G.R. No. 178301 April 24, 2009 People vs MALIBIRAN PEOPLE OF !E P !ILIPPINE", Plaintiff/Appellee, Plaintiff/Appellee, vs. ROLAN#O $Bo%o&'$ MALIBIRAN Accused, (&) BE*ERL+ IBOAN, Accused/Appellant. Accused/Appellant. DECISION A-"RIAMARINE J.: For review is the Nove!er "#, $%%& Decision " of the Court of Appeals 'CA( in CA)*.+. C+ No. %$"& which affired the -oint Decision $ dated Septe!er $#, $%%# of the +eional rial Court '+C(, Special Court for 0einous Cries, 1ranch "2&, of Pasi Cit3, 4etro 4anila, findin +olando 51oton5 4ali!iran '+olando( and 1everl3 i!o)an i!o)an 'appellant( uilt3 of 4urder and Parricide, respectivel3, respectivel3, and sentencin the to suffer the penalt3 of reclusion perpetua. perpetua . he conviction arose fro the death of +e3naldo an an '+e3naldo( on Fe!ruar3 2, "662. he antecedents that led to +e3naldo7s death, however, however, o wa3 !ac8 in the %7s when +e3naldo left his coon)law wife, +osalinda Fuer9as '+osalinda(, and their two '$( children, -essie and +e3nalin, in Davao, and went to 4anila to see8 reener pastures. :hile in 4anila, +e3naldo et and had a relationship with appellant. he3 eventuall3 arried in "6;". +e3naldo and appellant !eot three '#( children < +enevie, -a)Carlo and -a3 +. In "6;=, +e3naldo7s and +osalinda7s paths crossed aain and the3 resued their relationship. his led to the 5sourin5 of +e3naldo7s relationship with appellant> and in "66", +e3naldo oved out of the con?ual house and started livin aain with +osalinda, althouh +e3naldo aintained support of and paternal ties with his children. On that fateful da3 of Fe!ruar3 2, "662, +e3naldo and appellant were in *reenhills with their children for their usual Sunda3 allivant. After finishin lunch at the @ipura restaurant, the fail3 separated at around $%% o7cloc8 in the afternoon to do soe shoppin. Bater, the3 rerouped and purchased roceries at niart. At around =%% o7cloc8 in the afternoon, the fail3 stepped out of the shoppin all and +e3naldo proceeded to the par8in lot to et his red 0onda Accord, while the rest of his fail3 sta3ed !ehind and waited. Iediatel3 thereafter, the fail3 heard an eplosion coin fro the direction where +e3naldo par8ed his car. Appellant and +enevie ot curious and proceeded to the par8in lot. here, the3 saw the 0onda Accord !urnin, with 1
+e3naldo l3in !eside the driver7s seat, !urnin, charred and !leedin profusel3. profusel3. A tai driver driver naed Eler Pau 'Eler( appeared and and pulled +e3naldo +e3naldo out of the car. +e3naldo was then rushed to the Cardinal Santos 4edical 0ospital where he eventuall3 died !ecause of the severe in?uries he sustained. # he underl3in cause of his death was 4ultiple Fracture 4ultiple ascular In?uries Secondar3 to 1last In?ur3.= An investiation was was conducted !3 the police after which which two separate separate Inforations for 4urder and Parricide, dated Septe!er "%, "66, were filed aainst appellant, +olando and one Oswaldo 1anaa 'Oswaldo(. he Inforation in Criinal Case No. ""#%&2)0 accused +olando and Oswaldo of the crie of 4urder, to wit On Fe!ruar3 2, "662, in San -uan, 4etro 4anila and within the ?urisdiction of this 0onora!le Court, the accused, conspirin and confederatin with 1everl3 i!o)an, and three other individuals whose identities are still un8nown, did then and there willfull3, unlawfull3, and feloniousl3, with intent to 8ill, treacher3, evidence 'sic( preeditation and with the use of eplosion, plan, plant the eplosive, and 8ill the person of +e3naldo C. an, !3 placin said renades on the driverGs side of his car, and when said victi opened his car, an eplosion happened, there!3 inflictin upon the latter ortal wound which was the direct and iediate cause of his death. he accused Oswaldo, without havin participated in said crie of urder as principal, did and there willfull3, unlawfull3 and feloniousl3 ta8e part, as an accoplice, in its coission, !3 cooperatin in the eecution of the offense !3 previous and siultaneous acts. Contrar3 to law. law.2 he Inforation in Criinal Case No. ""#%&&)0 accused appellant of the crie of Parricide, to wit On Fe!ruar3 2, "662, in San -uan 4etro 4anila and within the ?urisdiction of this 0onora!le Court, the accused, while still arried to +e3naldo C. an, an, and such arriae not havin !een annulled and dissolved !3 copetent authorit3, conspirin and confederatin with +olando . 4ali!iran, and three other individuals whose identities are still un8nown, did then and there willfull3, unlawfull3 and feloniousl3 with intent to 8ill, treacher3, evidence 'sic( preeditation and with the use of eplosion, plan, plant the eplosive, and 8ill the person +e3nado C. an, !3 placin said renades on the driverGs side of his
car, and when said victi opened his car, an eplosion happened, there!3 inflictin upon the latter ortal wound which was the direct and iediate cause of his death. Contrar3 to law. & +olando and appellant pleaded not uilt3 on arrainent. heir co)accused, Oswaldo, was later dischared and utili9ed as one of the prosecution witnesses. he prosecution presented -essie an, Inspector Silverio Dollesin, Eler Pau, Police Inspector : ilson Bachica, Supervisin Investiatin Aent +e3naldo Olasco, +osalinda Fuer9as, -anet Pascual '-anet(, and Oswaldo, as its witnesses. For its part, the defense presented the followin witnesses, nael3 +enevie an, +oulo 1ru9o '+oulo(, essie Bu!a, Eil3 Cuevas, -ose On Santos, ictorino Feli9, irilio Dacalanio and accused +olando. Appellant did not testif3 in her !ehalf.
