Republic of the Philippines

Region VII
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
Branch X, Cebu City

NADINE BERNARDO-PADILLA,
Petitioner,

-VERSUS- CIVIL CASE NO. CEB-CIV-052

FOR: DECLARATION OF
NULLITY OF MARRIAGE
JAMES PADILLA,
Respondent.
x--------------------------------------------------------x

OFFER of TESTIMONY
The testimony of the witness is offered for the following purposes:

1. To testify as the Expert Witness in this case;

2. To prove the material allegations in the Petition; and
3. To testify on other matters relevant and incidental in this case.

JUDICIAL AFFIDAVIT OF JENNIFER SANTOS

I, Jennifer Santos, of legal age, single, with an office address at 48 Agila

Street, Eagle Building, Mandaue City, as part of my testimony in the above-
captioned case, after having been duly sworn in accordance with law, hereby
depose and state that:

I am the psychiatrist engaged by the Petitioner, Nadine Bernardo-Padilla,

in this case to conduct the Psychiatric Evaluation of the Parties;

In relation to the above-entitled case, the counsel, Atty. Joseph Gaviola,

at her office located at 221 Baker St., Holmes Building, Cebu City, asked me
questions which I answered to the best of my ability, fully conscious that I did
so under oath and that I may face perjury and/or any criminal liability for false
testimony;

The questions asked by Atty. Gaviola and the answers I gave are as
follows:

DIRECT EXAMINATION QUESTIONS:

1 of 8
Question (Q): Please state your personal circumstances.
Answer (A): I am Dr. Jennifer Santos, of legal age, Filipino, single and practicing
psychiatric counselling at 48 Agila Street, Eagle Building, Mandaue City.

Q: Why are you here in my office at my office, 221 Baker St., Holmes Building,
Cebu City?
A: To give a sworn statement by way of a judicial affidavit, the same to constitute
as my direct testimony, in the above-captioned case.

Q1: What qualifies you to perform the psychiatric evaluation of the parties?
A1: I am a psychiatrist and marriage counsellor by profession. I earned my
bachelor’s degree in Psychology in the University of San Jose – Recoletos way
back on March 2000. (Witness presented a copy of his college diploma, a copy
of which is hereto attached and marked as Appendix “A”.) I earned my master’s
degree in the year 2003 and my doctoral degree in the year 2008, both in the field
of Psychology in the University of San Carlos. (Witness presented a copy of his
diplomas which are hereto attached and marked as Appendices “B” and “C”,
respectively.)

Q2: Do you know the Petitioner in this case, Ms. Nadine-Bernardo Padilla?
A2: Yes, sir.

Q3: How do you know her?

A3: She came to my office sometime in 15 February 2017 to request a
psychological evaluation be conducted on her and her husband, James Padilla, in
relation to the case she filed against her husband for the nullification of their
marriage.

Q4: Did you conduct a psychiatric study of the parties in this case?
A4: Yes, sir.

Q5: Could you please tell us the manner by which you conducted your
evaluation?
A5: Yes, sir. I did the standard procedure in conducting a psychological
evaluation. In the first session, on June 25, 2017 at 3 o’clock in the afternoon, I
2 of 8
asked them to fill out a form which contains questions regarding their
psychological, mental and medical history and genealogy. I collected the forms
on the next day. On the second session, June 30, 2017, at two o’clock in the
afternoon, I met with them separately and asked them a battery of psychological
questions. On the third session, On July 3, 2017, I met with them at my office
and asked them a series of questions regarding their married life. I also met with
their child, Frederick, on the same date, and asked him a series of questions
regarding his parents’ treatment of each other around him.

Q6: After your study of the parties, what have you found?
A6: I have found that they have a really estranged marital relationship which
makes their marriage dysfunctional.

Q7: Can you elaborate that, please?

A7: What I mean is that their relationship is dysfunctional because one of the
partners, in this case Nadine, often feels a little conflict about entering the other’s
private world without permission. In their case, Nadine often feels conflicted to
get involved with James’ business because she fears that he may react negatively.

