High-society jewelry scam exposed

MANILA, Philippines – The Senate is eyeing an investigation into a multimillion-peso jewelry scam supposedly being masterminded by the chief of staff of philanthropist and socialite Rosemarie “Baby” Arenas.

Sen. Loren Legarda has filed a resolution asking two Senate committees to conduct a joint probe that will look into how the country’s pawnshops and so-called financial agents have been engaging in nefarious activities and committing abuses in violation of current laws.

Legarda, who is scheduled to deliver a privilege speech today, wants the Senate committee on banks and financial institutions and currencies and the committee on constitutional amendments, revision of codes and laws to handle the legislative inquiry.

Legarda’s resolution came in light of the discovery of a “high-society” jewelry scam which has victimized several individuals, including a diplomat who claims to have lost some P15.8 million to the scheme.

Spouses Michael and Barbara Tolentino, Agnes Huibonhoa and Doris Deborrah Palispis have filed syndicated estafa charges against Ma. Elena So Guisande, Arenas’ chief of staff, before the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the San Juan Prosecutor’s Office.

Allegedly acting in cahoots with her husband Antonio Vicente; siblings John So, Maria Melitona Sanches, Joanne Villena, and some of her employees, she allegedly fooled her victims into letting her sell very expensive jewelry so she can earn commissions.

The STAR was able to obtain a copy of the complaint filed by the Tolentino couple against Guisande for syndicated estafa as well as for violation of the Batas Pambansa Bilang 22 or the Bouncing Checks Law.

On April 1, 2009, the Tolentino couple filed charges before the DOJ, claiming to have lost some P10.6 million because of the scheme.

In their six-page affidavit, the couple said Guisande acted as one of their sales agents in the jewelry trade who was supposed to earn on a commission basis.

But in December 2008, the couple said they also learned that their jewelry, which was supposed to be sold, was being pawned or pledged.

They said the postdated checks issued to them by Guisande were either issued with a stop-payment order or were worthless because the accounts were closed.

They said they also discovered that one of their other sales agents, Pamela Suanico, was acting in conspiracy with Guisande after the checks that the latter issued her also started bouncing.

When confronted, Suanico allegedly confessed to the “fraudulent scheme,” of how she was giving the jewelry she was supposed to sell to Guisande, who disposes of the items by pawning them.

The couple said they tried to avoid going to court and so they visited Guisande’s condominium residence at the Chateau de Baie in Roxas Boulevard, Paranaque City where they met the respondent’s father David So and several other members of her family.

“Mr. David So, in the course of our talk, admitted that Ma. Elena So Guisande and her co-conspirators misappropriated our pieces of jewelry by pawning them without our consent and then thereafter, they divided the proceeds of said pawn transactions between themselves,” their complaint narrates.

The Tolentinos said Guisande’s father offered to settle the “obligation” by offering to give the spouses the pawn tickets so that the jewelry can be redeemed and that he will reimburse the money that would be spent for the same.

However, David So didn’t keep his part of the deal when he later refused to reimburse what they spent and give them the pawn tickets for the remaining jewelry that was yet to be accounted for.

“As a result of the nefarious and unlawful conspiracy of the above-named persons, we were fraudulently injured, as we have lost several pieces of jewelry collectively valued to be in the amount of P10,673,876,” the couple said.

“It is clear from the foregoing that the illegal scheme of the above-named persons follow a certain pattern,” they added, referring to how Guisande and Suanico get jewelry from them and then gave the same to David So who would then dispose of the items by making four people – identified as Valerio Lebosana, Maricel Orgaya, Jose Sanchez, and Danilo Daygo – pawn the items in different pawnshops

Diplomat Lost P15.8 M

Huibonhoa, honorary consul of Gambia, said Guisande pawned the items she was supposed to sell for quick cash and again pawned the receipt for more money which she used to pay off her principals or fund her postdated payment checks “to further induce us to continue transacting with her.”

According to the envoy, she accepted Guisande as a sales agent and delivered pieces of jewelry to her residence at Unit 407 La Maison Condominium, 115 Rada Street, Legaspi Village, Makati City from April to December 2008.

However, the envoy said that last January, she discovered that Guisande was deceiving her after she learned that some of the jewelry that she entrusted were pawned in three different pawnshops – the Rolly Estrella Pawnshop, the L. Raymundo Pawnshop Inc., and the F&T Taymundo Pawnshop Inc. – “without my knowledge and consent.”

Believing that the crime of syndicated estafa was committed, the diplomat said the total value of the items pawned amounts to P15,870,500.

“From all indications, the criminal acts perpetrated against me are part of an elaborate grand scheme to defraud similarly situated individuals. I have learned that I am one of the many who were deceived by the respondents,” Huibonhoa said in her complaint.

“After inducing these individuals, like myself, to authorize her to sell the jewelry items, without our knowledge and consent,” Huibonhoa said Guisande, her siblings, and her other representatives “would pawn or pledge the jewelry items for quick cash” and then “negotiates or sells the pawn tickets for more quick cash.”

41 types of jewelry

The third party claiming to have been victimized by the so-called jewelry scam, Palispis basically told the San Juan Prosecutor’s Office the same story of how she lost P7.3 million in the scheme.

But her complaint against Guisande and those who allegedly conspired with her to commit syndicated estafa provides more details of what jewelry she and her agents were selling to high-class clients.

The third complainant listed 41 types of jewelry, with a loose emerald-cut diamond having a total weight in carats of 9.64 worth P751,000 as the most expensive among the items that she entrusted the respondent to sell from February to November 2008.

First on her list was a diamond tennis choker and a diamond tennis bracelet worth P375,000, followed by a 4.56 carat commercial color emerald-cut diamond worth P215,000; 6.45 carat round earrings worth P300,000; a 5.01 carat white gold diamond ring worth P322,442; and a 4.31 carat marquise pair of loose diamonds worth P250,000.

The list went on with a 5 carat round cut diamond and a pair of 10.89 carat emerald cut diamonds collectively worth P712,250; and another pair of 7 carat diamonds worth P428,375.

The victim’s list of jewelry included more diamond earrings, a man’s diamond ring, more emerald- and princess-cut diamonds, a huge diamond cross, and other items all worth P7,322,167.

Diplomatic dinner

Huibonhoa’s complaint against Guisande and her alleged cohorts did not provide details of how she discovered that her jewelry were being pawned, but an article found by The STAR posted in an Internet blogsite (http://cocktales.ph/?p=1627) tells the supposed story.

Allegedly, Huibonhoa attended a diplomatic dinner and found one of her missing jewelry around the neck of a “high-society lady.”

When asked about the item the following day, the high-society lady told the diplomat that she purchased the necklace in cash “along with other jewelry pieces, from a certain JP, who subsequently told the diplomat that he was simply helping ‘friends’ dispose of an entire lot (‘lote-lote’ in local pawnshop parlance) of pre-owned jewelry.”

Insofar as the Senate’s investigation into abuses allegedly being committed by pawnshops is concerned, Legarda said the focus of the probe would be on the possible review of the country’s pawnshop Law, the Anti-Fencing Law, and other pertinent laws.