he as8ed his father what happened !ecause the latter was alread3 havin an attac8 of h3pertension and his father told hi that 1everl3 threatened hi and that 5he, '+e3naldo( will not !enetit fro his one3 if he will continue his ove for separation5 'p. =% i!id(. his threat was taped !3 +e3naldo in his conversation with 1everl3 'Eh. 515( -essie hiself has received threat of his life over the phone in "6;6 'p. #% i!id(. At the loune at Cardinal Santos 0ospital, on the da3 of the ishap, -essie testified on the eotional state of his other +osalinda while in said 0ospital> that she was continuousl3 cr3in while she was tal8in to -essieGs uncle. :hen as8ed where 1everl3 was and her eotional state, he said that 1everl3 was also at the loune of the said hospital, soeties she is seated and then she would stand up and then sit aain and then stand up aain. 0e did not see her cr3 5 hindi ko po syang nakitang umiyak 5 'pp. 2$)$# i!id(. :hen as8ed if his father had eneies when he was alive, he said he 8nows of no one 'p.2= i!id(. -essie was infored !3 his other '+osalinda( few onths after the death of +e3naldo that there was a letter !3 +osalinda addressed to his uncle which stated that 5if soethin happened to hi, 1everl3 has a hand in it5 'p. 2& i!id, Eh. 5 D5 Better dated 4arch $=, "666(
he +C sued up the testionies, as follows 0E EIDENCE FO+ 0E P+OSECION ". -essie an, a son of +e3naldo with +osalinda Fuer9as, testified that he oved to 4anila fro Davao in "6;2 to stud3 at the instance of his father +e3naldo and to ena!le then to !rin !ac8 tie that had !een lost since his father left his other +osalinda and the latterGs children in Davao 'SN, -an. $, p."=(> In "66" +e3naldo oved to their house !ecause his relationship with 1everl3 was worsenin, and to eacer!ate atters, 1everl3 had then a lover naed +ud3 Pascua or Pascual, a contractor for the resthouse of +e3naldo. +e3naldo and 1everl3 were then constantl3 Huarrelin over one3 'SN, Fe!ruar3 "%, "666, pp. $;) $6(> -essie had heard the nae of +olando 4ali!iran soetie in "66= !ecause one da3, +e3naldo cae hoe !efore dinner feelin ad since he found +olando 4ali!iran inside the !edroo of 1everl3 at their :hite Plains residence> +e3naldo had his un with hi at the tie !ut 4ali!iran ran awa3 'SN, -anuar3 $, "666, pp. "6)$"(. 0e eventuall3 cae to learn a!out ore details on +olando 4ali!iran fro Oswaldo 1anaa, the fail3 driver of 1everl3 who was in the house at :hite Plains at the tie of the incident 'I!id, p. $$(. One niht in Dece!er of the sae 3ear '"66=( -essie overheard +e3naldo tal8in to 1everl3 over the phone, with the latter fuin ad. After the phone conversation 2
On cross eaination, he aditted havin one to 4andalu3on Cit3 -ail and tal8ed with Oswaldo 1anaa a!out latterGs clai that !oth accused have planned to 8ill his father. :hen as8ed if he 8nows the conseHuences if 1everl3 is convicted, on the atter of Con?ual Partition of Propert3, -essie 8nows that 1everl3Gs share would !e forfeited. Counsel confired -essieGs reHuest of whatever propert3 of his father reainin shall shared eHuall3 !3 the leitiate and illeitiate children. hus, -essie confired as the areeent !etween the 'p. $;, 4arch $=, "666 SN(. $. 4r. Salona, a loc8sith in *reenhills Superar8et whose wor8 area is at the entrance door of the rocer3 of niart testified that he can duplicate an3 8e3 of an3 car in five '2( inutes. And that he is accessi!le to an3 one passin to *reenhills Shoppin Cople 'p. =2, 4arch $=, "666 SN(. he 0onda Car representative on the other hand testified that the 0onda Accord of the deceased has no alar, that the 0onda Accord 8e3 can !e duplicated without difficult3. And the 8e3less entr3 device of the said vehicle can !e duplicated 'pp. =&)= i!id, Stipulation. Order p. ##2 record ol. "(.
#. Insperctor Selverio Dollesin, the Chief of the 1o! Disposal nit of the Eastern Police District, and the Police Officer who conducted the post afterath report of the incident whose s8ills as an epert was uncontroverted, testified that the perpetrator 8new who the intended viciti was and has relia!le inforation as to his position when openin the vehicle. If the intended victi does not usuall3 drive and usuall3 sits on the rear portion of the vehicle 'p. =6, April "=, "666 SN( Inspector DollesinGs conclusion states that the device '!o!( was placed in front of the vehicle in !etween the driverGs seat and the front door !ecause the perpetrator had inforation a!out the victiGs oveents, otherwise he could have placed the device underneath the vehicle, in the rear portion of the vehicle or in an3 part thereof 'p. 2# i!id(. 0e testified that persons who have inial 8nowlede can set up the eplosive in the car in five '2( inutes 'p. &2 i!id(. he eplosion will coence at a!out =) seconds 'p. && i!id(. =. Eler Pau, the tai driver, testified that on Fe!ruar3 2, "662 he was ?ust droppin a passener to *reenhills Shoppin Cople when he heard a loud eplosion at the par8in level. 1ein curious of the incident he hurriedl3 went out to loo8 for a par8in, then proceeded to the area where the eplosion occurred. 0e saw a an wearin a shirt and short who is a!out to ive assistance to a an who was a down on the round !loodied. Findin that the an could not do it on his own, Eler rushed throuh to ive aid. 0e held !oth ars of the victi, ra!!ed hi in the wrists and draed hi out and !rouht hi farther to the !urnin car. 'pp. -ul3 , "666 SN(. he an l3in on the paveent has !urnt finers and hair, chest !loodied and s8in alread3 stic8in to ElerGs clothes 'p. ; I!id(. 0e noticed two woen at a!out two arlenth fro the car where he was. he 3ouner woan shouted 5Dadd3, Dadd3, 8a3a o i3an5. She was cr3in had wailin 'p. "% i!id(. 0e said that the older woan estured her left hand eclaied in a not so loud voice 5wala !an tutulon sa ain5 while her riht hand clutched her shoulder !a 'p. "" i!id(. :hen as8ed if the older woan appears to !e alared, Eler testified that he cannot sa3, and said she loo8ed noral> he did not notice her cr3in. Neither of the two feale rendered assistance to dra the victi, the3 ?ust followed hi when he pulled hi out. he older woan never touched the victi. 'p. "$ i!id(. Considerin that his ai is Huite far where the victi was l3in, he flaed a tai, and the victi was !rouht to Cardinal Santos 0ospital 'pp. "2)"& i!id(. On cross eaination, he was as8ed what the eanin of noral is, and he said 5natural Paran walan nan3ari5 It loo8s li8e nothin 3