Q8: Why do you think that Nadine fears a negative reaction from James?
A8: As I have observed in my sessions with them, the dominant person in their
relationship is James. It was almost like whatever James says, goes. I have
observed from Nadine that she hesitates in answering my questions in front of
James. It was almost, as if, she feared punishment if she did something wrong.

Q9: In evaluation of the Respondent, James, what have you found?

A9: I have found James to be chronically irresponsible, psychologically abusive
and a pathological liar.

Q10: Can you explain, in layman’s term, what you mean by chronically
irresponsible.
A10: Chronical irresponsibility, or Responsibility Deficit Disorder (RDD) in
psychological terminology, is a type of antisocial personality disorder which make
people careless, capricious or outright reckless. They forget their appointments;
they are always late; they neglect to plan ahead; they are financially irresponsible;
they don’t care about their belongings or relationships; they ignore deadlines; and

3 of 8
they act as though others should bail them out of whatever trouble they get in
to. These behavior is normal in adolescents or teenagers, but it is abnormal for
adults.

Q11: Why do you say that James suffers from RDD?

A11: One of the symptoms that James shows, that I base my findings on is his
inability to stay in one job. He either quits or is fired. I asked his former
employers for the reasons why he was fired, and they had almost identical
evaluation on him – that he was irresponsible at his job. They said that he was
often late or absent. Another symptom is his financial irresponsibility. As
discussed by Nadine during one of our sessions, James often squanders his salary
on beer houses or drinks with his buddies, neglecting the fact that he has
responsibilities of providing for his family. Nadine said that she had to ask her
parents for money to buy milk and diapers for their child because James wasted
his salary on alcohol.

Q12: Can you say that James’ RDD was present even before his marriage with
Nadine?
A12: Yes, Sir. Such a disorder is common in adolescents or teenagers. All a
person has to do to get rid of it is outgrow it or become responsible when he
reaches adulthood. In most cases, a person outgrows it and becomes responsible
during adulthood, especially when they get married. However, in the case of
James, he was never able to outgrow it as is shown by his current attitude towards
his responsibilities.

Q13: Can you explain, in layman’s terms, what is psychologically abusive?

A13: Yes, sir. Psychological abuse (also referred to as psychological violence,
emotional abuse, or mental abuse) is a form of abuse characterized by a person
subjecting or exposing another person to behavior that may result in
psychological trauma, including anxiety, chronic depression, or post-traumatic
stress disorder. Such abuse is often associated with situations of power
imbalance, such as abusive relationships, bullying, gaslighting and abuse in the
workplace. This behavior is often a sign of Borderline Personality Disorder
(BPD) which is a long-term pattern of abnormal behavior characterized by
unstable relationships with other people, unstable sense of self, and unstable
emotions.

Q14: Why do you say that James is psychologically abusive?

4 of 8
A14: It was apparent to me during our sessions that he was dominant when it
comes to his relationship with Nadine. He was often mean to Nadine, and orders
her to shut up whenever Nadine says something negative about him. I was also
able to infer from Nadine’s reaction to James’ scolding that she was fearful of
him. It was as if Nadine suffers from anxiety and psychological stress because of
James’ treatment of her.

Q15: Can you say that this behavior or James is present even before his marriage
with Nadine?
A15: Yes, Sir. The usual onset of this type of behavior is early adulthood which
is between the ages of 18 and 25 years. And the duration of which is long-term
and indeterminate unless treated.

Q16: Can you describe, in layman’s term, the term pathological liar?
A16: Yes, Sir. Pathological lying, also called pseudologia fantastica and
mythomania, is a behavior of habitual or compulsive lying. This type of behavior
is characterized by chronic fabricative tendency. Which means that the lying is
not provoked by the immediate situation or social pressure so much as it is an
innate trait of the personality. Normal lies are usually defensive, and are told to
avoid the consequences of telling the truth. They are often white lies that spare
another’s feelings, reflect a pro-social attitude, and make civilized human contact
possible. Pathological lying, on the other hand, is considered a mental illness
because it takes over rational judgment and progresses into the fantasy world and
back. It is when an individual consistently lies for no personal gain.

Q17: How can you say that James is a pathological liar?

