u/jdnllx

taena nakakagigil power tripping ng putangenang demonyong rosmar na yan!! ipatrend natin yan at ilapit sa kung saan man na mapapahiya at kaya tapatan yan si rosmar!! sana lumapit si ateng kakasuhan kay tulfo! wala ako tiwala sa public shaming at exploitation ni tulfo pero minsan kailangan kumapit kasi sa ganyan titiklop yan si rosmar!! lalo na at makapangyarihan si tulfo ngayon baka maungkat pa sinong nilalabhan nyan ni rosmar pag nabwiset si tulfo!! ilapit sana nya sa RTIA para kilabutan naman yan si rosmar

Tama yan Ganda! Puksain mo sila. Back up mo kaming lahat dito.

Siya ba ang big boss?

Swipe for more resibo 🧾

Isusunod ko si Tsunggo para sa VISA niya sa immigration since proud flokflok naman siya at kung legal ba ang pag-stay dito ni Dudung para maimbestigahan din ang source of funds ng chekwang yan na nagpapayaman lang sa Pilipinas. For sure dirty money yan. Ibalik sa lusak ang langaw fam.

Masyado ata maliit ang screenshot ko sa PC kaya here is the Compaint:

Dear Sir/Madam:

I am respectfully submitting this formal complaint and request for investigation concerning the circumstances surrounding the presence and treatment of Ms. Rosemarie Tan Pamulaklakin and her husband, Mr. Jerome Sazon Pamulaklakin, at the Calamba City, Laguna Prosecution Office.
Mr. Jerome Sazon Pamulaklakin reportedly has an ongoing case, which makes the circumstances surrounding their treatment inside a prosecution office particularly deserving of proper review and clarification.

I. Nature of the Complaint
At the outset, I would like to make clear that this complaint is not motivated by jealousy, hatred, personal animosity, or any intention to personally attack Ms. Rosemarie Tan Pamulaklakin or her husband. Neither is this complaint intended to take sides regarding Mr. Pamulaklakin's pending case.
The concern is about justice, fairness, equal treatment, professionalism, accountability, and public trust.

When an ordinary citizen enters a government office, particularly an institution connected with the administration of justice, there are normally established rules concerning security checks, visitor access, identification, conduct, and other office procedures.

It is therefore reasonable for the public to question circumstances where it appears that a particular individual may have received accommodation or treatment that ordinary members of the public may not ordinarily receive.

The central question is:
Were the same standards, rules, security procedures, and requirements applied equally to everyone, regardless of fame, social status, popularity, connections, or influence?
Justice should not only be fair in substance; it should also appear fair and impartial to the public.

II. Concern Regarding Possible Preferential Treatment

The circumstances shown and/or reported regarding the treatment of Ms. Rosemarie Tan Pamulaklakin and Mr. Jerome Sazon Pamulaklakin raise questions as to whether they were given accommodation, access, attention, or treatment that differed from what would ordinarily be provided to other members of the public.

The issue is not that Ms. Pamulaklakin may be a known or prominent personality. Being famous is not, by itself, a wrongdoing.

The concern arises when fame, popularity, influence, or social standing appears to result in privileges or accommodations that may not be available to ordinary citizens.

If ordinary citizens are required to comply with strict visitor policies, security protocols, dress or conduct requirements, and limitations on the number of persons who may enter government premises, then those same standards should apply consistently to everyone.

The presence of several companions, including family members and household helpers, also raises a legitimate question—not about who these people are, but whether each person had a valid reason to enter the premises and whether the same authorization and security procedures applicable to other visitors were followed.
If special consideration was given, there should be a legitimate and verifiable basis for such consideration.

III. Public Trust and Republic Act No. 6713
The conduct of government personnel inside an institution responsible for prosecutorial functions is particularly important because such conduct directly affects public confidence in the justice system.

Republic Act No. 6713, otherwise known as the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees, provides standards requiring public officials and employees to uphold the public interest, professionalism, justness and sincerity, and to provide service without unfair discrimination. The law also states that public employees should endeavor to discourage wrong perceptions of their roles as dispensers or peddlers of undue patronage.

The concern, therefore, is not simply whether someone may say that an interaction was “just a picture” or that “nothing wrong happened.”
The actions of government personnel, even seemingly minor actions, can affect the public's perception of whether government institutions are being administered fairly and impartially.
The Supreme Court has likewise recognized, in discussing RA 6713, that professionalism includes the responsibility to avoid conduct that creates a wrong perception of undue patronage and that public employees should avoid an appearance of impropriety affecting the integrity of government service.

IV. Possible Conflict of Interest or Appearance of Impropriety

I also respectfully request that the conduct and interactions of the government employees involved with Ms. Rosemarie Tan Pamulaklakin and Mr. Jerome Sazon Pamulaklakin be examined to determine whether the circumstances may constitute an actual, potential, or apparent conflict of interest, preferential treatment, undue patronage, or other ethical concern.