happened 'p. =$ i!id(. 0er was uncertain as to whether the two feales ?oined the deceased in the tai ca! 'p. =#( as he left. 2. Police Inspector :ilson Bachica testified that he was the police officer who investiated the case. In the Cardinal Santos 0ospital he was a!le to interview 1everl3 an. 0e as8ed her nae, address, nae of the victi, how the incident happened and who their copanions were. She answered those Huestions in a cal anner 'p. "#, Sept. $", "666 SN(. As per his o!servation which was told to his superiors, he has not seen reorse on the part of the victi, 'eanin the wife( for an investiator that is unusual. 1ased on his ore than si 3ears of eperience as an investiator, whenever a violent crie happened, usuall3 those relatives and love ones appears h3sterical, upset and restless. 0er reaction at the tie accordin to hi is not noral, considerin that the victi is her hus!and. 0e interviewed persons close to the victi even at the wa8e at Pa9 Funeral in Jue9on Cit3. 0e was a!le to interview the dauhter of the lad3)accused> the other lad3 and fail3 or relatives of the victi, the sae with the driver of the lad3 accused. 0e cae to 8now the identit3 of the policean lin8ed with the lad3 accused, naed +olando 4ali!iran. 0e testified that he o!tained the inforation that he desired f ro the widow nonchalantl3 and ar8ed with !lithe unconcern, which in his o!servation is unusual since she is supposed to !e the one who would dilientl3 push throuh in the investiation. :hen as8ed the level of interest as reards accused 4ali!iran, witness testified that !ecause of the anner of the coission of the crie throuh the use of eplosives, onl3 a trained person can do that ?o! 'pp. "2)"& i!id(. &. Supervisin Investiatin Aent +e3naldo Olasco testified that his onl3 o!servation on the deeanor of 1everl3 an is that she did not ive her stateent readil3 without the assistance of her counsel which for the investiator is Huite irreular. Considerin that she is the leal wife, he could not see the reason wh3 1everl3 would !rin a counsel when she is supposed to !e the coplainant in the case 'p. "", April 2, $%%% SN(. 0e testified that after havin interviewed a representative fro 0onda, the3 had set aside the possi!ilit3 that it was a third part3 who used pic8 loc8 in order to have access to the 0onda Accord and the presuption is that the duplicate 8e3 or the ain 8e3 was used in openin the car. he assessent was connected with the stateent of +enevie that she heard the clic8in of all the loc8s of the 0onda Accord, which she was sure of when the3 left the car in the par8in lot 'p. "$ i!id( In "66; the3 arrested +olando 4ali!iran in Candelaria Jue9on, he was fiin his owner t3pe ?eep at that tie. he arrestin officers waited
for 1everl3 an, and after thirt3 inutes the3 were a!le to arrest 1everl3 an on the sae place 'p ;, 4a3 #", $%%% SN(. he3 searched the preises of the place where the3 reside and found a white paper which he presued to !e 58ula5 !ecause thereGs soe oracle words inscri!e in that white piece of paper and at the !otto is written the sae of -essie 'pp. ;)6 i!id(. On cross eaination, he aditted that %K of the inforation on the case was iven !3 Oswaldo 1anaa throuh the persistence of the N1I which convinced hi to help solve the case. It was disclosed to the investiatin officer after he was released, thatGs the onl3 tie he ave in to the reHuest 'p. "=, a3 #", $%%% SN(. As to how the N1I operatives effected the arrest, it was throuh an inforation fro the Bucena Su!)Office 'p. ", I!id(. . +osalinda Fuer9as testified that her life in 4a8ati was 5ed3o aulo lna 8ase nanuulo s3a sa ain.5 :hen as8ed who this 5si3a5 was, she said 1everl3. hat one da3 1everl3 called on her and harassed her, and one da3 she received a urder letter threatenin that she '+osalinda( would !e around the newspaper sa3in that she would !e 8illed, li8e what the3 did in the news papers, puputu)putulin i3on a dodo o anuan dahil an)aaaw daw a8o '+osalinda( n asawa 'p. "" i!id, -une $, $%%% SN(. She stated that her hus!and wanted to separate with 1everl3 !ecause he found out that the latter has paraour naed +ud3 Pascua contractor of -olli!ee 'pp. "#)"= i!id(. She had never seen 1everl3 appeared to !e lonel3 when her hus!and was then 8idnapped. A telephone conversation with 1everl3 was recorded !3 +e3naldo which was a Huarrel reardin one3. In the Cardinal Santos 0ospital, she did not see 1everl3Gs appearance to !e lonel3 !ut appeared to !e a criinal, and 1everl3 did not cr3 'pp. "#)" i!id(. She entioned the letter of +e3naldo that if soethin happened to hi, 1everl3 is the one who 8illed hi 'p. $& I!id> pp. $=)$2, Eh. 5D, ol. ")A +ecord(. ;. -anet Pascual testified that she was a!le to 8now +olando 4ali!iran, !ecause on 4arch "66# when she was in :hite Plains, 1everl3 showed her a picture of hi '4ali!iran( and said to her that he is her !o3 friend. :itness told her that he was handsoe. She was close to 1everl3 that she freHuentl3 sta3ed in :hite Plains when 1everl3 and +e3naldo is no loner livin in the sae roof. he3 pla3ed ah?on, chat and has heard 1everl3Gs hurtful eotions !3 reason of her philanderin hus!and +e3naldo. 1everl3 told her of how she felt !ad aainst underwear not intented for her 'p. 6, Oct. "", $%%% SN(> that on Auust "66=, 4ali!iran told 1everl3 that he has a 58uapre5 who 8nows how to a8e 58ula5 for an aount of P"%,%%%.%%. hat +e3naldo would ?ust sleep 4
and never wa8e up. :itness testified that the3 went to Juiapo to !u3 the needed inredients !ut nothin happened 'p. "= I!id(. he accused wanted to 8ill +e3naldo in a wa3 that the3 would not !e suspected of havin planned it, and for hi ?ust to die of 5 !anunot5. She testified that the3 wanted to separate their properties !ut it did not push throuh, referrin to 1everl3 and +e3naldo. hat 1everl3 heard of the house !ein !uilt in Corinthian intended for +osalinda and fail3. In -ul3 "66= 4ali!iran told witness testified that she heard this on their wa3 to 1atanas, it was 1everl3Gs !irthda3 'p. "& i!id(. On Octo!er "66= she as8ed !3 4ali!iran to convince 1everl3 to arr3 hi, this was as8ed at the tie when 1everl3 was in *eran3 'p. " i!id(. :hen as8ed whether 1everl3 and +olando ever ot arried the witness testified that the two ot arried on Nove!er ;, "66=. 'p. "22 ol. ")A records Eh. 5--5 Certificate of 4arriae(. hat she eecuted an affidavit of corro!oratin witnesses for 1everl3 and 4ali!iran to f acilitate the processin of their eeption in o!tainin arriae license reHuireent 'p. "$; I!id> Eh. 5115(. She is an eplo3ee of the 4unicipalit3 of San -uan. After ettin arried the3 discussed how 4ali!iran would et inside the car of +e3naldo. On Dece!er of "66=, 1everl3 was a!le to duplicate +e3naldoGs 8e3 at the tie when the3 have shopped for an3 thins, +e3naldo as8ed her to !rin the oods to the car in the copartent as the 8ids would still shop 'p. " i!id(. After havin done so, she proceeded to a 8e3 duplicator in irra 4all and had the 8e3 duplicated. hereafter on the succeedin da3s or wee8s, she was a!le to ive the duplicate to 4ali!iran. hat the3 would use the renade since 4ali!iran has one in his house !ut his onl3 pro!le is how to et inside the car and place the renade 'p. ";, Oct. "", $%%% SN> ide p. #2 i!id( As to when the 8illin would ta8e place, the witness heard that the3 will do it durin the !aptis of the child of *loria, +olando 4ali!iranGs sister. he3 chose that date so that the3 would not !e suspected of an3thin and that pictures would !e ta8en in the !aptis to reflect that 4ali!iran too8 part in the sae 'pp. ")"; i!id(. Durin +e3naldoGs internent when as8ed whether 1everl3 loo8ed sad, witness said that she did not see her sad 'p. $% i!id(. On Fe!ruar3 ;, "662, durin the wa8e, witness et 4ali!iran in a canteen in :hite Plains and the3 rode a Canter owned !3 1everl3, on the road while the vehicle was cruisin alon @atipunan avenue near Ba!or 0ospital, 4ali!iran told her aon others that on the da3 he placed a renade on +e3naldoGs car he saw a securit3 uard rovin and so what he did was to hurriedl3 tie the wire in the renade 'p. $" i!id( not connected with the wire unli8e the one
