GR 188130; (July, 2010) (Digest)
G.R. No. 188130 ; July 26, 2010
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. MARY LOU OMICTIN y SINGCO, Accused-Appellant.
FACTS
Accused-appellant Mary Lou Omictin was charged with Illegal Recruitment in Large Scale and three counts of Estafa. The prosecution established that Omictin, without a license from the Department of Labor and Employment, recruited and promised overseas employment to four individuals: Primo Arvin Guevarra, Anthony Ambrosio, Roy Fernandez Mago, and Veronica Caponpon. She collected substantial placement fees ranging from PhP 16,000 to PhP 40,000 from each complainant under assurances of deployment to locations like London and New Zealand. The promised employment never materialized, and Omictin failed to return the money. An entrapment operation by the National Bureau of Investigation led to her arrest after she accepted marked money from Mago.
During trial, Omictin admitted receiving money from the complainants but claimed she was merely assisting them with visa processing and document preparation for potential employment, not actively recruiting them. She argued that the testimonies of Guevarra and Ambrosio were uncorroborated and self-serving. The Regional Trial Court convicted her, a decision affirmed by the Court of Appeals.
ISSUE
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming Omictin’s conviction for Illegal Recruitment in Large Scale and Estafa.
RULING
The Supreme Court denied the appeal and affirmed the conviction. The Court clarified a crucial evidentiary point regarding Omictin’s claim that the complainants’ testimonies were “self-serving.” It held that a testimony given in open court under oath, subject to cross-examination, is not considered a self-serving declaration. A self-serving statement is one made out of court. Therefore, the testimonies of Guevarra and Ambrosio were admissible and credible.
Furthermore, the Court noted that even assuming the testimonies were problematic, Omictin’s own judicial admissions during trial were sufficient to establish the factual basis for the charges. She explicitly admitted receiving PhP 40,000 from Guevarra and PhP 16,000 from Ambrosio. These admissions, coupled with the established lack of a recruitment license and the failure to deploy the complainants, conclusively proved all elements of Illegal Recruitment in Large Scale and Estafa. The offense is large scale as it was committed against three or more persons. The Court found no reason to overturn the consistent factual findings of the lower courts.