By Daisy CL Mandap
 |
| Pales says she is not crazy to have inflicted this kind of injury on herself |
“Hindi
naman ako baliw para saktan ang sarili ko.” (I am not crazy to have hurt
myself).
This was the lament of Eden Gumba
Pales, 37, who sobbed on the phone when asked for her reaction to the
acquittal on Wednesday of her former employer on six charges relating to her
alleged assault of the Filipina helper over a seven-month period.
In acquitting 35-year-old female
teacher Mak Pui-shan, West Kowloon deputy magistrate Li Cheuk-wai said Pales,
the main witness in the case, was unreliable, and gave statements that were
full of loopholes and flaws.
 |
| PINDUTIN PARA SA DETALYE |
Mak was acquitted of one count of
common assault, three counts of assault occasioning bodily harm, one count of
administering poison to Pales – a dishwashing liquid which the employer
allegedly mixed with congee which she then forced the helper to eat – and a count
of criminal intimidation.
The first five charges were related
to various events that allegedly happened at Mak’s family home in Tsuen Wan
between October 2020 and May 2021 and the last, on May 29, 2021, four days after
Pales left to complain about the alleged assault.
The most striking evidence presented
during the trial were photos of the bruises on Pales’ thighs which she claimed
were caused by a steel spatula that Mak had used to hit her, and several long scratches
on her back which the employer also allegedly caused earlier.
 |
| PRESS FOR MORE DETAILS |
Also part of the evidence of the
prosecution was a medical report on the bruises sustained by Pales and a police
officer who took her to the hospital for the check-up.
Pales
claimed she was never allowed to take a day-off since she started working for
Mak in late March 2020 until she was forced to escape in May last year, so how
could she have sustained all the injuries shown to the court without anyone
knowing about them?
She also asked, what might have been her motivation for bringing false charges against her former employer?
.jpg) |
| Mak, a secondary school teacher, was acquitted on 6 charges of assaulting and threatening Pales |
But for the magistrate, the prosecution’s case hinged on Pales’ credibility as a witness, saying the case was one of “one versus one” situation. Ip noted that the alleged victim’s statement were contradictory and that she changed her answers several times during cross-examination.
Among the contradictory statements
cited by Li were Pales’ claim that only she and Mak were present when she was
forced to eat congee with cleaning detergent, but later said Mak’s husband was
in the master bedroom.
Li also noted that the police who searched
Mak’s house did not find the actual bottle of cleaning detergent in the flat
that the employer had allegedly used in the incident, so the court could not determine
if there was indeed poison in it.
 |
| BASAHIN ANG DETALYE! |
The magistrate also pointed out that
Pales had claimed the skin on her head became swollen after Mak pulled her hair
and banged her head against a wall, yet she did not include this in her written
statement with the police.
As for the allegation that Mak had
scratched the helper’s back, Li found the claim incredible as that would have
involved the employer jumping over a bed and inserting her
hands under the helper’s clothes to carry out the alleged assault.
Li also pointed out that Pales had
told police that Mak scratched her back once with one hand, but in court, said
the employer had used both hands.
Asked why they were 18 scratch marks
on her back, Pales told the court some of them were made in the past.
 |
| Pindutin para sa latest Winners! |
The magistrate also said police did
not find the frying pan that Mak had allegedly used to hit her on both her
thighs. In court, Pales said there was a mistake in translation because what she
had told police was that she was assaulted with a spatula but Li dismissed this
as another untruth, saying the helper was well-versed in English.
Pales said she was hurt by the finding
that she had been untruthful, and also by the magistrate’s failure to address
the various injuries she sustained during what she claimed were repeated
assaults on her.
“Nagkaroon
po ako ng maraming mga scars sa katawan dahil sa pauli-ulit na pananakit sa
akin,” Pales said. “Tapos ako pa ang pinalabas na sinungaling. Grabe po
talaga.”
(I have a lot of scars on my body
from the repeated assaults committed against me. But now I am the one being
branded as a liar? That is seriously unfair.)
 |
| Eden also showed off scratches on the side of her body and back allegedly caused by Mak |
In-between sobs, Pales said the
decision made her lose trust in Hong Kong’s justice system.
“Kung alam ko lang po na hindi ko makukuha ang justice dito buti pang umuwi na lang ako.” (Had I known that I wouldn’t get justice here I would have just gone home. )
But not all hopes are lost for
Pales. According to Kitty Chong, a solicitor at Daly and Associates which
is representing Pales in a civil claim against Mak, the case can still be
pursued.
“At this stage, we can still pursue
the civil claim. However, as to whether we will continue pursuing the same, the
decision ultimately lies with Eden. We will be having further meetings with
Eden to render advice to her, including the range of any potential damages.”
Chong said her firm was frustrated
by the acquittal but since they were not present at Mak’s trial, they did not
know yet what the employer had said in court and what led to the magistrate’s
finding.
“If there is any potential challenge
of the finding of facts, it would be up to the prosecution to appeal the
decision,” she said.
But she added a civil case may still
be pursued because the standard of proof that is required is not as high as
that for criminal cases where a conviction could only be rendered if the
charges are proved “beyond reasonable doubt.”
Edwina Antonio, a case officer of
the Mission for Migrant Workers who has accompanied Pales during all her court
appearances as a witness, was also saddened by the decision. But she said the
Mission remains firmly by her side on whatever moves she wants to take next.
Antonio said Pales is in a dire
strait as she is a single parent to a 17-year-old daughter whom she has failed
to provide for in the past 10 months that her case had been in court.
The Overseas Workers Welfare
Administration which has given her shelter has reportedly given the helper a small
amount to set up a business back home, but that recently failed.
Pales says her experience in Hong
Kong has traumatized her so much that she cannot imagine herself working abroad
again. But at the same time, she does not know how she could continue
supporting her daughter when she goes home.
Pales, a first-time domestic helper,
arrived in Hong Kong on Mar 9, 2020 and moved in with Mak, her husband and
their two sons, aged 5 years and 5 months at their Tsuen Wan home after spending 20 days in
quarantine.
Pales claimed the first time the
defendant attacked her was between October and November in 2020 when the
employer pulled her hair and banged her head against the wall when she forgot an
order to clean the baby’s toys.
The next assault allegedly happened
in mid-February last year, when the baby started crying inconsolably as she
tried to let him finish his bowl of porridge. This time, Mak allegedly pumped
dishwashing detergent onto a bowl with congee and ordered the helper to eat it.
A few days later Mak allegedly
attacked her again for no reason while she was fixing the couple’s bed. The
employer allegedly clawed her back, leaving it with about 10 fingernail scratches
that caused the skin to bleed.
The worst of the alleged attacks
happened on May 25 when Mak was angered by the baby’s crying who refused to finish his congee. Mak allegedly grabbed hold of a spatula and used it
to beat the helper’s stomach and thighs.
Pales said she escaped the next day
when Mak’s family went out for lunch and went to her agency's boarding house before seeking police help.
During her cross-examination, Pales
said Mak destroyed her orginal phone and gave her a new one that she would lock
during the daytime and unlock during the night so she could communicate with
her family in the Philippines.
As she was not allowed to take a
day-off the defendant transferred her entire salary of 4,630 to her sister’s
bank account every month.
Pales said she did not disclose the
attacks to anyone because she did not want to lose her job as she was the
breadwinner in her family and had no savings.
She also said her mother had high
blood pressure and could suffer a stroke if she knew about her ordeal.
In dismissing this explanation, magistrate Li said Pales knew her rights very well and could have asked her agency to find
her another job.
