2. What is wrong with the side of Maj.

Hindang (why did he come up to that honor

report)?

3. What are his assumptions?

I appeal, in the name of clarity, fairness and truth[,] that my case be reopened and carefully
reviewed for I did not violate the honor code/system, I can answer NO to both questions (Did
I intend to deceive? Did I intend to take undue advantage?) and for the following reasons:

1. The honor report of Maj. Hindang was already settled and finalized given the fact
that no face-to-face personal conversation with Ms. Costales was conducted to
clarify what and when exactly was the issue at hand.

2. Statements of the respondents support my explanation.

3. My explanation to my appeal to my DR (Request for reconsideration of meted

punishment) further supports my explanation in my delinquency report.

4. My understanding of the duration of the "CLASS" covers not just a lecture in a

typical classroom instruction but includes every transaction and communication a
teacher does with her students, especially that in our case some cadets asked for
queries, and I am given instruction by which (sic) were directly related to our CLASS.
Her transaction and communication with our other classmates may have already
ended but ours extended for a little bit.

I agree and consider that because Cadet CUDIA is under my instruction to

wait, and the other cadets still have business with me, it is reasonable
enough for him to say that "Our class was dismissed a bit late" (dealing with
matter of seconds or a minute particularly 45 seconds to 1 minute and 30
seconds)

And with concern to (sic) OR432 class, I can say it ended on time (1500H).

(signed)
M COSTALES

w/ attached certification

5. I was transparent and honest in explaining the 2-minute delay and did not attempt
to conceal anything that happened or I did.

6. Furthermore, CPT DULA WAN PA, the Tactical Officer of Hawk Company[,] and I
had a conversation with regards (sic) to the same matter for which he can give
important points of my case.

7. Cadet lcl DIAZ "D" Co can also stand as a witness that I waited for Ms. Costales. 24

On January 15, 2014, the HC constituted a team to conduct a preliminary investigation on the
reported honor violation of Cadet 1 CL Cudia. The Foxtrot Company was designated as the
investigating team and was composed of Cadet 1 CL Hasigan as Presiding Officer, and Cadets 1 CL
Mogol, lCL Raguindin, 2CL Gumilab, 2CL Saldua, 3CL Espejo, and 3CL Poncardas as
members. Soon after, the team submitted its Preliminary Investigation Report recommending that
25

the case be formalized.

The formal investigation against Cadet 1 CL Cu di a then ensued. The Presiding Officer was Cadet 1
CL Rhona K. Salvacion, while the nine (9) voting members were Cadets lCL Jairus 0. Fantin, lCL
Bryan Sonny S. Arlegui, 1 CL Kim Adrian R. Martal, 1 CL J eanelyn P. Cabrido, 1 CL ShuAydan G.
Ayada, 1 CL Dalton John G. Lagura, 2CL Renato A. Carifio, Jr., 2CL Arwi C. Martinez, and 2CL Niko
Angelo C. Tarayao. Acting as recorders tasked to document the entire proceedings were 4CL
26

Jennifer A. Cuarteron and 3CL Leoncio Nico A. de Jesus 11. Those who observed the trial were
27

Cadets 1 CL Balmeo, Dag-uman, Hasigan, Raguindin, Paulino, Arcangel, and Narciso; Cadets 2CL
Jocson and Saldua, Jr.; and Cadet 3CL Umaguing. 28

The first formal hearing started late evening of January 20, 2014 and lasted until early morning the
next day. Cadet lCL Cudia was informed of the charge against him, as to which he pleaded "Not
Guilty." Among those who testified were Cadet 1 CL Cudia, Maj. Hindang, and Cadets 1 CL
Arcangel and Narciso. On the second night of the hearing held on January 21, 2014, Cadet 1 CL
Cudia again appeared and was called to the witness stand along with Cadets Brit and Barrawed. Dr.
Costales also testified under oath via phone on a loudspeaker. Deliberation among the HC voting
members followed. After that, the ballot sheets were distributed. The members cast their votes
through secret balloting and submitted their accomplished ballot sheets together with their written
justification. The result was 8-1 in favor of a guilty verdict. Cadet lCL Dalton John G. Lagura (Cadet
lCL Lagura) was the lone dissenter. Allegedly, upon the order ofHC Chairman Cadet 1 CL Mogol,
the Presiding Officer and voting members went inside a chamber adjoining the court room for further
deliberation. After several minutes, they went out and the Presiding Officer announced the 9-0 guilty
verdict. Cadet 1 CL Cudia, who already served nine (9) touring hours, was then informed of the
unanimous votes finding him guilty of violating the Honor Code. He was immediately placed in the
PMA Holding Center until the resolution of his appeal.

