Canadian Citizen Killed In Surigao City

[Americano]

"incorruptible"  is not a common word in the Philippines.  Superman has arrived.  It would take a very special person to remain "incorruptible" when they are surrounded by corruption every day.

[jamesmusslewhite]

"incorruptible"  is not a common word in the Philippines.  Superman has arrived.  It would take a very special person to remain "incorruptible" when they are surrounded by corruption every day.

Honest people with character and a moral center still exist thank goodness...

Edited February 26, 2014 by jamesmusslewhite

[jamesmusslewhite]

I do not want to comment on Jane’s guilt or innocence. I do not want to inject my own belief because until the trial my opinions can only be considered as mere speculations and conjecture at best. As I am also a witness for the prosecution to do so would also be unethical as the presumption of “innocent until proven guilty” must be observed as I was and am friends with Harry, Jane, Jerome, Arnel and Miss. Kima. There are two things though that I see as being quite tragic.

1. If Jane did conspire with Jerome to have Harry killed, it would have been so much better to simply have divorced him and took her half of the joint assets. The rice mill property (km 10) and well as Jane’s lodge (km 6) and a lot in San Juan were all in her name.  She had two businesses that would have made her a good living and she really could have gone to the PNP to have Harry deported and blacklisted. There would not be all the troubles and complications that surround her now. Harry had a prenuptial signed when they first married but having been married over 10 years negates that document if what I have been told about Canadian law is true.
2. If Jane is innocent then all she and Harry had built here is wasting away. The rice mill is not operating because the equipment is broken. Jane’s lodge have fallen into total disrepair and can not take in lodgers due to the filth, mold and cat urine and feces in the rooms. All the A/C units are broken as is all of the Doyle’s personal belongings. Jane’s family has destroyed her businesses. Rumors are that Jane may very well lose the Jane’s Lodge property due to an overdue outstanding loan on the property. If Jane has sent money to cover the payments than Jane’s family and her secretary is scamming her out of the money and not being truthful to her as to the true state of affair of her businesses and assets. I heard rumors that they had been holding big parties every time Jane had sent money and that her secretary had purchased expensive gifts and even a new motorcycle for her boyfriend and herself using the funds Jane sent her to operate the business, and has even requested an additional 100,000p so he could go up to Manila to check on Harry’s case.  A simple call by Jane to the Surigao PNP investigators could easily accomplish that for her, and the truth is since the secretary is neither a lawyer nor a police official she would be able to get any information released to her from Camp Crome. If Jane is innocent that she has been stabbed in the back by the very ones she trusted and paid to cover her while absent.

If Jane is innocent of these charges she will be lucky if she anything left after her family and employees have finished with her. Years of hard work will simply be reduced to rubble and refuge. This Is a tragedy which could have been simply avoided in either case.

Edited February 26, 2014 by jamesmusslewhite

[Thomas]

If Jane did conspire with Jerome to have Harry killed, it would have been so much better to simply have divorced him and took her half of the joint assets.

Not sure what you mean with JOINT assets. Did they marry in Phils or Canada?

 

NOTE! The Philippine law has a "built in" prenup, which goes without need to write any prenup.   =Each partner KEEP the value they entered the marriage with. Only the part they EARN and don't spend DURING marriage they split in half.

That make it common they who entered a marriage poor, they DON'T get much in a divorce...

[jamesmusslewhite]

 

If Jane did conspire with Jerome to have Harry killed, it would have been so much better to simply have divorced him and took her half of the joint assets.

Not sure what you mean with JOINT assets. Did they marry in Phils or Canada?

 

NOTE! The Philippine law has a "built in" prenup, which goes without need to write any prenup.   =Each partner KEEP the value they entered the marriage with. Only the part they EARN and don't spend DURING marriage they split in half.

That make it common they who entered a marriage poor, they DON'T get much in a divorce...

 

They married here but they also lived in Canada long enough for her to get Canadian resident status. They had at least one joint investment account worth over 200, 000 Canadian dollars. Whether there were other assets accumulated after they were married and while they were living in Canada or what the Canadian laws are pertaining to accumulated assets during divorce I really just do not know. She would have been entitled to at least 100,000 Dollars Canadian from the joint investment account which is still considered a sizable sum here especially when combined with three real properties with two running businesses they purchased here in Surigao after they were married. She also would have certainly received monthly support for the children because if they were to divorce they would have it done in Canada and therefore would be subject to Canadian divorce laws which seem to be very liberal in nature.      

