Exhibit “A” Judicial Affidavit of Lennie Joy A. Alviola (Private Complainant) dated Nov 18, 2013 and its attachments

To prove its existence, genuineness and due execution and as part of the testimony of Private Complainant.

To prove all allegations of the complainant in this crimanl complaint against defendant.

A-1 Page 2 of the affidavitA-2 Page 3A-3 Page 4A-4 Page 5A-5 Page 6A-6 Page 7A-6-a Signature of Lennie Joy A. AlviolaExhibit “B” Answer to Letter-Complaint To prove the fact that defendant had written

words against the complainant which is subject to this criminal case.

B-1 Par 2 of the Answer: “She is the victim of a conspiracy and frame up between her cunning immediate supervisory authority, some jealous co-employees the scheming daughter of incumbent mayor who wants to be the mayor and a certain Mrs. Hasselman”

B-2 Signature of Nila V. AradoExhibit “C” Minutes of the Preliminary

Investigation conducted on the complaint against Ms. Nila Arado for issuing fake Mayor’s Permit

C-1 Signature of Vivien Miraflor-SecretaryC-2 Signature of Godard Kabristante-

ChairmanC-3 Signature of Cesar Blanco, Jr -MemberC-4 Signature of Agustin Ramacho-

memberC-5 Signature of Marfelia Sarte -MemberExhibit “D” Findings and Recommendations of the

Investigating Committee.To prove the fact that Defendant Arado forged the signature of the Municipal Vice Mayor in issuing the Mayors Permit.

Exhibit “E” Letter from Denmar Abo addressed to Mayor Alviola dated July 15, 2013

To prove that a complaint was filed against Nila Arado for issuing a fake mayor’s permit.

Exhibit “F” Affidavit of Carmecil albino dated July 16, 2013

To prove that Nila Arado issued a Mayor’s Permit to Mad Dog Resto Bar and Resort.

Exhibit F-1 Signature of Carmecil Albino in her Affidavit dated July 16, 2013

Exhibit “G” Mayor’s Permit issued on June 25, 2013

G-1 Second Page of the Mayors PermitF-1-a Forged signature of Vice Mayor

TuballaExhibit “H” Letter of Vice Mayor Tuballo

addressed to the Mayor dated ________

Exhibit “I” Judicial Affidavit of Elenita T. Valencia dated Dec 10, 2013

To support certain allegations of Private Complainant in his complaint against the defendant

Foundation/Preliminary/Estab motiveI-1 Page 2

I-1-a Signature of Elenita T. ValenciaExhibit “J” Judicial Affidavit dated Dec 10, 2013

of Merlie A. AbanteTo support certain allegations of Private Complainant in his complaint against the defendant

J-1 Page 2J-1-a Signature of Merlie A. AbanteExhibit “K” Judicial Affidavit dated Dec 10, 2013

of Revah Angustia V. VenalesTo support certain allegations of Private Complainant in his complaint against the defendant

Page 2Signature of Revah Angustia V. Venales

Exhibit “L” Judicial Affidavit dated Dec 10, 2013 of Edwin Inoferio

To support certain allegations of Private Complainant in his complaint against the defendant

L-1 Page 2L-1-a Signature of Edwin InoferioExhibit “M” Judicial Affidavit dated Dec 10, 2013

of Rowena MoradosTo support certain allegations of Private Complainant in his complaint against the defendant.

M-1 Page 2M-1-a Signature of Rowena Morados

Reservation of additional exhibits in the course of the proceeding of this case.

Not made with good motives and for justifiable ends

G.R. No. L-16772           November 30, 1962

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellant, vs.JULIAN MONTON, E

"Every defamatory imputation is presumed to be malicious even if it be true, if no good intention and justifiable motive for making it is shown, except in the following cases: (1) a private communication made by any person to another in the performance of any legal, moral, or social duty." Libel, as defined under Article 353, has three elements: The imputation must be defamatory, it must have been given publicity, and it must be malicious. A fourth element may also be considered implicit in the provision, namely, that the victim of the libel must be identifiable. The defamatory character of the imputation is shown by the recitals thereof. No evidence aliunde need be adduced to prove it. With respect to the element of malice, the same is established (either by presumption or by proof. If nothing but the defamatory imputation itself is laid before the court, malice is presumed from it, and to overcome this presumption there must be a showing of good intention and justifiable motive. In other words, the burden is upon the defendants to overcome the legal inference of malice.