intended for +e3naldo which has a connection 'p. $" i!id(. As far as she 8nows, there were four or five renades placed. She told this secret to another friend so that in case soethin happened to her, it was the doin of 4ali!iran and 1everl3. On Cross eaination, she was as8ed whether 4ali!iran did it alone, she said that he has a loo8 out as what 4ali!iran told hi 'p. $& i!id(. :hen confronted wh3 she was testif3in onl3 now, she said she was !othered !3 her conscience. As to how did she et the inforation of 8e3 duplication, she said that it was told to her !3 1everl3 'p. #2 i!id(. It was also disclosed that she did as8 Att3. 4orales for a su of P2,%%%.%% for he to !u3 edicine. 6. Oswaldo 1anaa 'or 1anaa( testified that 1everl3 told hi that she and 4ali!iran had a relationship 'p. #6, April "66= SN(. 0e testified that on April "%, "66= 1everl3 as8ed hi to loo8 for a hired unan, if he could not find one, he ?ust loo8 for a poison that would 8ill +e3naldo, ten thousand 'P"%,%%%.%%( pesos was iven hi for this 'p. "= I!id(. In his sworn stateent he said that 1everl3 as8ed hi to see8 eans for +e3naldo to die. hat she will pa3 an3 aount ?ust for hi to et out of her life. 0e has driven for her in oin to 0illtop Police Station, a3ta3 +i9al to see +olando 4ali!iran. hat 4ali!iran !laes 1everl3 of the reason wh3 +e3naldo is still alive and then volunteered hiself to reed3 the situation, that he would see8 a an that would 8ill +e3naldo he ade an eaple of a an the3 8illed and threw in Antipolo 51anin5 with 1everl3, 4ali!iran and two other persons who appear to !e policean !ecause the3 have soethin !udin in their waste LsicM which is assued to !e a un, the3 went to Pao!on 1ulacan via 4ala!on. 0e heard that the3 would fetch a an in 1ulacan that 8nows how to place a !o! in a vehicle. Near the sea the3 tal8ed to a person thereat. Fro Pao!on the3 rode a !anca and went to an islet where the plannin was discussed as to how uch is the fee and how the 8illin will !e had. he3 ordered hi to return !ac8 to the vehicle and ?ust fetched the in 1inanonan. 0e swore that on Fe!ruar3 2, "662 around "%#% a.. 1everl3 as8ed one of her si!lins to call +e3naldo for the to !e pic8ed up !ecause ever3 Sunda3, the fail3 would o out for recreation. Around "$%% p he was as8ed !3 1everl3 to follow where the3 will o and when the3 are alread3 par8ed, he was instructed to fetch 4ali!iran in Calte, @atipunan near Sha8e3s and !rin the to the place where +e3naldo was par8ed. In the Calte station he saw 4ali!iran with two persons who loo8ed li8e policeen and another person he previousl3 saw in 5
1ulacan. 0e drove the B#%% an, and !rouht the to the par8in lot where +e3naldoGs 0onda Car was par8ed and 4ali!iran told hi ?ust drove LsicM in the area and coe !ac8. At around #%% p.. after half an hour he saw 4ali!iran and copan3 and I pic8ed the up. 0e heard fro the person in 1ulacan 5A3os na, siuradon alinis ito.5 hen he was as8ed to drive the to 0illtop Police Station. 0e discovered the death of +e3naldo when he saw and read newspaper, he called 1everl3 to confir this incident and he was as8ed to !e hired aain and drove for her. :hen he was in :hite Plains alread3, he was as8ed !3 1everl3 and 4ali!iran not to sHueal what he 8nows of, otherwise, his life will ?ust !e endanered. hat 1everl3 and 4ali!iran were lovers since 4arch "66#, when the3 et each other in a pier3 in 4ari8ina. here was an incident that +e3naldo saw 4ali!iran in their own !edroo, and there was alost a unshot incident, he was there !ecause he was as8ed to drive the vehicle. 1everl3 anGs source of one3 was fro +e3naldo an, that he '1anaa( was as8ed freHuentl3 !3 1everl3 who in turn would ive it to 4ali!iran 'Eh. 535, pp. "$$)"$2 ol. ")A, Sworn Stateent Nove!er $6, "66&(. On 4arch $6, "66& he was no loner drivin for 1everl3 !ecause he was arrested !3 the Presidential Anti)Crie Coission for his alleed involveent in the 8idnappin of the father of the classate of +enevie an. 0e was later on acHuitted 'p. "&, Fe!. $%, $%%" SN( and released fro incarceration on 4a3 , "66. :hen as8ed whether -essie an helped hi to !e acHuitted in the 8idnappin case, he said no 'p. "& i!id(. On Cross eaination, he was as8ed how an3 ties did -essie an visit hi in prison, he said that it was Att3. Olan9o who visited hi for a!out si ties and that he saw -essie when he was alread3 out of ?ail 'pp. $=)$2 i!id(. 0e testified that there was one incident when +e3naldo and 4a!iliran alost had a shootout in the !edroo downstairs !ecause 4ali!iran was inside the !edroo where 1everl3 was, +e3naldo have a un at that tie !ulin in his waste LsicM 'p. =% i!id(. Further on Cross, he testified that soetie in -une "66=, he with 1everl3 went to 0illtop Police Station and fetched 4ali!iran and copan3 to o to Pao!on 1ulacan, the3 passed !3 4ala!on !efore oin to 1ulacan. :hen the3 reached the !ride near the sea, the3 rode a !anca, a!out si of the plus the one rowin the !oar towards an Island. In the Island, there was one person waitin 'p. ==)=2 i!id(. he sta3ed there for ?ust for a!out ten '"%( inutes, and durin that period, at a!out one ars lenth he overheard their conversation concernin a
an to !rin the !o! in the car. :hen as8ed who was in the !anca then, he said it was 1everl3, 1oton '4ali!iran(, -anet and the an the3 pic8ed up at 0illtop. 0e was told to return the B#%% and ?ust wait for the in 1inanonan, hence he rode a !anca to return to the !ride and then drove the B#%% an towards 1inanonan 'p. 2% i!id(. :hen as8ed if he 8nows that 4ali!iran is enaed in the fishin !usiness of !anus, he had no idea 'p. =2 i!id(. DEFENSE EIDENCE For the defense, in opposition to the testion3 of Eler Pau, it called to the witness stand +enevie an. She testified that she !elieve that her other '1everl3( did not 8ill her dad !ecause she was with the at the tie of the incident 'p. & Fe!. 2, $%%$ SN(. hat it is not true that the3 did nothin when his dad was l3in on the round at the tie of the incident. hat her o screaed at that tie and did tried to pull her dad who was under the car that she 8ept oin around to find a safer place to pull hi out !ecause the car was !urnin and so the3 could not pic8 her dad without !urnin. 0er other tried crawlin underneath the car so she can reach hi !ut he pulled her o aside and pulled dad ris8in hiself fro !urnin 'p. "" i!id( She found out that the person who helped the was the tai driver, Eler Pau. hat a driver of a Ford Fiera or o3ota aaraw of soe 8ind of deliver3 van !oarded her dad with her o and headed for Cardinal Santos 0ospital. She said that if is not true that her o appeared unaffected or actin noral as if nothin happened. hat it is li8ewise not true when Eler Pau said that he alone carried her dadGs !od3, and said that there was another an who helped put her dad on the car 'p. "= i!id(. She swore that her o was shoc8ed and was cr3in at that tie 'pp. ""$)""2, Eh. 55 Sworn Stateent of +enevie an(. She aditted that it was onl3 the tai driver who pulled out his dad fro the daner area to a safer place at a!out four '=( eters, while Eler Pau was drain her dad, the3 where there followin hi 'p. =# Fe!ruar3 2, $%%$, SN(. hat she touched her father when the3 where 'p. =2 i!id(. It was confired in her testion3 that it was the tai drivers who loo8ed for a tai ca! ' p. =& i!id(. She as8ed if she o!served whether her o carried a portion of her dadGs !od3 or ars, hands, les or !uttoc8s of her father, she said she could not ree!er 'p. );, Fe!ruar3 "$, $%%$ SN(. :hen as8ed whether her o has a shoulder !a at that tie, she could not ree!er. She testified that her parents 8eep Huarrelin to each other a3 !e in "6;;);6 and stopped in "66". it was a once a onth Huarrel 'pp. $#)$= i!id(. A certain -anet Pascual freHuentl3 sta3ed in their house in the onths of Octo!er "66= 6