[Thomas]

 

 

If Jane did conspire with Jerome to have Harry killed, it would have been so much better to simply have divorced him and took her half of the joint assets.

Not sure what you mean with JOINT assets. Did they marry in Phils or Canada?

 

NOTE! The Philippine law has a "built in" prenup, which goes without need to write any prenup.   =Each partner KEEP the value they entered the marriage with. Only the part they EARN and don't spend DURING marriage they split in half.

That make it common they who entered a marriage poor, they DON'T get much in a divorce...

 

They married here but they also lived in Canada long enough for her to get Canadian resident status. They had at least one joint investment account worth over 200, 000 Canadian dollars. Whether there were other assets accumulated after they were married and while they were living in Canada or what the Canadian laws are pertaining to accumulated assets during divorce I really just do not know. She would have been entitled to at least 100,000 Dollars Canadian from the joint investment account which is still considered a sizable sum here especially when combined with three real properties with two running businesses they purchased here in Surigao after they were married. She also would have certainly received monthly support for the children because if they were to divorce they would have it done in Canada and therefore would be subject to Canadian divorce laws which seem to be very liberal in nature.      

Well. I have no idea what the Canadian law says,

but I suppouse Philippine "prenuption" DON'T bother what type of acount the money IS on, but if it's COME from money HE had BEFORE marriage.

Isn't the Philippine law the main, because they married there?

 

And I suppouse montly support for JEROME's (if it is) son is suppoused to be paid by Jerome   :mocking:

(At least in Sweden support are suppoused to be paid by the BIOLOGICAL father, except if the stepfather AGREED to else by an adoption or such, WHEN he KNOW he isn't the biological father himself...)

 

So I suppouse Jane risked to get only small part of the assets. Why would she have meeting with the assassins otherwice, if she had got much anyway?...

[jamesmusslewhite]

 

 

 

If Jane did conspire with Jerome to have Harry killed, it would have been so much better to simply have divorced him and took her half of the joint assets.

Not sure what you mean with JOINT assets. Did they marry in Phils or Canada?

 

NOTE! The Philippine law has a "built in" prenup, which goes without need to write any prenup.   =Each partner KEEP the value they entered the marriage with. Only the part they EARN and don't spend DURING marriage they split in half.

That make it common they who entered a marriage poor, they DON'T get much in a divorce...

 

They married here but they also lived in Canada long enough for her to get Canadian resident status. They had at least one joint investment account worth over 200, 000 Canadian dollars. Whether there were other assets accumulated after they were married and while they were living in Canada or what the Canadian laws are pertaining to accumulated assets during divorce I really just do not know. She would have been entitled to at least 100,000 Dollars Canadian from the joint investment account which is still considered a sizable sum here especially when combined with three real properties with two running businesses they purchased here in Surigao after they were married. She also would have certainly received monthly support for the children because if they were to divorce they would have it done in Canada and therefore would be subject to Canadian divorce laws which seem to be very liberal in nature.      

Well. I have no idea what the Canadian law says,

but I suppouse Philippine "prenuption" DON'T bother what type of acount the money IS on, but if it's COME from money HE had BEFORE marriage.

Isn't the Philippine law the main, because they married there?

 

And I suppouse montly support for JEROME's (if it is) son is suppoused to be paid by Jerome   :mocking:

(At least in Sweden support are suppoused to be paid by the BIOLOGICAL father, except if the stepfather AGREED to else by an adoption or such, WHEN he KNOW he isn't the biological father himself...)

 

So I suppouse Jane risked to get only small part of the assets. Why would she have meeting with the assassins otherwice, if she had got much anyway?...

 

Well land purchased here would be in Jane's name as harry could not legally own land. So prenupt or not Jane would be on the deeds of sale, titles, legal documents, BIR etc. 

 

As far as the support issue, since Harry was married to Jane at the time of conception the Canadian authorities seem to consider the newborn as Harry's son thus rewarding the child to an equal share as the other children of Harry. To date even though the Surigao PNP want a DNA test done and Harry's Canadian family wants a DNA test done and yet still after 4-5 months after the birth the Canadian authorities have not done so.

 

There are accumulative assets in the over 12 years they were married and no prenupt would have legally protected Harry from having to divide those assets nor would it had shielded him from garnishment of continued child support on their special needs son Joseph. 

 

As to the question of her sitting with assassins this is the belief of the Surigao PNP and until the arrest warrant is served and she is in court to answer these allegations this is still yet to be proven. I myself have noway of being able to answer that question without having to resort to mere speculation and conjecture and I rather not do so. But I did look up the following information on the subject you mentioned and added it as members may certainly find it of interesting.