A17: There are many instances on which I can base my finding that James is a
pathological liar. First, he wrote in his patient’s form in my office that he is an
advertising manager in a small company while in truth and in fact he was a
salesman. He also told me in our one-on-one session that he constantly takes his
family to vacation destinations like Japan or South Korea during summer breaks,
but in truth and in fact, according to Nadine’s statements, they have never gone
beyond the Philippines. One of his co-workers said, during my investigation, that
James said that he belongs to a wealthy family and that he is just working as a
salesman to experience the life of normal worker. He also told me that he was
an undercover agent of the Central Intelligence Agency of the United States of
America, and that his life here in the Philippines is just a cover that’s why he
can’t really be held liable for not caring for his family so much.

5 of 8
Q18: Can you prove these accusations?
A18: Yes, Sir. I have in my possession a video recording of my sessions with
James and Nadine, as well as an audio recording of the interview I conducted
with his co-worker.

Q19: Can you say that this behavior was present even before James’ marriage
with Nadine?
A19: Yes, sir. The average onset age of this type of behavior is 16 years old. It
was also stated by Nadine that when James was still courting her, he would often
make up stories about his life and his achievements, which, as a matter of fact,
was the reason she fell in love with him in the first place.

Q20: According to your educated judgment, can you say that the disorders that
you described earlier incapacitate James to perform essential marital obligations?
A20: Yes, Sir. These disorders incapacitate, or have a strong tendency to
incapacitate, James to perform essential marital obligations.

Q21: How?
A21: Chronic irresponsibility hinders the husband from providing his family a
decent life. In most cases, the husband neglects the welfare of the family as long
as he satisfies his own desires. Psychological abuse is more often the cause of
broken families. It will also deprive the children of the opportunity, if not the
right, to grow up in a loving family. Children who grew up in a psychological
abusive family, more often become psychologically abusive themselves.
Pathological lying damages trust, which is a basic foundation of all relationships.
If a spouse cannot trust the other because the other is a pathological liar, their
family relationship will be estranged. As they say, trust lost is hard to earn back.

Q22: Dr. Santos, did you put your findings in writing?

A22: Yes, Sir.

Q23: I have here a document which purports to be a psychological report on one

James Padilla, dated August 2, 2017. Can you please go over it and tell us what it
is?

6 of 8
A23: Sir, this is the same psychological report that I have made.

Q24: Found on the last page of the same is a signature above a typewritten name
Dr. Jennifer Santos, is that your signature above your name?
A24: Yes, Sir.

Q25: I have no further questions. Do you have anything to add or retract, Dr.
Santos?
A25: No, Sir.

Q26: Are you willing to sign this statement?

A26: Yes, Sir.
…………………………………………………….

Affiant further sayeth naught.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 17th day

of March 2018, Quezon City, Metro Manila, Philippines.

JENNIFER SANTOS, Ph.D.

Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN before me, this 10th day of May 2017, in
Quezon City, Jennifer Santos, whose signature above appears presented to me
her PRC License with License No. PRC-00-034552 issued on January 10, 2017
at the City of Manila.

JOSEPH GAVIOLA
Counsel for Petitioner

SWORN ATTESTATION

7 of 8
 I faithfully recorded or caused to be recorded the questions asked and
answers given above, and neither did I nor any other person then present or
assisting me coached the witness regarding his answers.

JOSEPH GAVIOLA
Counsel for Petitioner

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN before me, this 17th day of March 2018,
in Cebu City, JOSEPH GAVIOLA, the person whose signature above appears
presented to me her IBP ID with Roll of Attorneys No. 75021 issued on May
21, 2016 at the City of Manila.

Doc No. 1; AIMELE ROSE MIANO

Page No. 2; Notary Public
Book No. 2; Appointment No. 5030730
Series of 2018. Until 31 December 2018
Roll No. 755221
IBP No. 654654/ 12-31-2018
PTR No. 22224876/ 12-01-2018
MCLE Compliance No. 11342; 8/21/18
Commission Serial No.: A-521

Copy furnished:

REYNOLD S. RYAN
Counsel for Respondent
RYAN & ASSOCIATES LAW OFFICES
Ayala Building, San Goku Street,
Cebu City 6000

8 of 8