until Fe!ruar3 of "662, and her oGs relationship with -anet was cordial 'pp. $)$;, i!id(. As reards to 4ali!iran, she 8nows hi at the onth of Auust or Septe!er of "66= !ut no 8nowlede of a arriae that too8 place !etween her o and 4ali!iran on Nove!er of the sae 3ear 'p. #% i!id(. +oulo 1ru9o, the securit3 uard of an Fail3 at : hite Plains testified that there was an offer of half a illion to hi !3 an un8nown person and a deand for hi to leave the eplo3 of 1everl3 an and a threat to his life should he testif3 !efore the Court. 0e testified that 1anaa was a fail3 driver of the an in :hite Plains fro 4arch "66# until Auust "66=, after said date, he was ta8en !3 +e3naldo an as driver at :inreach. 0e testifies that the stateent of Oswaldo 1anaa that he cae over to :hite Plains on Fe!ruar3 2, "662, drove the B#%% an and followed the fail3 to *reenhills Shoppin Cople is false. 1ecause at that tie, the B#%% was still par8ed inside :hite Plains, it was ?ust a concocted stateent of 1anaa !ecause he has a rude on 4rs. an as she did not help hi when he was incarcerated in Cap Crae 'p.=)=; i!id(. 0e was told !3 1anaa that the3 were supposed to 8idnap the three si!lins of 1everl3 an !ut he too8 pit3 on the !ecause 1everl3 is a nice person to hi. 0e stated that -essie an helped hi to !e acHuitted 'p. =6 i!id( and proised ood ?o! and house to live in. As reards -anet Pascual, he testified that he had an altercation with her '-anet( !ecause there was an instruction for hi !3 +enevie for -anet not to let inside the house. hat -anet ot ad at the !ecause she is not !een LsicM treated the wa3 +enevieGs o did not to her. Bi8ewise, +enevie has refused to ive her P2,%%%.%% allowance as her o did !efore to -anet for the latterGs edicine 'pp. 2%)2"(. On account of said incident, she ade a threatenin rear8 that if she will not !e treated fairl3 and the P2,%%%.%% allowance !e not iven to her, she will o to the an 1rother and she will testif3 4rs. an. :hen as8ed who she was anr3 of 1ru9o said it was aainst +enevie and Att3. 4orales. She was anr3 with the latter !ecause she thouht that Att3. 4orales was tellin +enevie not to ive her allowance an3ore and refuse access inside the white plains 'p. 2" i!id(. :hen as8ed if he 8nows 4ali!iran, he said that he was a!le to ?oin hi twice when there was a deliver3 of re?ected !read for fish feeds in 1ulacan. hat he saw hi eiht ';( ties in a onth in "66= and ?ust twice a wee8 in the onth of Auust, Septe!er and Octo!er of said 3ear. 'p. 2$ i!id(. 0e also saw hi on -ul3 of "66= on the occasion of 1everl3Gs 1irthda3.
hat on Fe!ruar3 2, "66=, 1everl3 called on hi to rela3 to +oer to fetch the three 8ids in *reen 0ills. :hen as8ed the tone of 1everl3 at the tie of the phone call, he said the tone was that she was scared and confused 'p. &# i!id( essie Bu!a, the careta8er of 4anila 4eorial Par8 testified that she was paid !3 1everl3 to ta8e care of the to! of +e3naldo and that in soe points in tie -essie too8 over and later her services were not availed of an3ore 'p. $#, April #%, $%%$ SN( hat she saw 1everl3 with 1anaa on Nove!er "66& 'p. ; i!id( and -essie with 1anaa in one occasion in oin to the to! on Nove!er "66 'p. = i!id( and in April $%%" 'p. $% i!id(. Eil3 Cuevas, one of the friends of 1everl3 testified that -anet Pascual is a !ac8 fihter and a traitor, that -anet tried to convince her to testif3 aainst 1everl3 and if witness will !e convinced, -anet will receive a !i aount of one3 a!out three '#( illion fro another source. estified that it is not true that 1everl3 and 4ali!iran orchestrated or asterinded the death of +e3naldo, and that -anet testified !ecause she needed one3 !ecause she is sic8 and dia!etic 'p. , 4a3 $", $%%$ SN(. She 8nows such fact !3 heart that the3 are innocent and that the3 are ood people 'p. $% i!id(. ictorino Feli, a police officer testified that 4ali!iran is a e!er of the AHuarius 4ulti)Purpose Cooperative, a cooperative that is enaed in the culture of fish particularl3 51anus5 at Bauna De 1a3 particularl3 1au!on, 1inanonan, Bauna. 0e testified that soetie in "66=, he toether with 4ali!iran waited at ropical 0ut, Cainta for the to !e pic8ed up for 1ulacan to purchase finerlins. he3 were fetched !3 an B#%% an driven !3 Oswaldo 1anaa and the3 were around si or seven at that tie that headed first to Dapalit, 4ala!on, 4etro 4anila to eet the owner of the fish pond, findin that the owner thereof was alread3 in 1ulacan the3 proceeded thereat, at aliptip, 1ulacan. In said place, the3 left the B#%% an alon the !ride, near the sea and fro there the3 rode a otor !anca in oin to the finerlins ponds. 0e testified that Oswaldo was not with the in oin to the pond fro aliptip 'pp. "")"#, Sept. #, $%%$ SN(. :hen as8ed where he was, he said he drove the B#%% !ac8 'p. "= i!id(. he pond was a!out three 8iloeters fro alilip, and the3 were a!le to !u3 finerlins, loaded it in another water transport oin to Bauna Ba8e fro 1ulacan traversin Pasi +iver and thereafter the3 returned !ac8 to 1inanonan 'p. "2 i!id(. On Cross, he testified that has et 1anaa an3 ties !ecause he used to deliver re?ected for !anus feeds, !ut said that it was onl3 once when 1anaa drove with hi, that is soeties in "66= 'p. $% i!id(. he testified that 4ali!iran 7
toether with hi went to alilip, 1ulacan to procure soe finerlins soetie in -une "662 to id "66& '-oint Order, Sept. #, $%%$, p. #&& ol. III record(. irilio Dacanilao testified that on Fe!ruar3 2, "662 at a!out "$%% noon he was at the residence of one *loria 4ali!iran Santos and fro there, he saw accused +olando 4ali!iran toether with his wife and children, witnessG parents)in)law and sisters)in)law. :hen as8ed who his parents)in)law is, he said Fernando 4ali!iran and -ovita 4ali!iran, the parents of +olando 4ali!iran 'p. 2, Sept. ", $%%$ SN(. 0e said that the3 left the occasion at around 2%%p and at that tie, accused 4ali!iran, with 1o3 Santos and Eduardo was still pla3in 5puso35. :hen as8ed if there was such a tie that 4ali!iran left the house of *loria Santos, he said, he did not o out of the house sir 'pp. 2) i!id(. On Cross eaination, it was disclosed that he 8nows 4ali!iran at the tie witness was still his wife, the sister of 4ali!iran, that was soetie in "6;;. when as8ed if he considered 4ali!iran to !e close to hi as the !rother of his wife, he said 3es sir 'p. "% i!id(. As8ed if his relationship with hi is such that he would place 4ali!iran in a difficult situation, he answered, it depends on the situation 'p. "" i!id(. :itness was as8ed how lon it would ta8e to reach niart Superar8et fro his residence in 4alanda3, he estiate it to !e ore or less half an hour 'p. "# i!id(. 0e testified that no ae was ever stop LsicM on the reason that the3 have to wait for 4ali!iran. Said witness testion3 was corro!orated !3 -ose On Santos, the father of the child who was !apti9ed on said occasion. 