I am not alleging that a conflict of interest has already been established. Rather, I am asking the appropriate authority to investigate and determine whether one exists or whether the circumstances reasonably create an appearance of compromised impartiality or preferential treatment.

This concern is particularly relevant because Mr. Pamulaklakin reportedly has an ongoing case and the incident occurred inside a prosecution office.
I respectfully request that the investigating authority determine, among other things:

1. The identities and positions of the government personnel who interacted with Ms. Pamulaklakin and Mr. Pamulaklakin;
2. Whether any of those personnel had official involvement in, access to, or responsibilities relating to Mr. Pamulaklakin's pending case;
3. Whether any personal, professional, social, or other relationship existed between the employees and either of the two individuals;
4. Whether any special accommodation, assistance, access, or privilege was extended to them;
5. Whether such accommodation was authorized under existing office rules and procedures;
6. Whether the same accommodation would ordinarily be provided to other parties or members of the public;
7. Whether the employees had any interest or relationship that could affect, or reasonably appear to affect, the impartial performance of their official duties; and
8. Whether the conduct observed constitutes any violation of applicable ethical standards, office policies, security protocols, or other relevant rules.

V. Publicly Posted TikTok Video and Attached Evidence

For reference and verification, I am providing a video publicly posted on TikTok by Ms. Diane Cuerdo, which appears to show circumstances relevant to this complaint.

TikTok Video: https://vt.tiktok.com/ZSVecQEug/

I am also attaching a copy of the video file to this email for reference and verification.

The video is being submitted as reference material so that the appropriate authority may independently review the circumstances shown therein. I respectfully request that the video be evaluated together with any available CCTV footage, visitor logs, security records, office records, photographs, and statements of personnel or witnesses who were present during the incident.

I am not submitting the video for purposes of encouraging harassment, public condemnation, or trial by social media. It is being submitted so that the appropriate government authority can objectively determine what actually occurred and whether the conduct of the personnel involved was consistent with applicable rules and ethical standards.

VI. Request for Investigation and Appropriate Action
In view of the foregoing, I respectfully request that your office:

1. Conduct an impartial investigation into the incident at the Calamba City, Laguna Prosecution Office;
2. Identify the government personnel involved and determine their respective roles and responsibilities;
3. Review the available video and, if possible, relevant CCTV footage and other official records;
4. Determine whether the applicable visitor, security, access, and office procedures were followed;
5. Determine whether Ms. Rosemarie Tan Pamulaklakin, Mr. Jerome Sazon Pamulaklakin, and their companions were treated in accordance with the same standards applicable to ordinary members of the public;
6. Determine whether any special accommodation, privilege, or preferential treatment was extended;
7. Determine whether the circumstances give rise to an actual, potential, or apparent conflict of interest or other ethical concern;
8. Determine whether any provision of RA 6713 or other applicable rules, regulations, or office policies may have been violated; and
9. Take such appropriate administrative or corrective action as may be warranted by the findings of the investigation.
   I respectfully emphasize that this complaint is not asking the investigating authority to presume guilt or wrongdoing. It is a request for an objective examination of the facts.

If the investigation establishes that the personnel acted properly, that all applicable rules were followed, and that there was no preferential treatment or conflict of interest, then such finding should likewise be acknowledged.

What is important is that the matter be investigated transparently and objectively so that legitimate concerns can either be substantiated and addressed or properly clarified.

VII. Closing
The issue here is not about being a fan, hating a person, being bitter, or taking sides.
It is about the basic principle that there should be equal treatment inside institutions of justice.
Justice should never appear to depend upon fame, connections, popularity, or social status. There should be no perception that some individuals are treated as VIPs while ordinary citizens are required to strictly follow rules and procedures.
At a time when public confidence in government and the justice system is already fragile, incidents that create an appearance of preferential treatment can further undermine that trust.
This complaint is therefore not simply about Ms. Rosemarie Tan Pamulaklakin or Mr. Jerome Sazon Pamulaklakin. It is about fairness, accountability, professionalism, equal treatment, and maintaining public confidence in the integrity of government institutions.

I respectfully request that this complaint be given due attention and not disregarded, and that I be provided, subject to applicable rules on confidentiality and due process, with an acknowledgment of receipt and information regarding the appropriate action or referral taken on this matter.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Tangena nitong hito na to? Nakikisali pa talaga sa pang mock kay Shai. Tuloy mo lang Roldan malapit lapit na ang laos era mo. Wag na wag mo ulit gagamitin si Shai sa content mo ah.

Aalingasaw at aalingasaw din baho ng yaman mo rusmi. And we’re allll here for it. Manifesting 🤞🤞

Yabang sino kaya nasa likod neto? Si Sarah Discaya nga bumagsak ikaw pa kaya Rusmi? waiting sa karma mo

Grabe ka rosmar nagttrabaho ng maayos si Shai tas kakasuhan mo dahil naglilive? Sana all aning