Republic of the Philippines

NATIONAL POLICE COMMISSION

PHILIPPINE NATIONAL POLICE
POLICE REGIONAL OFFICE 2
Camp Marcelo A Adduru, Tuguegarao City, Cagayan

POLICE REGIONAL OFFICE 2, PRO2-AC-01-091321

Complainant, For: Grave Misconduct

-versus-

Pat Romnick C Casafrancisco,

Respondent.
x--------------------------------------------------x

DECISION
This is an administrative action initiated by the Regional Investigation and
Detective Management Division (RIDMD), PRO2 against Pat Romnick C
Casafrancisco for “Grave Misconduct”.

The Formal Charge reads:

The undersign in his official capacity as Chief, Regional

Investigation and Detective Management Division, Police Regional
Office 2 under oath, hereby administratively charge the above named
respondent for administrative offense of “Grave Misconduct”,
pursuant to the provisions of NAPOLCOM Memorandum Circular
NO. 2016-002, particularly Rule 21, Section 2, Paragraph C, Sub-
paragraph 3(r), which provides “commit any act or omission that
constitute a crime punishable under the Revised Penal Code or
Special Laws where the duration of impossible penalty is
imprisonment of not lower than six (6) months and one (1) day”,
committed as followes:

On July 27, 2010, Jackie Delos Santos (Private Complainant)

was married to Pat Romnick C Casafrancisco (respondent). During the
time of their marriage, when herein complainant was about seven (7)
months pregnant, she decided to go to Manila as she wanted to be
with her husband when she delivered their child. However, when they
are living in Metro Manila, respondent brought home another woman
and for that reason complainant went back home to Ballesteros,
Cagayan. On November 8, 2010, complainant delivers their child.
Since then, she was the only one supporting their child as herein
respondent is living a separate life in Metro Manila. Sometime in 2017
Decision
PRO2-AC-01-081621
Grave Neglect of Duty: PCpl Rduardo A Ferrer Jr
Page 2 of 7
x-------------------x

when herein respondent were admitted in the PNP with the rank of
Patrolman. Be that as it may, herein respondent never gave any
financial support to their child while he was away. Worst, herein
respondent already has children from another woman and even listed
his illegitimate child as his dependent in his employment records while
their legitimate child was not.

On the other hand, while complainant can only provide much,

she needed the support of her husband that prompted her to invite her
husband at the PAO, Ballesteros District for a mediation proceeding
for child support. At first the agreement was fruitful as Romnick
regularly observed the same. However, after just six (6) months of
regularly financial support, the remittance became irregular and
incomplete. Complainant religiously reminded respondent of his
obligations, but he always had a ready justification as to why he could
not give what was previously agreed upon as the appropriate need of
the child. At present, the need of the child has increased, considering
that he is now in elementary studies and there are numerous projects
and school materials that are needed not to mention the regular
medical check-up that their child has to undergo. To remedy the
situation, she was constrained to file a petition for support against the
respondent before the Regional Trial Court (Branch 33) of Ballesteros,
Cagayan. After filing the petition, respondent reached out to her and
pleaded if they could just settle the matter extra-judicially. Thus,
listening to her tamer side, she gave the respondent another chance
and they again executed a compromise agreement. In view of the
agreement, she withdrew her petition in court in the hope that
respondent will make good of his promises embodied in the latest
compromise agreement. Unfortunately, respondent reneged of his
obligations, which further put her into tight spot, having withdrawn her
petition against the respondent on an honest belief that he would
perform his obligation. This battery of fraudulent acts and false
promises of the respondent caused her so much psychological and
emotional pain, because he is clearly taking advantage of her
unfavourable financial situation to put her in a spot whereas is she
has to beg him for the support of their child. The fact that respondent
begot another child adds up to the emotional and psychological
caused into her, considering that it is a clear embodiment of his
infidelity and considering further that their son is in need of financial
support while the respondent has the gall of fathering another child.