0e testified that he pla3ed 5puso35 with 4ali!iran at around $%%p, until &#% to %% p and there was never a tie that 4ali!iran left the ta!le where the3 were pla3in ecept when he feels li8e peein 'p. "% -ul3 "&, $%%$ SN(. It was estiated at a!ut five ties, and it too8 hi a!out three to five inutes ever3tie he would rise to pee and return to the ta!le. hat 4ali!iran a3 have left their house at around &#% or %% in the evenin on Fe!ruar3 2, "662 'p. "", i!id( On Cross eaination, he testified that the idea of !aptis was rushl3 scheduled, !ecause he won in a coc8fiht three to four da3s !efore the !aptis of his child at a!out Fe!ruar3 " or $ of "662. hat aount was a!out P2%,%%%.%% 'pp. $%)$" i!id(. 4ali!iran did not ta8e an3 participation in the !aptis nor was he present at the church, !ut was alread3 at the reception with his fail3, for lunch. 0e testified that 4ali!iran left !3 call of nature, to pee, a!out four to five ties and a span of five inutes 'p. #" i!id(. Accused +olando 4ali!iran in his Counter)Affidavit said that he does intellience wor8 for seven 3ears. 0e doesnGt 8now 1anaa as to rec8less
discuss a supposed plot to 8ill soe!od3 within his hearin. hat would !e inconsistent with the entire trainin and eperience as a police officer. Especiall3 when the epertise is intellience wor8. 1anaa drove for the in -une or -ul3 "662 not in -une of "66= 'for onths after the death of +e3naldo( Lpp. "=)"2$, Eh. 5005 ol. ")a recordM. 0e testified that he et 1anaa soetie in the last Huarter of "66# at the pier3 of 1everl3 an 'pp. "$)"#, Oct. ;, $%%$ SN(. 0e aditted that he was with 1anaa usin the B#%% an of 1everl3 in one occasion, in "66= when the3 purchased finerlins fro 1ulacan. he3 procured the sae !ecause their cooperative was culturin 5!anus5 in 1arana3 1o!on, 1inanonan, +i9al 'pp. "=)"2(. 0e testified that in 1ulacan, 1anaa was left at the foot of the !ride where the B#%% was par8ed 'p. "6 i!id( and heard that 1everl3 told 1anaa to o !ac8, in :hite Plains 'p. $", i!id(. After procurin the finerlins, the3 rode a !i !anca called 5pitu3a5 then the3 went !ac8 to Pritil, 1inanonan. In Pritil, the3 waited for 1anaa 'P. $& i!id(. 0e denied havin et -anet Pascual on :ednesda3 at a!out Fe!ruar3 ;, "662 !ecause since uesda3 'Fe!ruar3 , "662( he was alread3 confined in the Cap !3 Order of his nit Coander, Chief Inspector Florentin Sipin 'p. 2, -anuar3 $", $%%# SN( !ecause he was under investiation !3 the Presidential Anti)Crie Coission. 0e aditted that he et 1everl3 in the last Huarter of "66# 'p. ;, Octo!er $$, $%%$( !ut denied havin intiate relations with her 'p. $" i!id(. 0e testified that he et -anet Pascual onl3 once, on Nove!er "66=, !ut said that the3 never tal8ed 'p. "$, Nove!er "$, $%%$ SN(. 0e denied havin arried 1everl3 an nor did he ever reHuested -anet Pascual to secure a license for the to et arried. 0e denied havin had a trip with -anet in 1ulacan and aditted that he went to aa!les once, with 1everl3, 8ids and 3a3a as well as his father 'p. $2, i!id(, that was soetie in "66=, !efore +e3naldo died. 0e testified that he used his own vehicle with his father in oin to aa!les. 0e denied seein +e3naldo> he said he ?ust heard hi !ased on his conversation with 1everl3 an which too8 place in the pier3 in 4ari8ina. In su, the place of incidents where he anaed to eet and tal8 with 1everl3 an was in the pier3 in 4ari8ina> at Cap station in a3ta3 +i9al> in 1ulacan when the3 procured finerlins in 1inanonan> 4ala!on> a!ales> :hite Plains and Cainta. 'pp. #%> #$> #2 i!id(. 0e testified that he was arrested in Candelaria Jue9on on Dece!er "66; 'p. "" -anuar3 $", $%%#( !ut denied livin with 1everl3 an at the tie of the arrest. 0e said he ?ust saw 1everl3 thirt3 '#%( inutes after his arrest in the town proper 8
of Candelaria, Jue9on 'P. $", i!id(. 0e denied that he uttered the rear8 5its !etter to 8ill +ene since 3ou are not !enefitin fro hi5 'p. #; i!id(> never have access to renades> never as8ed 1everl3 an how he could et inside +e3naldoGs Car never claied to !e a sharp shooter and had never went to 1atanas utterin the rear8s entioned !3 -anet Pascual nor went to 1atanas at the tie of 1everl3Gs !irthda3. On Cross eaination, he said that he never tal8 to -anet at the tie of his restriction and thereafter. 0e had no coercial dealin with -anet nor have an3 roantic relations with her 'p. ;, i!id(. It was onl3 when the case was filed he was a!le to tal8 to her 'p. 2, Fe!ruar3 =, $%%# SN(. 0e testified that he evaded arrest !ecause there was a pendin petition for review filed !3 his law3er !efore the Departent of -ustice despite the fact that there is an eistin warrant of arrest which he found out at the end of "66 'p. "2 i!id(. On Septe!er $#, $%%#, the +C found +olando uilt3 of 4urder and appellant, of Parricide. he dispositive portion of the -oint Decision reads as follows :0E+EFO+E, the Court finds !oth accused uilt3 !e3ond reasona!le dou!t as chared. Accused +olando 4ali!iran for the crie of 4urder in Criinal Case No. ""#%&2)0 and accused 1everl3 i!o)an for Parricide in Criinal Case No. ""#%&&)0 defined and penali9ed under Article $=; and Article $=&, respectivel3, of the +evised Penal Code, as aended, in relation to +epu!lic Act No. &26 with the attendant circustances of treacher3, evident preeditation and use of eplosion and sentencin !oth accused the supree penalt3 of DEA0, and orderin the to pa3 ?ointl3 and severall3 to the heirs of +e3naldo an the aount of Fift3 housand 'P2%,%%%.%%( Pesos as indenit3 for death, Eiht3 housand 'P;%,%%%.%%( Pesos as actual daaes> Fift3 housand 'P2%,%%%.%%( as oral daaes> and to pa3 the costs. SO O+DE+ED. ; Appellant then appealed to this Court> the appeal was, however, referred to the CA pursuant to People v. Mateo. 6 In its Decision dated Nove!er "#, $%%&, the CA affired the Decision of the +C. he CA, however, too8 ?udicial notice of +epu!lic Act No. 6#=& prohi!itin the iposition of the death penalt3 and thus reduced the penalt3 to reclusion perpetua. he dispositive portion of the said Decision reads as follows :0E+EFO+E, preises considered, the ?oint decision dated Septe!er $#, $%%# of the +eional rial Court, Special Court for 0einous Cries, 1ranch "2&,
Pasi Cit3 in Criinal Case No. ""#%&2)0 for 4urder and Criinal Case No. ""#%&&)0 for Parricide is here!3 AFFI+4ED with 4odification in that the supree penalt3 of death iposed on !oth accused)appellants is here!3 reduced to RECLUSIO PERPE!U". SO O+DE+ED."% As anifested !3 the Office of the Solicitor *eneral 'OS*(, +olando did not file a 4otion for +econsideration or a Notice of Appeal fro the CA Decision. "" For all intents and purposes, the ?udent of conviction as to +olando !ecae final and eecutor3 on Dece!er "=, $%%&. his was confired !3 CA +esolution dated -anuar3 $6, $%%, which noted that 5pursuant to the report dated -anuar3 $#, $%% of the -udicial +ecords Division that no otion for reconsideration or notice of appeal had !een filed !3 counsel for appellant +olando 4ali!iran, entr3 of ?udent is issued aainst said appellant .5 "$ his review shall therefore pertain onl3 to appellant 1everl3 i!o)an7s conviction. Appellant and the OS* were reHuired !3 the Court in its +esolution dated Octo!er #, $%% to file suppleental !riefs, if the3 so desired. he OS* filed a 4anifestation and 4otion that it would no loner file an3 suppleental !rief. As reards appellant, records show that, as of even date, she had not filed an3 suppleental !rief, despite due notice. "# In the 1rief she filed with the Court prior to the endorseent of the case to the CA, appellant raised the followin assinent of errors I. 0E +E*IONAB +IAB CO+ E++ED IN FINDIN* 0A ACCSED) APPEBBAN 1EE+B I1O AN *IB OF 0E C+I4E OF PA++ICIDE 1ASED 4E+EB ON CI+C4SANCIAB EIDENCE, 0E +EJISIES 0E+EOF NO 0AIN* 1EEN S1SANIABB ESA1BIS0ED> II. 0E +E*IONAB +IAB CO+ S0OBD 0AE NO APP+ECIAED 0E ESI4ON OF P+OSECION :INESS OS:ABDO 1ANAA* AS IS 1ASIS FO+ ESA1BIS0IN* CONSPI+AC 1E:EEN ACCSED) APPEBBAN 4ABI1I+AN AND ACCSED)APPEBBAN 1EE+B AN, SC0 9
