THE Cebuano businessman who got sued by talent manager Annabelle Rama has something to smile about after the Quezon City Prosecutors’ Office junked the estafa case she filed against him for “lack of jurisdiction”.
In her resolution, Asst. City Prosecutor Mariesther Vedaña said the Quezon City Prosecutors’ Office has no jurisdiction over the case filed by Annabelle against Jose Vicente Rama del Prado which happened in Cebu City.
Vedaña said the complaint filed by Annabelle appeared to be a matter of counter-charge after del Prado filed estafa charges against her. Annabelle and del Prado are first-degree cousins.
In her complaint, Annabelle claimed that she issued a check worth P1.5 million to del Prado upon his request to be used as a “show check” to make it appear that the talent manager put up money for his alleged apartelle business venture.
A month before the May 2013 elections, Annabelle said she started asking Del Prado to return the check but he allegedly failed to comply.
Annabelle said she later found out that del Prado presented her check for re-discounting.
In his counter-affidavit, del Prado said the case filed by Annabelle against him was in retaliation for the cases he filed against Gutierrez before the Cebu City Prosecutors’ Office.
Records show that Annabelle filed the case against del Prado a month after he filed charges of estafa and violation of Batas Pambansa Bilang 22 or the Anti-Bouncing Check Law against her in Cebu City.
In Dec. 2013, the Cebu City Prosecutors’ Office recommended the filing of estafa charges against Annabelle in court.
The prosecutors’ office found sufficient basis to indict Annabelle who is accused of receiving money from del Prado in exchange for two bouncing checks worth nearly P1.9 million.
The charge of violating the Anti-Bouncing Check Law against Annabelle was dismissed.
Disclaimer: The comments uploaded on this site do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of management and owner of Cebudailynews. We reserve the right to exclude comments that we deem to be inconsistent with our editorial standards.
