THE legal camp of Marikina 1st District Representative Marcelino “Marcy” Teodoro has strongly questioned his recent indictment by the Department of Justice (DOJ), arguing that the criminal complaints filed against the lawmaker lack sufficient basis and pointing out irregularity in how the final resolution was handled.
The DOJ recently found probable cause with reasonable certainty of conviction to indict Teodoro on four counts of rape through sexual assault and one count of acts of lasciviousness.
The charges stem from allegations made by two female police officers who previously served as his security detail.
According to the DOJ, five criminal cases have officially been filed before the Marikina Regional Trial Court, placing the matter under judicial jurisdiction.
However, Teodoro’s legal counsel, Alma Mallonga, raised serious concerns regarding the integrity of the resolution.
Mallonga noted that the complaints were originally investigated by a designated DOJ panel composed of Senior Assistant State Prosecutor Anna Noreen T. Denavadera and Assistant State Prosecutor Ruth Anne P. Zamora.
The panel conducted hearings and concluded its investigation over seven months ago.
Mallonga expressed surprise that the final resolution was neither prepared nor signed by the investigating panel, but was instead drafted and signed by an entirely different state prosecutor.
“Because of this, it is reasonable to assume that the original investigation report and recommendation of the DOJ panel to dismiss the complaints against Cong. Marcy were altered,” Mallonga stated.
While the DOJ resolution maintained that issues regarding the credibility of the accusations and Teodoro’s defenses should be resolved during trial, Mallonga emphasized that the congressman is fully prepared to clear his name in court.
The feisty lawyer framed the upcoming legal battle as a necessary step to expose falsehoods and put an end to politically motivated attacks by adversaries.
Teodoro’s camp affirmed that he welcomes the opportunity to face the legal process directly, describing the case not merely as a personal fight, but as a broader struggle for due process, justice, and accountability.