ESI4ON 1EIN* 0EA+SA ON SO4E PA+S AND +EPBEE :I0 INCONSISENCIES>"= 1efore proceedin to the erits of appellant7s aruents, the Court ta8es note of the +C7s o!servation reardin appellant7s stoic stance durin and after the incident and her non)presentation as witness. he +C too8 this neativel3 aainst appellant. he Court differs therefro. Appellant7s seein indifference or lac8 of eotions cannot !e cateoricall3 Huantified as an indicium of her uilt. here is no hard and fast aue for easurin a person7s reaction or !ehavior when confronted with a startlin, not to ention horrif3in, occurrence. It has alread3 !een stated that witnesses of startlin occurrences react differentl3 dependin upon their situation and state of ind, and there is no standard for of huan !ehavioral response when one is confronted with a strane, startlin or frihtful eperience. he wor8ins of the huan ind placed under eotional stress are unpredicta!le, and people react differentl3 soe a3 shout, soe a3 faint and others a3 !e shoc8ed into insensi!ilit3."2 Also, appellant7s failure to testif3 in her defense should not !e ta8en aainst her. he Court preserves the rule that an accused has the riht to decline to testif3 at the trial without an3 inference of uilt drawn fro his failure to !e on the witness stand."& he constitutional riht to !e presued innocent still prevails. his notwithstandin, the totalit3 of the circustantial evidence presented aainst appellant ?ustifies her conviction of the crie of Parricide. Appellant clais that the circustantial evidence proven durin trial onl3 shows that there was a possi!ilit3 that appellant a3 have conspired with +olando, !ut nevertheless clais that it cae short of provin her uilt !e3ond reasona!le dou!t." Appellant further arues that the testion3 of Oswaldo was in soe parts hearsa3 and replete with inconsistencies."; Specificall3, appellant contends that the testion3 of Oswaldo that 5he overheard a conversation !etween 4ali!iran '+olando( and 1everl3 'appellant( that the3 will fetch a an in 1ulacan that 8nows how to place a !o! in a vehicle5 is hearsa3. "6 Bi8ewise, in her +epl3 1rief ,$% appellant clais that the testion3 of -anet is hearsa3. Contrar3 to the clai of appellant, the testionies of Oswaldo and -anet are not covered !3 the hearsa3 rule.
he hearsa3 rule states that a witness a3 not testif3 as to what he erel3 learned fro others either !ecause he was told, or he read or heard the sae. his is derived fro S ection #&, +ule "#%, +evised +ules of Court, which reHuires that a witness can testif3 onl3 to those facts that he 8nows of or coes fro his personal 8nowlede, that is, that are derived fro his perception. 0earsa3 testion3 a3 not !e received as proof of the truth of what he has learned.$" he law, however, provides for specific eceptions to the hearsa3 rule. One is the doctrine of independentl3 relevant stateents, where onl3 the fact that such stateents were ade is relevant, and the truth or falsit3 thereof is iaterial. he hearsa3 rule does not appl3> hence, the stateents are adissi!le as evidence. Evidence as to the a8in of such stateent is not secondar3 !ut priar3, for the stateent itself a3 constitute a fact in issue or !e circustantiall3 relevant as to the eistence of such a fact. $$ he witness who testifies thereto is copetent !ecause he heard the sae, as this is a atter of fact derived fro his own perception, and the purpose is to prove either that the stateent was ade or the tenor thereof. $# In this case, Oswaldo7s testion3 that he overhead a conversation !etween +olando and appellant that the3 would fetch a an in 1ulacan who 8new how to place a !o! in a vehicle is adissi!le, if onl3 to esta!lish the fact that such stateent was ade and the tenor thereof. Bi8ewise, -anet a3 testif3 on atters not onl3 uttered in her presence, since these a3 !e considered as independentl3 relevant stateents, !ut also personall3 conve3ed to her !3 appellant and +olando. Appellant further arues that Oswaldo7s testion3 to the effect that he drove the B#%% van of the an fail3 and !rouht +olando to the par8in lot where +e3naldoGs 0onda Accord was par8ed, was refuted !3 defense witness +oulo, the securit3 uard of the an fail3. +oulo testified that the B#%% van never left :hite Plains on the da3 of the incident. $= :hile the defense a3 have presented Securit3 *uard +oulo to refute the testion3 of Oswaldo, it is settled that when credi!ilit3 is in issue, the Supree Court enerall3 defers to the findins of the trial court, considerin that it was in a !etter position to decide the Huestion, havin heard the witnesses theselves and o!served their deportent durin trial. $2 hus, in the a!sence of an3 palpa!le error, this Court defers to the trials court7s ipression and conclusion that, as !etween Oswaldo and +oulo, the f orer7s testion3 deserved ore weiht and credence.#a$phi#
here is nothin on record to convince the Court to depart fro the findins of the +C. On the contrar3, the testion3 of -anet as corro!orated !3 Oswaldo, thouh circustantial, leaves no dou!t that appellant had in fact conspired with +olando in !rinin a!out the death of her hus!and +e3naldo. As a rule of ancient respecta!ilit3 now olded into tradition, circustantial evidence suffices to convict, onl3 if the followin reHuisites concur 'a( there is ore than one circustance> '!( the facts fro which the inferences are derived are proven> and 'c( the co!ination of all the circustances is such as to produce a conviction !e3ond reasona!le dou!t. $& he case of the prosecution was priaril3 !uilt around the strenth of the testionies of -anet and Oswaldo. he salient portions of -anet7s testion3 are etensivel3 Huoted hereunder J. An3thin else sinificant that happened in the reainin of "66=, 4s. Pascual A. After the3 were arried, the3 tal8ed a!out what the37re onna do for +ene. /. ere )i) %e )isss i%5 A. I&si)e %e (r, Bo%o&' 6(s (si&' Beverl o6 6ol) e e (le %o 'e% i&si)e %e (r si&e e (s &o e (&) Beverl s(i) %(% se (& )o soe%i&' (o% i% (&) so i% 6(s i& %e l(s% 6ee o: Noveer 1994 o: :irs% 6ee o: #eeer 1994 6e& %e soppe) :or so (& %i&'s. J. :ho is 'sic( with hi A. +ene, 1everl3 and her three 8ids. +ene as8ed her since +ene and 8ids would still shop, +ene as8ed her to !rins the oods to the car in the copartent. /. A&) %e&5 A. A&) (:%er Beverl pl(e) %e %i&'s i&si)e %e op(r%e&%, se () 6i% er %e e, se proee)e) %o ( e )pli(%or i& *irr( M(ll (&) () %e e )pli(%e). J. :hen did she ive the 8e3 to 4ali!iran, if 3ou 8now