On January 24, 2014, Cadet ICL Cudia filed a written appeal addressed to the HC Chairman, the full
text of which stated:

WRITTEN APPEAL

14 NOVEMBER 2013

This is when I was reported for "Late for two (2) minutes in Eng412 class", my explanation on
this delinquency report when I received it, is that "Our class was dismissed a (little) bit late
and I came directly from 4th period class ... etc". Knowing the fact that in my delinquency
report, it is stated that ENG412 classes started 1500H and I am late for two minutes, it is
logical enough for I (sic) to interpret it as "I came 1502H during that class". This is the
explanation that came into my mind that time. (I just cannot recall the exact words I used in
explaining that delinquency report, but what I want to say is that I have no intention to be
late). In my statements, I convey my message as "since I was not the only one left in that
class, and the instructor is with us, I used the term "CLASS", I used the word "DISMISSED"
because I was under instruction (to wait for her to give the section grade) by the instructor,
Ms. Costales. The other cadets (lCL MIRANDA, lCL ARCANGEL) still have queries and
business with her that made me decide to use the word "CLASS", while the others who don't
have queries and business with her (ex: lCL NARCISO and 1 CL DIAZ) were also around.

Note:

The four named cadets were also reported late.

 Reference: Para 171. 0. (Leaving the Classroom Prior to Dismissal Time)(Sec XVII,
CCAFPR s2008)

It is stated in this reference that "Cadets shall not linger in the place of instruction after the
section has been dismissed. EXCEPT when told or allowed to do so by the instructor or by
any competent authority for official purposes. "

The instruction by Ms. Costales was given to me before the two bells rang (indicating the end
of class hour, 1500H). I waited for her for about 45 seconds to 1 minute and 30 seconds, that
made me to decide to write "a little bit late" in my explanation. Truly, the class ENDED
1500H but due to official purpose (instruction by Ms. Costales to wait) and the conflict in
academic schedule (to which I am not in control of the circumstances, 4th PD class 1330H-
1500H and 5th PD class 1500H-1 600H), and since Ms. Costales, my other classmates, and
I were there, I used the word "CLASS".

19 December 2013

I was informed that my delinquency report was awarded, 11 Demerits and 13 Touring hours.
Not because I don't want to serve punishment, but because I know I did nothing wrong, I
obeyed instruction, and believing that my reason is justifiable and valid, that is why I
approached our tactical officer, MAJ HINDANG PAF, to clarify and ask why it was awarded
that day.

In our conversation, he said that he had a phone call to my instructor and he even added
that they have a protocol to dismiss the class, 15 minutes or 10 minutes before 1500H. I
explained:

Sir, I strongly believe that I am not in control of the circumstances, our 4th period class
ended 1500H and our 5th period class, which is ENG412, started 1500H also. Immediately
after 4th period class, I went to my next class without any intention of being late Sir.

These statements are supplementary to my explanation in my delinquency report, in here, I

specified the conflict in the schedule and again, I have no intention to be late. After
explaining it further with these statements, my tactical officer said that since I was reported in
a written form, I should make an appeal in a written form. Thinking that he already
understood what I want to say, I immediately made an appeal that day stating the words that
I used in having conversation with him. 29

Attached to the written appeal was a Certification dated January 24, 2014, wherein Dr. Costales
attested:

1. That Cadet MIRANDA, ARCANGEL, [and] NARCISO was (sic) with Cadet CUDIA in
making query about their latest grades in OR432 and/or results of UEl outside the ACADS
office. The following facts may explain their queries on 14 November 2013:

a. That I held my class in the PMAFI room instead of room 104.