Court clears Wakee Salud

CEBU, Philippines - The Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MTCC) has cleared boxing promoter Rex "Wakee" Salud from criminal case for the insufficiency of evidence.

"Wherefore, the foregoing considered accused is acquitted of the offense of violation of Batas Pambansa Bilang 22 or the Anti-Bouncing Check Law for two counts," the decision reads.

In 2003, private complainant, Almacita Paray has sued Salud for anti-bouncing check law after two checks each worth P5 million was dishonored by the bank for reason "drawn against insufficient funds."

Paray said despite demands to make good of his checks still the latter failed to do so prompted the filing of the case.

Her testimonies were corroborated by her father, Teodoro Go. He said he knew Salud being their family friend.

Sometime in September 2003, he said accused called him and asked if he knew a certain William Gatchalian, a stockholder of Waterfront Hotel, and if he was willing to rediscount the check of the latter. He told Salud it was his daughter who rediscounted checks.

Go said her daughter rediscounted the checks presented by Salud worth P10 million. As guarantee, Salud presented his checks.

However, he said when his daughter presented the checks allegedly owned by Gatchalian in the bank the checks were dishonored as well as the guarantee checks of Salud.

Salud strongly denied the accusation filed against him.

For his defense, he alleged that sometime in September 2003, Mat Mendoza, his friend approached him and requested that his three checks worth P12. 5 million will be encashed at a rediscounted rate.

Said checks were allegedly issued by Gatchalian and Waterfront Hotel.

However, he said he learned that abovementioned checks were dishonored. With that, he said he informed Gatchalian, who advised to redeposit the same. But again, it was dishonored.

This prompted Paray to ask for a meeting with Gatchalian.

Aside from the checks of Gatchalian, Salud said he gave to Paray two blank checks as asked by the latter.

Moreover, Salud said he was surprised when he was asked by the court to submit counter-affidavit because of bouncing checks.

Salud said it was later he knew that the basis of filing of herein case was due to the two blank checks he issued to private complainant.

"…that the allegations are all false, fabricated, malicious and has no basis considering that he did not borrow money from the private complainant and never issued the checks for such consideration; that private complainant took advantage of the two blank checks that she asked from him even though she knew that the same were delivered without any consideration," his statement's reads.

Salud claimed he did not receive any notice of dishonor or demand letter from the private complainant.

With the foregoing evidences, Tecson ruled in favor of the accused. She said the presentation of the demand letter and the registry receipts do not meet the required "proof beyond reasonable doubt." Tecson said the accused denied that he received the said letter.

Tecson added the prosecution also failed to present the person, who received the said document.

Though accused was acquitted for criminal offense, he however did not escape with its civil liability. Tecson ordered Salud to pay P10 million to the private complainant representing the face value of the two bounced checks with 12 percent interest per annum.

Aside from that, Salud was meted to pay P100,000 for attorney's fees and the cost of suit. — (FREEMAN)