‘Hard to believe Kris Aquino felt she was violated’—Yap’s lawyer

Loading the Player...

MANILA, Philippines—“Alam mo lahat ng nangayari sa mga ex-boyfriends ko, nasira ang kanilang mga career. [You know what happened to all my ex-boyfriends, their careers were destroyed.] ”

Those words were allegedly among the other threatening statements made by TV Host Kris Aquino against James Yap, his lawyer Lorna Kapunan, said in an interview over Radyo Inquirer 990AM Thursday.

Previously, Yap said he was threatened by the actress-host with the statement, “Alalahanin mo may tatlong taon pa brother ko [don’t forget that my brother still has three years],” referring to President Benigno Aquino III.

Frank Chavez, Kris’s lawyer, denied that she would make such statement during a separate interview.

James Yap and Kris Aquino. FILE PHOTO

Kapunan, however, said that Yap would not lie about such things. “If it were not true, you think he would say that? You think he would like to antagonize or quarrel with her family? Gusto ba niyang awayin ang ating presidente na kaibigan naman niya [Does he want to quarrel with the president who is his friend]?”

“It is not a statement that anybody can invent,” Kapunan said.

Kris had recently filed for a 30-day temporary protection order (TPO) against Yap for alleged “overt sexual advances” and “mean and malicious statements” during one of Yap’s visit to their five year old son “Bimby” last December 3.

Kapunan questioned why it took so long for Kris to file for a protection order if the said “abuse” had happened months ago.

“Hard to believe that Kris felt she was violated and she waited three months to complain, she felt she was abused [but] she did not go to her security, they have personal security guards, the condo has security guards, the [nannys] were there,” Kapunan said.

“Masyado naman imbento mga storya nila just to get a temporary protection order,” she said.

Always not available

Kapunan refuted the claims of Chavez that Yap had abandoned his parental authority and that he was not sincere in wanting to see his son because he only visited 25 times, at most, out of his 104 times a year, twice a week, visitation agreement.

“As a matter of fact, because of Kris’ busy schedule, Yap would attend parent-teacher meetings and other school activities,” Kapunan said.

She said, however, that Yap could not visit Bimby in their house because they were always going on out of town or out of the country trips. Kris was also sometimes taking Bimby with her during film shoots.

Kris had also scheduled tutorial session for Bimby during the Wednesdays and Fridays that Yap was allowed to visit, Kapunan said.

“It’s not Yap’s fault,” she said.

Legitimacy issue

Kapunan said that the root cause of the issue was because Kris wants Bimby to carry the name Aquino and not Yap.

Back when Kris had filed for annulment, she reasoned that the lady minister who presided over their marriage had no authority. Kapunan said that it was Kris who got that lady minister.

The consequence of that annulment however was that Bimby would become illegitimate, Kapunan said.

On the other hand, James’ basis for his counterpetition for annulment was “psychological incapacity,” which would have retained the legitimacy of Bimby, she said.

“She did not like the name Yap, she wanted the child to use the name Cojuangco Aquino,” Kapunan added.

Since Bimby “is now of school age, Kris wanted to change the status to legitimate and wanted to adopt the child … because in law an adopted child has the same rights as a legitimate child,” she said.

In February this year, Kris was trying to get Yap to sign a consent form for her to adopt Bimby.

“Because you cannot adopt without the consent of the biological parent,” Kapunan said.

Kris had allegedly told James they can “jointly adopt” but this was not possible according to Kapunan because “you cannot adopt jointly if you are not married to each other because you are not a couple.”

“The reason is simple: since you are single, it is not unlikely that you will get married again, and therefore the child will have another father,” she said.

Yap was told by his lawyers that if he signed the consent it would mean losing visitation rights “or worse, he would no longer be Bimby’s father.”

“If you sign a consent form and you allow adoption by another person you relinquish all your rights, it’s like you are saying ‘hindi mo na anak si Bimby’ it’s as if binigay mo na si Bimby,” Kapunan said.

That could have been the trigger that set off Yap to become hostile and why Kris was no longer allowing Yap to visit Bimby, she said.

Get Inquirer updates while on the go, add us on these apps:

Inquirer Viber

Disclaimer: The comments uploaded on this site do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of management and owner of We reserve the right to exclude comments that we deem to be inconsistent with our editorial standards.

  • May_Baxasfa

    Kris honest??? Look at how she and her 3 sisters totally skirted Ms. Soho’s question about Kris using Pnoy’s 3 remaining years in office to threaten James. Who’s being honest here? Not Kris, nor any of her 3 sisters. Amalayer family amalaying on national TV?

  • arao_liwanag

    The Aquinos are the violators of all good moral. Kumabit kay Philip Salvador, nagpalit ng boyfriend na parang nagpapalit lang ng panti. Saman tala ang kanyang kapatid naman na mukhang TITI, ay parang badap.

  • ernesto

    mayabang lang ang mga akino sisters,di lahat na taon sa akino tandaan nyo yan

  • May_Baxasfa

    dalen, people here are not judging KriSTD as a showbiz person nor as a woman but as a person. Being showbiz or being a woman is not the issue here; the issue is KriSTD’s honesty, reliability, and integrity–which are a big part of the merits of the case.

  • May_Baxasfa

    dalen, it’s not really that everybody is siding with james; more like almost nobody believes in KriSTD. gets mo na ba?

To subscribe to the Philippine Daily Inquirer newspaper in the Philippines, call +63 2 896-6000 for Metro Manila and Metro Cebu or email your subscription request here.

Factual errors? Contact the Philippine Daily Inquirer's day desk. Believe this article violates journalistic ethics? Contact the Inquirer's Reader's Advocate. Or write The Readers' Advocate:

c/o Philippine Daily Inquirer Chino Roces Avenue corner Yague and Mascardo Streets, Makati City,Metro Manila, Philippines Or fax nos. +63 2 8974793 to 94


editors' picks



latest videos