A composite photo of actress Bea Alonzo and the social media post of lawyer Wilfredo Garrido.

Speculation surrounding the reported cancellation of Bea Alonzo’s wedding to businessman Vincent Co has intensified after a cryptic social media post by lawyer Wilfredo Garrido described what he called a controversial revised prenuptial agreement containing “deal breaker” provisions. Although Garrido did not mention names in his viral post, many social media users speculated that he was referring to Alonzo following reports that her planned wedding to Co in Spain this May would no longer push through. In a viral Facebook post, Garrido discussed what he described as unusual conditions allegedly inserted into the revised agreement of a celebrity couple. Among the provisions he cited were a ban on shouting during marital arguments, a requirement for the bride to live with her future husband’s family, and an automatic surrender of child custody to the groom’s family in the event of separation. “Dear Bride-to-be: You were ready to sign the prenup, but then they added provisions that had nothing to do with property relations,” Garrido wrote. “You had every right to refuse. That no longer looks like a prenup but more like a life sentence.” He criticised the reported condition requiring cohabitation with in-laws, writing: “For example, it’s not right that you are required to live with the in-laws. What are they, poison?” Garrido also questioned the alleged prohibition against raising one’s voice during disagreements. “Neither is it fair to ban either party from raising their voice. What if you need to let off steam?” he said. However, the lawyer said the most alarming clause involved child custody. “But the most problematic, the deal breaker, the ‘poison pill’, is the provision that in case of separation, you give up custody of your young children.” He described child custody as a “primal, fundamental right” that cannot simply be waived without court intervention. In a pointed reference, Garrido advised the unnamed bride-to-be to speak with Maggie Wilson “to know how it feels to lose one’s children to the stronger party.” He concluded his post by encouraging the woman to walk away from the marriage entirely. “It is best to walk away from a lifelong bondage. Your refusal to sign is admirable. They can shove their prenup. Forget the wedding. It doesn’t diminish you. Bravo.” The post quickly triggered strong reactions online, with many netizens expressing support for what they believed was Alonzo’s decision. One commenter wrote: “The part about the children is the worst. Bea, run away as fast as you can and don’t even look back.” Another said: “There’s nothing wrong with a prenup as long as it’s reasonable.” Neither Alonzo nor Co has publicly addressed the viral claims. The actress, one of the Philippines’ most prominent stars, has remained silent amid mounting speculation over the status of her relationship and the reported wedding cancellation. CAM/Expat Media
For all the latest news from the UAE and the world, follow us on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram and subscribe to our YouTube page