Personnel of the Catanduanes police arrested a resident of Viga town the other week after exhausting all her appeals over her 2024 conviction in four counts of grave oral defamation.
Rosel Aldave Evangelista, 51, a housewife from barangay San Vicente, was taken into custody by law enforcers from the Viga police station led by officer-in-charge PLt. Jessie Lloyd N. Almosa on the basis of the warrant of arrest issued by Judge Lilibeth R. Ranara-Danglosi of the 3rd Municipal Circuit Trial Court of Panganiban-Viga-Bagamanoc last July 3, 2026.
Her arrest came nearly a year after the Supreme Court’s Second Division denied her petition for review on 5, 2024certiorari for failure to sufficiently show any reversible error in the decisions of the Court of Appeals on Feb. 5, 2024 and July 8, 2024 that affirmed her conviction by MCTC Viga.
In its Nov. 3, 2022 joint decision, the MCTC found Evangelista guilty of defaming her former employer, Antonio Aquino, by spreading allegations that he had sexual relations with some of his female employees at Vigdon Trading, whom she claimed were his mistresses, and that he was a drug user.
Aside from the complainant, the prosecution presented during the trial four witnesses, including three former employees, who testified that Evangelista made the scurrilous statements to them.
In proving the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, the MCTC said her denial and alibi cannot prevail over the positive and categorical testimonies of the witnesses.
For each count, Evangelista was sentenced to suffer two months and one day to one year and one day of imprisonment and to pay P20,000 as moral and exemplary damages and P25,000 as attorney’s fees.
With her motion for reconsideration denied at MCTC, the accused appealed to the Regional Trial Court, but the latter affirmed the lower court’s ruling.
The RTC declared that it was convinced that the accused, by telling other people that Antonio is a philanderer, a drug addict and a rapist without factual and legal basis, acted with malice and acted solelty for the purpose of defaming and slandering Antonio.
The Court of Appeals also shot down her petition for review, saying that the trial courts correctly convicted the petitioner.
However, the CA Sixth Division stated that the lower courts improperly awarded exemplary damages and attorney’s fees and deleted the same from the sentence on Evangelista.
Complainant Antonio was represented in the case by Atty. Apollo V. Atencia.