Prejudices and Dues: How Pepsi Paloma’s Story Should be Told with Truth and Justice
Angeline Ashlee Marquez and Kyla Edquilane
“The world is a stage, and the stage is a world of entertainment.” – Howard Dietz.
Amidst the vast changes in Philippine entertainment history, the story of Delia Dueñas Smith, better known as Pepsi Paloma, remains a mystery that invites contemplation about the true events of her past. Many are left to ponder about the "what ifs" of her case and the life that the young star could have had, had circumstances been different. What if her voice had been heard, and her story told with the respect and dignity it deserves?
Pepsi's tragic fate serves as a poignant reminder of the darker realities that can lurk behind the glitz and glamour of showbiz. As we reflect on her case, it becomes increasingly important to seek the truth and ensure that her narrative is not overshadowed by sensationalism or exploitation. By doing so, we honor not only her memory but also the countless others who have faced similar struggles in silence.
Background of the Case
In 1982, Pepsi Paloma accused comedians Vic Sotto, Joey de Leon, and Ricardo “Richie D’Horsie” Reyes of drugging and raping her at the Sulô Hotel in Quezon City. The accusations sent shockwaves through the entertainment industry, as the alleged crime involved some of the nation’s most beloved TV personalities. Reports soon emerged claiming that Tito Sotto, Vic’s older brother and future senator, had intervened by allegedly intimidating Paloma into signing an Affidavit of Desistance, causing her to drop the charges. Had the suspects been convicted, they would have faced the death penalty by electric chair.
Tragically, on May 31, 1985, Pepsi was found dead in her apartment under suspicious circumstances, with authorities initially reporting that she had died by suicide. A diary allegedly found by investigators detailed her financial and emotional struggles, but those closest to her, including her manager Babette Corcuerra, questioned its authenticity. Many believe that the unresolved trauma from the rape case, combined with the pressure and isolation she faced, may have contributed to her tragic end.
Pepsi’s fateful demise, coupled with the absence of sufficient legal proceedings, left the case unresolved and shrouded in mystery — creating a dark chapter in Philippine entertainment history.
A Question of Credibility
Now, nearly four decades later, the tragic case is being revisited in a film directed by Darryl Yap, The Rapists of Pepsi Paloma. The film, which dramatizes the events surrounding Paloma’s accusations, has already stirred controversy and headlines. Critics are questioning whether it will honor Pepsi’s memory and expose the truth or sanitize the story to protect those implicated. Central to this debate is Yap’s role as the director: How will he handle this sensitive and painful story?
Yap’s approach to filmmaking is often provocative and unafraid to delve into controversial, sensitive subjects. He is known for addressing topics such as sexuality, political history, and real-life tragedies with a boldness that frequently sparks debates. His films often lean on shock value, dark humor, and satire to evoke strong reactions from audiences. This approach, while garnering a dedicated following who appreciate his willingness to confront taboo subjects, also attracts criticism from those who believe he crosses ethical lines in pursuit of sensationalism.
For instance, in the 2021 film Paglaki Ko, Gusto Kong Maging Pornstar, Yap explored the adult film industry with a mix of explicit content and a meta-commentary on the country’s entertainment scene. This blending of raw sexuality and satire led to differing opinions: some see it as a daring commentary, while others accuse Yap of trivializing a complex and often exploitative industry.
Similarly in Ang Babaeng Walang Pakialam, Yap tackled a delicate subject, the experience of a girl with a rare disease, by including humor around a character with a physical disability (i.e., Jerald Napoles as “Ngongo”). This choice was met with backlash, as it raised questions about the sensitivity with which such topics should be treated. Yap’s tendency to mix comedy with sensitive issues has earned him both praise for his fearlessness and disapproval for what some perceive as a lack of empathy.
Furthermore, his historical dramas, such as Martyr or Murderer and Maid in Malacañang, further revealed his willingness to reinterpret and reframe Filipino history. The portrayal of the Marcos family has been contentious, with Yap’s films often accused of presenting them in a more sympathetic light, leading to debates about historical accuracy and the potential for rewriting the narrative of the Marcos dictatorship.