“ACTS CONTRARY TO LAW AND EXISTING PNP RULES AND

REGULATIONS”.
Decision
PRO2-AC-01-081621
Grave Neglect of Duty: PCpl Rduardo A Ferrer Jr
Page 3 of 7
x-------------------x

In the complaint-affidavit of Jackie D Casafrancisco, she averred that on July

27, 2010, she was married to respondent Pat Romnick C Casafrancisco. During the
time of their marriage, when herein complainant was about seven (7) months
pregnant, she decided to go to Manila as she wanted to be with her husband on the
time she will deliver their child. However, while they are living in Metro Manila,
respondent brought home another woman and for that reason complainant went
back home to Ballesteros, Cagayan. On November 8, 2010, complainant gave birth
to their child. Since then, she was the only one supporting their child as herein
respondent is living a separate life in Metro Manila. Sometime in 2017, the
respondent entered the PNP with the rank of Patrolman. However, he never gave
any financial support to their child while he was away. Worst, the respondent already
sired children with another woman and even listed his illegitimate child as his
dependent in his employment records.

The prosecution submitted as evidence the copy of Certificate of Marriage

between respondent and Jackie D Casafrancisco and a Certificate of Live birth of
their son Jayro Matt D Casafrancisco.

On December 5, 2017, private complainant and the respondent entered into a

compromise agreement for the financial support of their son Jayro Matt D
Casafrancisco. In such agreement, the respondent agreed to give a monthly support
to Jayro amounting to Five Thousand (Php5,000.00) Pesos starting from January of
2018 and shall be modified after three (3) years or at the instance of one party.

According to the private complainant, at first the respondent observed his

obligation. However, after just six (6) months of regularly giving financial support, the
remittance became irregular and incomplete. She religiously reminded respondent of
his obligation, but he always had a ready justification as to why he could not give
what was previously agreed upon. The need of the child has increased, considering
that he is in elementary studies and there are numerous projects and school
materials that are needed not to mention the regular medical check-up that their child
has to undergo. To remedy the situation, she was constrained to file a petition for
support against the respondent before the Regional Trial Court (Branch 33) of
Ballesteros, Cagayan. After filing the petition, respondent reached out to her and
pleaded if they could just settle the matter extra-judicially. Thus, listening to her
tamer side, she gave the respondent another chance and they again executed a
compromise agreement.

To prove the existence of such agreement for the second time, the
prosecution presented a copy of the Compromise Agreement between the private
complainant and the respondent dated October 16, 2019, witnessed by Atty.
Genevie C Ogalino, and subscribed by Atty. Aldwin Kenneth P. Baldovino, Public
Attorney 2. Such agreement reiterates the obligation of the respondent to give a
regular monthly support of Php5,000.00 to their minor child named Jayro Matt D
Decision
PRO2-AC-01-081621
Grave Neglect of Duty: PCpl Rduardo A Ferrer Jr
Page 4 of 7
x-------------------x

Casafrancisco, with a modification that the respondent shall also give half of the
bonuses that he will receive from his employment, which include 13 th and 14th month
pay. The respondent also undertakes to no longer apply loans in the future. In
exchange, the private complainant shall move for the dismissal of the complaint for
support, however, if the terms of such agreement is not complied with by the
respondent, she can seek to the fullest of all legal remedies including the
revival/refilling of the above mentioned complaint for support.

In view of the agreement, the private complainant withdrew her petition in

court in the hope that respondent will make good of his promises. Unfortunately, the
respondent reneged of his obligations, which further put her into tight spot, having
withdrawn her petition against the respondent on an honest belief that he would
perform his obligation.

The investigation report of Ballesteros Police Station shows that on January 5,

2021 at about 11:30 AM, the private complainant arrived at their office and reported
about the failure of the respondent to give financial support to their 10 years old son
Jayro Matt Casafrancisco. She also complained that the respondent has a second
family with two kids.

