VARGAS COUPLE APPEALS DISMISSAL OF CHILD ABUSE COMPLAINT, SAYS RESOLUTION USED WRONG LAW AND IGNORED EVIDENCE

 

Alfred and Yasmine Vargas

Alfred Vargas and his wife Yasmine have asked the Manila Prosecutors’ Office to reconsider its Resolution dismissing their criminal complaint against Rob Sy and his partner Juvelle Bacosa, saying the resolution applied the wrong law and ignored substantial evidence.

 
According to the Vargas couple, the Resolution relied on the definition of bullying under Republic Act No. 10627, or the Anti-Bullying Act of 2013, a law specifically designed to address bullying in schools and educational institutions.
 
The complaint filed by the Vargas spouses against Sy and Bacosa, however, is not based on the Anti-Bullying Act.
 
The Vargas complaint sought the prosecution of respondents under Section 10(a) of Republic Act No. 7610, otherwise known as the Special Protection of Children Against Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act. The said law was enacted to safeguard children from abuse, cruelty, exploitation, and conditions prejudicial to their development.
 
They added that the bullying incident cited in their complaint occurred during a swimming competition at the Rizal Memorial Sports Complex on February 14, 2026, and not within a school environment.
 
“We respectfully believe that the Resolution erred in adopting restrictive interpretation of the law and failed to fully appreciate the totality of the evidence on record,” they said.
 
In their Motion for Reconsideration, the Vargas couple said the Resolution narrowed the protection afforded by law by treating the incident involving their seven-year old child as a purely school-based bullying incident.
 
According to the Motion, such an approach overlooked the broader protections provided under Republic Act No. 7610.
 
The Vargas couple added that the Resolution disregarded material evidence, including eyewitness testimonies, reports, and professional psychiatric findings documenting the emotional and psychological impact suffered by their child.
 
The pieces of evidence submitted showed that the bullying incident triggered fear, emotional distress, humiliation, and psychological harm, the Vargas couple said. 
 
It also highlighted the failure of Sy and Bacosa to take reasonable corrective and preventive action despite warning and repeated reminders, they added.
 
Contrary to the findings of the Resolution, the Vargas couple said their child “was subjected to acts of aggression, ridicule, humiliation, intimidation, and emotional maltreatment.”
 
“These acts resulted in clinically documented psychological distress,” they said.
 
The Vargas couple likewise disputes the Resolution’s characterization of the incidents as a mere childish disagreement or minor altercation.
 
“These are not trivial matters,” they said.
 
“These are precisely the kinds of acts and conditions that Republic Act No. 7610 seeks to prevent, particularly when they affect the dignity, emotional security, psychological well-being, and development of a child.”
 
The Motion further said that their complaint is not based solely on their statements but the direct accounts of multiple witnesses. These direct accounts were submitted to support their complaint.
 
“These are positive, direct, and material eyewitness accounts,” they said in their appeal.
 
The Vargas couple also emphasized that the Resolution did not give weight to the child’s own narration of the events and the result of the psychiatric evaluation.
 
According to the appeal, the evaluation documented emotional and psychological distress, including symptoms consistent with adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood, fear reactions, humiliation, anxiety, feelings of betrayal, and clinically significant distress requiring professional intervention.
 
“These manifestations should not be dismissed as mere childish statements or ordinary conflict between minors,” they said.
 
“Rather, they demonstrate the seriousness of the harm alleged and underscore the need for responsible parental authority, supervision, and intervention,” they added.
 
“This case has never been about publicity, personal conflict, or retaliation,” the Vargas couple said.
 
“It has always been about parents’ accountability, child protection, and ensuring that the law works for the very individuals it was designed to protect,” they added.
 
“We will always respect and believe in the legal process. Our faith in the justice system makes us hope that the truth can never be manipulated and covered up. Lalabas at lalabas din ang katotohanan,” Alfred Vargas said in a separate statement.
 
“Umaasa kami na mabibigyang kaming mag-asawa ng pagkakataon na ipaglaban ang karapatan ng aming anak. He has been a victim of continuous bullying,” he said.
 
“Ito ay para rin sa lahat ng mga batang biniktima, sinaktan at inabuso ng mga bully. Sana ay mabigyan sila ng tinig at ng pagkakataon na ibangon ang kanilang pagkatao at ipaglaban ang kanilang mga karaparatan sa ating hukuman,” he added.