The controversy surrounding The Rapists of Pepsi Paloma places Yap’s approach under intense scrutiny, especially given the real-life nature of the subject matter. How he handles such a tragic and sensitive story will likely shape public opinion of his work even further. Will he use the case as a vehicle for justice, or will he sensationalize it for dramatic effect?
Handling Real-Life Stories and Events
As movies have developed over time, themes have evolved from real-life stories to significant events of the past. This elaborate approach to narrating true stories allows historical records to reach the public through the engaging mediums of entertainment and showbiz.
However, handling true-to-life stories and events requires intensive research and a deep commitment to authenticity. Filmmakers must navigate the complexities of historical accuracy while crafting compelling narratives that resonate with audiences. This often involves consulting historians, experts, and primary sources to ensure that the portrayal of events is both respectful and accurate.
For instance, Dekada '70 (2002) delves into the socio-political landscape of the Philippines during the 1970s, capturing the struggles and resilience of a family amidst the tumult of martial law. In a similar fashion, Aishite Imasu 1941: Mahal Kita (2004) tells a poignant love story set against the backdrop of World War II, highlighting the impact of war on personal relationships and national identity.
However, despite Yap's persistent efforts in the creation of this film, the case of Pepsi itself has yet to receive the justice it deserves. The artistic liberties that Yap may take in this controversial project could potentially obscure the truth, as there is still a lack of concrete evidence detailing the actual events.
This raises concerns about the film's ability to accurately represent the complexities of the situation, as well as the potential for sensationalism to overshadow the real stories of those affected. Ultimately, the challenge lies in balancing creative expression with a commitment to truth, ensuring that the narrative does not become a mere fabrication but rather a respectful homage to the lives intertwined in this historical context.
With that being said, movies not only entertain but also educate audiences about significant historical moments, encouraging viewers to reflect on the complexities of their shared heritage. By prioritizing accuracy and depth in their storytelling, these filmmakers contribute to a more informed understanding of the past, fostering a sense of connection and awareness among viewers. These films are not merely created for entertainment as they can also serve as powerful vehicles for storytelling, carrying the responsibility of presenting an accurate reflection of history as it truly was.
Exploited Even After Death
Over 40 years since Pepsi’s untimely death, the actress’s legacy and name have been exploited by various individuals in the industry, often to protect their own interests and reputations. For some, this exploitation serves as a means to keep their own tarnished legacies relevant, all while continuing to tarnish the reputation of the young woman, even in death. This troubling trend raises questions about the ethics of using a deceased person's name and story for personal gain, highlighting the need for greater respect and sensitivity toward those who can no longer defend themselves.
An incident that showcases this attempt to erase the past occurred in 2018 when former Senate President Tito Sotto requested that the Philippine Daily Inquirer remove articles from their website regarding the alleged rape and murder of the '80s sexy star. This request was perceived by many as an effort to suppress discussions about a painful chapter in Philippine entertainment history. Sotto's actions sparked outrage among advocates for victims' rights, who argued that such attempts to erase history only serve to further silence the voices of those who have suffered.
In a similar vein, an individual close to the victim spoke out regarding the case. This was Guada Guarin, a former co-worker of Pepsi Paloma in the entertainment industry. Guarin claimed that the rape case against Pepsi was never real and expressed her hope for a day when this case would be resolved. Her comments have sparked renewed discussions about the circumstances surrounding Pepsi's tragic death and the ongoing impact of her legacy. Many are questioning the motivations behind such statements, as they can further complicate an already sensitive issue. Guarin's remarks highlight the need for a thorough examination of the events that transpired, as well as a deeper understanding of societal attitudes toward victims of abuse.
These incidents underscore the ongoing struggle to confront uncomfortable truths and the importance of acknowledging the past in order to foster healing and understanding. By attempting to erase these narratives, public figures risk perpetuating a culture of silence around issues of abuse and violence, ultimately hindering progress toward justice and accountability.