Edited February 27, 2014 by jamesmusslewhite

[jamesmusslewhite]

Prenups in the Philippines

Although divorce is not allowed under Philippine law, prenuptial agreements are permissible to “fix the property relations during the marriage within the limits provided by this Code.”

Article 1 of the Family Code of the Philippines provides that, “Marriage is a special contract of permanent union between a man and a woman entered into in accordance with law for the establishment of conjugal and family life. It is the foundation of the family and an inviolable social institution whose nature, consequences, and incidents are governed by law and not subject to stipulation, except that marriage settlements may fix the property relations during the marriage within the limits provided by this Code.” The Family Code, otherwise known as Executive Order No.  209, took effect in 1988.

The Family Code provides that a regime of absolute community of property applies automatically upon marriage. However, that regime is subordinate to the terms of a valid prenuptial agreement.

Thus the Code specifies that “Unless otherwise provided in this Chapter or in the marriage settlements, the community property shall consist of all the property owned by the spouses at the time of the celebration of the marriage or acquired thereafter.” Article 91. Certain specified items are excluded from the default regime of community property but the burden is on the party asserting that an item is excluded to prove that such is the case. (Articles 92 and 93).

A prenuptial agreement may contain such terms as the parties wish to govern their affairs. However, the Family Code provides for certain specific regimes that the parties may choose to adopt, these being:

 

The regime of Conjugal Partnership of Gains, whereby the husband and wife place in a common fund the proceeds, products, fruits and income from their separate properties and those acquired by either or both spouses through their efforts or by chance, and, upon dissolution of the marriage or of the partnership, the net gains or benefits obtained by either or both spouses shall be divided equally between them, unless otherwise agreed in the marriage settlements; and

 

The regime of Separation of Property, whereby each spouse shall own, dispose of, possess, administer and enjoy his or her own separate estate, without need of the consent of the other, and which may refer to present or future property or both and which may be total or partial.

Prenuptial agreements must be entered into voluntarily. They should be in writing. They can be set aside for lack of consent, fraud, coercion, mistake, undue influence or bad faith. In order to be effective against third persons, they must be notarized and recorded in the Registry of Property for the Protection of Creditors and in the local civil registry. 

A prenuptial agreement may stipulate as to what law will determine the parties’ property relations. Absent such a choice of law clause the law of the Philippines will govern such matters if one spouse is a Filipino citizen. However, the laws of the Philippines will not apply to property located outside the Philippines. Article 16 of the Civil Code of the Philippines provides that,   "Real property as well as personal property is subject to the law of the country where it is situated."

 

[Thomas]

I did read that law through proper around a year ago, but perhaps I missunderstood it. It's hard to read law texts in own birth language too  :)      (I tried to read it again now, but I'm to tired to read such texts, because I have worked with trying to figuere out a friend's messed up business documents to make his acounting for last year.)

Well land purchased here would be in Jane's name as harry could not legally own land. So prenupt or not Jane would be on the deeds of sale, titles, legal documents, BIR etc.

I suppouse it make no difference who's name is on documents, when counting the VALUE in a split.

As far as the support issue, since Harry was married to Jane at the time of conception the Canadian authorities seem to consider the newborn as Harry's son thus rewarding the child to an equal share as the other children of Harry. To date even though the Surigao PNP want a DNA test done and Harry's Canadian family wants a DNA test done and yet still after 4-5 months after the birth the Canadian authorities have not done so.

Meaning the Canadian court is that stupid  :) it would force Harry to pay support for the baby even if Jerome is the biological father??

There are accumulative assets in the over 12 years they were married and no prenupt would have legally protected Harry from having to divide those assets

Yes, no difference, such are split equal in any case. (Except perhaps profits from private assets if having a prenup.)

[i am bob]

Meaning the Canadian court is that stupid :) it would force Harry to pay support for the baby even if Jerome is the biological father??

Thomas, is it stupid to give a child money to ensure they do not starve to death while waiting for legal issues to be resolved regardless of what the parents are accused of? To prove that the child is not Harry's is not all that is needed. Is the child Jerome's? Somebody else's? Did Harry know this? And, if so, did Harry agree to raise the child as his own? These are all questions that need to be answered before the child is stripped of what may actually be legally his. And Harry, as much a curmudgeon he may have been, I don't think he would begrudge an infant child until other arrangements could be made otherwise.

Sent by using a very long piece of string, a couple tin cans, 2 gaseous monkeys, Tapatalk and my Nexus 4