SECTIONS
Sunday, August 18, 2019

Former telecom firm exec shoots video of sexual advances, sued

A FORMER high-ranking official of a telecommunication company was charged for allegedly recording his sexual advances on a fellow employee.

Regional Anti-Cybercrime Office (RACO) 7 Chief Leo Dofiles lodged the complaint last week against respondent Neil (real name withheld pending his statement) for violating Republic Act 9995, or the Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act of 2009.

A separate sexual harassment complaint had been filed against Neil, who is in his late 40s.

Complainant Louise (not her real name), in her complaint, said she had no knowledge that the respondent recorded his acts on video. The sexual abuses happened inside the respondent’s office.

“I absolutely did not agree to be photographed or to a video taken of the dastardly act done to me. What married (woman), who is in her right mind, will agree to a video recording of a sexual act and more so with another person?” she said.

Neil, in his counter-affidavit, said he and Louise were having an affair, which she denied.

She said the first sexual abuse happened sometime in August 2011. Neil asked for a sexual favor, after threatening to transfer her to a far-flung office because of her poor sales.

“I followed whatever he told me to do because I was already very weakened by the prior psychological torture that I no longer had the strength to repel the respondent’s sexual assault,” she said.

Neil, who demanded that Louise see him at the airport, sexually assaulted her three more times.

Scared, the complainant kept her silence and did her best to avoid him.

Sometime in January this year, Louise could no longer avoid the respondent as they needed to have an appraisal of sales representatives’ individual performances.

Neil told Louise that she would be transferred to his office. Louise was later invited to his office where she was allegedly detained for four hours and was sexually abused again by the respondent.

Louise tried to send text messages to her husband, but she failed. Her mobile phone later ran out of battery.

The respondent’s abuses reached the higher officials and he was fired from the company after he was proven guilty. (KAL)
style="display:block; text-align:center;"
data-ad-layout="in-article"
data-ad-format="fluid"
data-ad-client="ca-pub-2836569479021745"
data-ad-slot="1977900730">



style="display:block; text-align:center;"
data-ad-layout="in-article"
data-ad-format="fluid"
data-ad-client="ca-pub-2836569479021745"
data-ad-slot="4158864647">


VIEW COMMENTS
DISCLAIMER:

SunStar website welcomes friendly debate, but comments posted on this site do not necessarily reflect the views of the SunStar management and its affiliates. SunStar reserves the right to delete, reproduce or modify comments posted here without notice. Posts that are inappropriate will automatically be deleted.


Forum rules:

Do not use obscenity. Some words have been banned. Stick to the topic. Do not veer away from the discussion. Be coherent. Do not shout or use CAPITAL LETTERS!

sunstar.com.ph