Because of this complaint, a case for violation RA 9262 or the Anti-Violence

Against Women and their Children Act of 2004 was referred at the Provincial
Prosecutor’s Office on January 5, 2021. The Investigation report and referral was
also sent to the RIDMD, and upon the latter’s finding of probable cause to indict the
respondent, hence, this present case of Grave Misconduct against the respondent
was formally filed.

In compliance with the rules on summary proceedings and disposition of

cases provided under NAPOLCOM MC No. 2016-002, the Summons, including the
Charge Sheet and its evidence, were personally received by respondent and he
timely filed his Answer.

In his answer, the respondent claimed that it was not his intention to remiss
his financial obligation. The truth being that he is much willing to comply with their
previous compromise agreement. Respondent submitted as part of his evidence his
Affidavit authorizing the PNP-Finance Service to deduct five thousand pesos
(P5,000.00) a month and an equivalent of 50% of all his bonuses, to include 13 th and
14th month pay and be given to his son Jayro D Casafrancisco.

Subsequently, a Pre-Hearing Conference as part of the above cited rules was

scheduled on October 11, 2021 in which both parties were dully notified and were all
present during the hearing.
Decision
PRO2-AC-01-081621
Grave Neglect of Duty: PCpl Rduardo A Ferrer Jr
Page 5 of 7
x-------------------x

During the Pre-hearing conference, the respondent acknowledged that the

private complainant is his legal wife and that Jayro Matt Casafrancisco is his son. He
also acknowledged his obligation as stated in their Compromise agreement with his
wife. However, according to respondent, his failure to deliver his monetary obligation
was because he is assigned in Palanan Island and it was difficult for him to send
money because of the CoViD 19 pandemic. Further, he admitted the allegation that
during their stay in Manila he brought home another woman. Respondent also
admitted that he has another family with two kids.

The sole issue in this case is whether or not the respondent is liable as
charged.

Under Rule 21, Section 2, Paragraph C, Sub-paragraph 3(r) of NAPOLCOM

Memorandum Circular 2016-002, Grave Misconduct includes any act or omission
that constitute a crime punishable under the Revised Penal Code or Special Laws
where the duration of impossible penalty is imprisonment of not lower than six (6)
months and one (1) day”.

Misconduct, in the administrative sense, is a transgression of some

established and definite rule of action. It is an intentional wrongdoing or a deliberate
violation of a rule of law or standard of behaviour, especially by a government
official. Misconduct is considered grave if accompanied by corruption, a clear intent
to violate the law, or a flagrant disregard of established rules, which must all be
supported by substantial evidence. If the misconduct does not involve any of the
additional elements to qualify the misconduct as grave, the person charged may only
be held liable for simple misconduct.
Moreover, in administrative proceedings, the quantum of proof necessary for
a finding of guilt is substantial evidence or such relevant evidence as a reasonable
mind may accept as adequate to support a conclusion. The standard of substantial
evidence is satisfied when there is reasonable ground to believe that a person is
responsible for the misconduct complained of, even if such evidence might not be
overwhelming or even preponderant. (Office of the Ombudsman vs. PSUPT
BRILLANTES et al.)

After careful analysis of the above established facts, there is substantial

evidence that respondent violated the provision of “Republic Act 9262 - Anti-Violence
Against Women and Their Children Act of 2004", Particularly Section 5 (e)(2) which
provides “Depriving or threatening to deprive the woman or her children of financial
support due her or her family, or deliberately providing the woman’s children
insufficient support”. Under this law, such act is tantamount to economic abuse.
Economic abuse refers to acts that make or attempt to make a woman
financially dependent which includes among others the withdrawal of financial
support.

Be it noted that the private complainant is the legal wife of the respondent and
Jayro Matt D Casafrancisco is their legitimate child. It is therefore the obligation of
the respondent to give support. In her testimony during the Pre-hearing conference,
Decision
PRO2-AC-01-081621
Grave Neglect of Duty: PCpl Rduardo A Ferrer Jr
Page 6 of 7
x-------------------x

she stated that her purpose in asking financial support is not for herself but only for
their child. She further stated that aside from the needs of the child for financial
support, her intention is to at least, by the minimal amount of support, the child would
come to know and appreciate the respondent as his father.