Industry Dynamics
The entertainment industry operates within a complex web of legal and institutional pressures that can significantly influence the creation, distribution, and reception of cinematic works. In the Philippines, this is particularly evident in the context of high-profile lawsuits, regulatory bodies like the Movie and Television Review and Classification Board (MTRCB), and the influence of prominent families such as the Sottos over film regulation.
As Yap's newest film targets Vic Sotto, the legal battle highlights high stakes that involve the more broad implications in terms of creative expression. Sotto's lawsuit raises questions about intellectual property rights, contractual obligations, and the potential for legal disputes to stifle artistic freedom. Such cases can create a chilling effect on filmmakers, who may become wary of pursuing certain narratives or themes that could provoke legal challenges.
The MTRCB plays a crucial role in regulating film content in the Philippines, tasked with reviewing and classifying films for public viewing. While its primary goal is to protect audiences from inappropriate content, the board's decisions can also lead to potential censorship. Filmmakers often find themselves navigating the delicate balance between creative expression and compliance with MTRCB guidelines. This regulatory scrutiny can influence the storytelling choices made by filmmakers, as they may alter or omit certain elements to avoid censorship or ensure a favorable rating.
Moreover, the Sotto family's influence over film regulation cannot be overlooked. As a prominent family in the Philippine entertainment industry, their connections and legacy can shape industry standards and practices. This influence can manifest in various ways, from lobbying for specific regulations to impacting the types of stories that are deemed acceptable for public consumption. The intertwining of personal and professional interests within such influential families can create a unique dynamic that affects the broader landscape of film production and distribution.
Additionally, a decision made by the Muntinlupa Court on January 24 demands that the controversial director and his team delete the 26-second trailer from all online platforms. The trailer features a conversation between two deceased individuals, raising questions about its authenticity and the ethical implications of representing the dead in such a manner.
Many viewers are left grappling with the blurred lines between fact and fiction, as the portrayal of these figures can easily lead to misinformation and misinterpretation. This ruling underscores the ongoing tension between creative expression and the responsibility filmmakers have to present their subjects with integrity, particularly when dealing with sensitive historical contexts.
Karma as the Ultimate Truth-teller
The narrative of Paloma’s life was almost tucked away in the shadows of time, until Yap’s recent film brought it back into the spotlight. The film became an avenue to reread a story long left unresolved. However, while it gave voice to the late actress’ tragic tale, it also became a grave where wounds continue to burn and the narrative cannot sleep.
As public awareness swells, so does the demand for justice. But with it comes a troubling reality: the case might never reach closure. The accused have started filing lawsuits to defend their innocence, keeping the case in an endless state of legal limbo. Each new lawsuit introduces another layer of complexity that further entangles the search for truth.
Moreover, with virtual rallies around the case, the lines between fact and fiction grow ever more blurred. What began as a tragedy now unfolds as a battleground for justice, with accusations and counter-accusations transforming it into a chaotic web of legal and public disputes. Each new development pushes the truth farther out of reach, leaving the question: will we ever truly know what happened to Pepsi? As those accused continue their fight, the story persists as a disturbance — an unsettling, unfinished issue that refuses to fade from the collective consciousness.
Pepsi’s story is one that demands to be told with the utmost respect, truth, and justice. It is not merely a subject for dramatic exploitation or sensationalized narratives, but a real tragedy, one marked by injustice and silence.
As the years pass, we must confront the painful reality that her legacy has been manipulated and obscured for far too long. Whether through film, media, or public discourse, we owe it to her memory — and to all victims of abuse —to ensure that her story is told with authenticity, accountability, and empathy.
The truth must prevail, not as a fleeting moment of spectacle, but as a lasting commitment to the dignity of the victim and the pursuit of justice. Only then can Pepsi's life and death transcend the shadows of exploitation and find the resolution she was denied in life.