Ruby Rose Barrameda’s husband loses bid to clear him of parricide case
RUBY Rose Barrameda INQUIRER FILE PHOTO
MANILA, Philippines – The Court of Appeals denied the bid of businessman Manuel Jimenez III to clear him of parricide case over the death of his wife Ruby Rose Barrameda in 2007.
In a three-page resolution written by Associate Justice Pedro Corrales, its former special 16th division stood by its decision last year that allows the Department of Justice to pursue the case against him.
Jimenez III, in his appeal said the case should be dismissed following the recantation of star witness Manuel Montero.
But the appeals court in its ruling said “a recantation does not necessarily cancel an earlier declaration. As with any other testimony, it is subject to the test credibility and should be received with caution…No rule or doctrine requires previous testimony to be presumed false merely because a witness now says so.”
On Dec. 10, 2013, the appeals court denied Jimenez III’s petition for review seeking the reversal of the May 2, 2012 decision and July 4 resolution of the Office of the President, which sustained the August 11, 2010 resolution of Justice Secretary Leila De Lima.
The August 11 resolution of De Lima recommended the filing of information for parricide against Jimenez and an information for murder against his uncle, fishing magnate Lope Jimenez.
The appeals court explained that the arguments raised by Jimenez to support his petition refer to the admissibility of the evidence presented against him which should be threshed out during trial proper and not at the preliminary investigation level.
The petitioner earlier argued that the OP committed a serious error of and acted with grave abuse of discretion in upholding the finding of probable cause for parricide against him on the basis of the “hearsay, uncorroborated and unreliable statements of supposed state witness Manuel Montero.”
Montero has already recanted his statement implicating the Jimenezes and several others in the crime.
Aside from Jimenez III and his uncle, also charged for Barrameda’s death were his lawyer-father Manuel Jimenez Jr., and alleged henchmen Eric Fernandez, Robert Ponce and Lennard “Spyke” Descalso.
The DOJ argued that Montero’s prior statements were not necessarily rendered moot and academic by the latter’s notice of withdrawal.
Court records showed that Ruby Rose left her home in Moonwalk Village, Las Piñas City to go to the bank and visit her children at the house of her parents-in-law in BF Homes, Paranaque City.
At that time, she and her husband, Manuel III were already estranged and embroiled in several cases including a dismissed complaint for domestic abuse and a pending civil case for the custody of their children.
Ruby Rose failed to return home that day and was never seen or heard from again.
After two years, Montero voluntarily surrendered to the Philippine National Police and pinpointed to the accused as those responsible for Barrameda’s disappearance.
Montero testified that Jimenez Jr. instructed him to kill Ruby Rose for bringing shame to the Jimenez family.
Fernandez, Descalso and Ponce forcibly took Barrameda from the Jimenezes home in Las Piñas and brought her to the Buena Suerte Jimenez Company compound in Navotas.
Montero claimed that Descalso strangled Ruby Rose to death with a rope and her body was placed inside a steel drum, which was later filled with cement.
He added that Lope gave P50,000 each to Fernandez, Descalso and Ponce supposedly coming from Jimenez Jr.
RELATED STORY
CA affirms parricide indictment of Ruby Rose Barrameda’s husband
