FILIPINO ACCUSED OF KILLING WIFE’S

FILIPINO BOYFRIEND IN LOS ANGELES

By:  Roman P. Mosqueda, Esq.

            “It’s the stuff you see in movies,” commented Referee Stanley L. Berman of Department 415 of the Los Angeles County Children’s Court in Monterey Park, California.

            He had just read the Status Review Report of the Department of Children and Family Services during the hearing on September 8, 2004, which alleges that the Filipino-American father of the two children previously declared dependents  of the Court, pursuant to Section 300(b) of the California Welfare and Institutions Code, due to the alleged failure of the mother to protect the two children from the father, had shot and killed their mother’s boyfriend on May 9, 2004.

            Indeed, the Filipino-American father, whose name is withheld to protect his privacy, has been reportedly charged with two felony counts of the crime of murder in violation of Penal Code Section 187(a) for killing another human being (name withheld) with malice afterthought, and of the crime of stalking in violation of Penal Code Section 646.9(b) for repeatedly following and willfully and maliciously harassing his wife.

            It was further alleged in the felony complaint that the defendant-father was subject to a restraining order by the Family Court and Children’s Court, prohibiting such described behavior against his Filipina wife.

Crimes of Murder

And Stalking:

            Murder is defined as “the unlawful killing of a human being, or fetus, with malice aforethought,” by Section 187(a) of the California Penal Code.

            It is classified as first degree murder under Section 189 thereof, if it is perpetrated by means of:

            1.   “a destructive device or explosive, a weapon of mass destruction, knowing use of ammunition designed primarily to penetrate metal or armor; or

  2.   poison, lying in wait, torture; or

  3.   by any other kind  of willful, deliberate, and premeditated killing; or

           4.   committed in the perpetration of, or attempt to perpetrate, arson, rape, carjacking, robbery,                        burglary, mayhem, kidnapping, train wrecking, or any act punishable under Sections 206 (torture), 286 (sodomy), 288 (lewd act on child under 14 years old), 288a (oral copulation) or 289 (sexual penetration by foreign or unknown object); or 

            5.     discharging a firearm from a motor vehicle, intentionally at another person outside of the vehicle with the intent to inflict death.

All other kinds of murders are of the second degree.”

Every person guilty of murder in the first degree is punished by death, imprisonment in the state prison for life without the possibility of parole, or imprisonment in the state prison for a term of 25 years to life; and every person guilty of murder in the second degree is punished by imprisonment in the state prison for a term of 15 years to life, under Section 190(a) of the Penal Code.

The crime of stalking is defined as: “Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows or willfully and maliciously harasses another and who makes a credible threat with the intent to place that person in reasonable fear for his or her safety, or the safety of his or immediate family,” under Section 646.9(a) of the Penal Code.

It is punished by imprisonment in the state prison for two, three, or four years, when there is a temporary restraining order, injunction, or any other court order in effect prohibiting said behavior, under Section 646.9(b) of the Penal Code.

Alleged 5-09-04

Shooting Incident:

            It is reported and alleged that the minors’ Filipino father shot with a shotgun and killed their mother’s boyfriend on May 9, 2004, on the sidewalk in front of the mother’s residence where the two children reside.

            Their father allegedly returned to the United States from London in late April 2004; their father reportedly called their mother’s cell phone and the mother’s boyfriend answered.  The boyfriend reportedly walked outside to the front of the apartment building.  Their mother followed.

            They reportedly observed the minors’ father  drive up.  They both ran toward the back of the apartment building.  The minors’ father reportedly  jumped out of his vehicle, shot the boyfriend, prepared to shoot the boyfriend again, and aimed the gun at his wife.

            She reportedly yelled “no,” and tried to pull at his shirt to deter him.  She called 911.  He fled the scene.  Paramedics and police reportedly arrived.

            The minors’ father reportedly called his wife an hour or so later, while the police were in her apartment.  She allegedly conspired with the police and set up a meeting with him at a nearby park.

            He reportedly told her: “please no police,” and “I hope he’s dead.”  The police were reportedly waiting for him at the designated meeting place at the park.  He was arrested and taken into custody.

Minor Children’s

Dependency Hearings:

            The Author represented the minors’ father at the juvenile dependency hearings of the two minors before Referee Stanley L. Berman of Department 415 of the Los Angeles County Children’s Court.

            The minor children were taken and placed in foster care by the Department of Children and Family Services from January 28,2004 to February 18, 2004, when they were returned to their mother’s home.

            At the hearing on March 10, 2004, the Author objected to the grant of the dependency petition on the ground that the two minor children were not in “substantial risk” of suffering serious physical harm or illness from the father nor the mother.

            But Referee Berman granted the Section 300(b) Welfare and Institutions Code petition for failure to protect, based on the allegations therein that the violent conduct of the children’s parents (father held a gun to his head and threatened to kill himself and mother) and the father’s abuse of alcohol “endanger the children’s physical and emotional health, safety and well being, create a detrimental home environment and place the children at risk of physical and emotional harm and damage.”

            At that hearing on March 10, 2004, minors’ father agreed to leave the United States to cool off.  Instead of going to the Philippines, he allegedly  left for London on or about March 17, 2004 via Virgin Atlantic Airlines.

News of Shooting And

Version of Paternal Grandmother

Of Minors:

            On May 11, 2004, the social worker (name withheld to protect her privacy) with the Department of Children and Family Services in charge of the minor children’s case called the Author by telephone to inform him that the minors’ father had killed last Sunday night (May 9, 2004) his wife’s boyfriend with a shotgun.

            Shocked, the Author told the lady social worker that he had thought that the minors’ father was still in London, and that this was the first time he had heard about the shooting.  The minors’ father and his mother had not called the Author, who had last seen them during the March 10, 2004 Children’s Court hearing.

            A call to the mother of the minors’ father that same day (May 11, 2004) confirmed that the minors’ father is in jail  (presently at Men’s Central Jail), that he had come back from London about three weeks ago, and that he felt that his wife’s boyfriend, a social worker who knows the system,  had not only taken his wife from him, but also his two children.

            His mother (paternal grandmother of the minors) was not present during the alleged shooting.  He is presumed innocent of the murder and stalking charges until proven guilty. The killed social worker was allegedly another Filipino, with four children. 

            A social worker with the Los Angeles County Department of Children and Family Services should not be romantically involved with a party to a dependency case because of semblance of persecution.

            At the hearing on January 11, 2005, the Children’s Court finally terminated jurisdiction over the minors, who had completed their therapy, and closed their case.

            The moral of this true story is: inability to let go of unrequited love may prove fatal, if sufficiently provoked. 

******

            (The Author, Roman P. Mosqueda, has personally represented minors and parents in the Children’s Court and Juvenile Courts in Los Angeles County.