There is no merit rom the reasoning of the respondent using the COVID 19
pandemic and his work assignment in the Municipality of Palanan Island to justify his
failure to send support for his son. When asked during the Pre-hearing Conference if
what mode of money transfer is available in Palanan, the respondent answered that
there is “Smart Padala” available therein. It is unbelievable that respondent, being a
Policeman cannot even remedy for almost a year a simple problem of how to send
money to his son. If only that respondent is willing to give support, he could have just
sent it through Smart Padala which is available in his work assignment. With the so
many ways of sending money nowadays such as GCASH, Mobile Banking, other
electronic modes, and through mail, the reasoning of respondent is untenable.

Even the affidavit submitted by the respondent to deduct from his monthly
salary the amount of P5,000.00 cannot be given credit without the approval of the
PNP Finance Service. He only submitted his application form to the finance Service
for the automatic deduction of his salary only after he was formally charged of this
case.

It was also proven by the testimony of respondent that he applied and was
granted loans and what is left on his monthly salary after deduction of those loans
are only ten thousand (P10,000.00) pesos, more or less. This, according to
respondent contributed to his difficulty in giving his obligation to his child. When
asked for his reason in securing a loan, respondent answered that he used it in the
renovation of his house. Respondent was also asked whether he gave a part of his
loans to his son but he answered in the negative. It is difficult to understand why the
respondent secured loans to the maximum limit having no emergency or any other
urgent and compelling reason to do so, and did not left sufficient amount on his
monthly salary to fulfil his obligation for their child. This prejudicial act of respondent
just indicates his wilful disregard of his obligation to give support to his son.

The respondent also admitted the allegation of his wife that during their stay in
Manila, he brought home another woman. This detrimental act of respondent forced
his wife to go back home at Ballesteros, Cagayan. Further, he admitted that he is
cohabiting with another woman whom they conceived two children. These admitted
acts of the respondent constitute Psychological Violence as defined under RA
9262, which refers to acts or omissions causing or likely to cause mental or
emotional suffering of the victim.

The PNP Core Values provides that the police service is a noble profession
and demands from its members specialized knowledge and skills and high standard
of ethics and morality. In this regard, the members of the Philippine National Police
must adhere to and internalize the enduring core values of love of God, respect for
authority, selfless love and service for people, respect for women and the sanctity
of marriage.
Decision
PRO2-AC-01-081621
Grave Neglect of Duty: PCpl Rduardo A Ferrer Jr
Page 7 of 7
x-------------------x

The Police Officer's Creed also provides that a Police Officer must “believe in
the sanctity of marriage and the respect for women. Shall set the example of
decency and morality and shall have high regard for family life and chastity”.

Further, the Ethical Standards also provides among others that PNP
personnel shall be faithful to their lawfully wedded spouses. And finally, as
embodied in the Police Officers’ Pledge, PNP personnel are obliged to maintain a
high standard of morality, as well as, to live a decent and virtuous life to serve as an
example to others.

In the present case, there is more than substantial evidence showing that the
respondent committed acts constituting Economic Abused and Psychological
violence which are in violation of RA 9262 or the Anti-Violence Against Women and
their Children Act of 2004, which is tantamount to grave misconduct.

On the other hand, the respondent submitted his PNP-PAIS containing his
awards, medals and commendations to mitigate his offense. This was appreciated
by the Summary Hearing Officer as a mitigating circumstance.

Under Rule 22, Section 5(b) of NAPOLCOM MC 2016-002, it provides that the
minimum period of the penalty shall be imposed where only mitigating and no
aggravating circumstance are present.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, respondent Pat Romnick C

Casafrancisco is found GUILTY of Grave Misconduct and is hereby meted the
penalty of Ninety (90) Days Suspension.

SO ORDERED.

Done this ______ day of _________________ at Camp Marcelo A Adduru,

Tuguegarao City, Cagayan.

STEVE B LUDAN
Police Brigadier General
Regional Director