10
A. hat was alread3 Dece!er, I cannot recall the eact date, sir.
/. )i) Mr. M(liir(& &ee) %e e5
J. :hat da3 of the wee8 was this
A. Be(se %e pl(&&e), si&e %e (&&o% se %e '& B% s(i) %(% %e 6ol) se 're&()e i&s%e() e(se e () ( 're&()e i& is ose. B% %eir o&l prole is o6 %o 'e% i&si)e %e (r.
A. Sunda3, 4a7.
CO+ :ho is 1utch A. 4r. 4ali!iran, 3our 0onor. CO+
/. (% i&) o: i&) ;si< 6(s )pli(%e)5 A. e e i& %e &e6 (r o: Re&e %e !o&)( Aor). Court B% i& %e :irs% pl(e, o 6ere &o% %ere 6e& i% 6(s )pli(%e)5 !o6 o 6ere ;si< (le %o &o6 %(% i% 6(s i&)ee) )pli(%e)5
1utch and 1oton are one and the sae person
A. Be(se (:%er Beverl () )pli(%e) %e e, se %ol) e %(% se 6(s (le %o (ve %e e )pli(%e) (&) se %ol) e o6 se )i) i% (&) se %ol) e %(% se 6ill 'ive %e e %o B%.
A. es, 3our 0onor.
J. Did she show 3ou the duplicated 8e3
J. Did the3 discuss how, where and when the3 would planted the renade in the car of +ene
A. %inanoon niya lang . J. :hat does it loo8ed LsicM li8e
11
A. I heard fro the that the3 would do it durin the !aptisal of the child of *loria who is the sister of 1utch.
A. Iyong maha&a na malaki. 'indi ko na inano &asta susi( nag)iisa.
J. And 1utch is 1oton
J. On what occasion did she tell 3ou a!out this
A. 1oton, sir.
A. None, I was ?ust in :hite Plains.
J. Do 3ou 8now when that !in3a when supposed to !e held
J. :hen was this
A. he !aptisal !e held on Fe!ruar3 2, "662, sir.
A. hat was Dece!er, "66=.
J. :h3 did the3 choose that date of the !in3a
J. :hat was their decision when the3 will eecute the plan
A. So that if a picture was ta8en durin the !aptis, there would !e witnesses that the3 were in the !aptis, the3 would not !e suspected that the3 have soethin to do with that. $
A. It will !e durin the !aptisal of the child of *loria !ecause 1utch is one of the sponsors.$; 'Ephasis Supplied(
In addition, Oswaldo testified on the occurrences on the da3 of the incident, in this wise
J. :ho drived LsicM A. @u3a +ene, sir.
/= )i) o 'o %o Gree&ills5 J. :hat part of *reenhills did the3 o A. I 6(s %ol) A%e Beverl %o :ollo6 %e 6erever %e 'o. A. he par8in lot infront LsicM of niart, sir. J. :hat tie did she tell 3ou to o there /. (% )i) o )o 6e& %e oe ;si< %o Gree&ills5 A. After lunch, sir.
12
/. (% veile )i) o se %o :ollo6 er5
A. e& I :o&) o% %e (lre() p(re) (&) ?( Re&e 'o% i& I 6e&% s%r(i'% %o ?(%ip&(&.
A. L300, sir.
/. 5
/. -po& 6ose i&s%r%io&5
A. Be(se I 6(s %ol) A%e %o :e% Bo%o&'.
A. A%e Beverl, sir.
J. :here in @ atipunan
J. Did 3ou in fact follow her
A. In Calte near Sha8e3s.
A. es, sir.
CO+
J. :hat tie did the3 reach. theL:Mhiteplains
:ho is 1oton
A. Alost " o7cloc8, sir.
A. +olando 4ali!iran, our 0onor.
J. Incidentall3, who was with 1everl3
J. he accused in this case
A. @u3a +ene an, 1everl3 an, +ene!ie, -a and -+.
A. es, 3our 0onor .$6
/. (% (r )i) %e se5
A. !o&)( Aor).
J. ou pic8ed up 4ali!iran at Calte on Fe!ruar3 2, "662
/. >olor5
A. es, sir.
A. Re), sir.
J. :hat tie was that
A. Around $ o7cloc8, sir.
J. :hat did the3 ride
J. :ho if an3 was with hi
A. B#%% that I was drivin, sir.
A. wo u3s. One who I saw in LsicM 1ulacan and the one who we sinakay at 0illtop.
/. ere i: (& )i) o 'o (:%er pii&' %e p5 A. Fro >(l%e@ 6e proee)e) %o Gree&ills.
J. :hen did 3ou o in LsicM 1ulacan /. 5 A. In -une "66=, sir. J. :ith who A. 1oton, 1everl3, -anet, I and two u3s in 0illtop !ecause that is the instruction of 1everl3.
A. Be(se %(% is %e i&s%r%io& o: A%e Beverl. ere %e 6ere, I 6ill )rop %e %ere. /. #i) o )o %(%5 A. +es, sir.
J. Do 3ou 8now the nae of the two u3s fro 0illtop /. ere e@(%l )i) o )rop %e o&5 A. If iven the chance I can reconi9e the !ut I do not 8now the !3 nae.
A. I& %e pl(e 6ere ?( Re&e 6(s p(re). #"
J. :hat did 3ou do in 1ulacan
A. :e went to the Island near the sea.
CO+ :hat happened while the3 were inside the vehicle while 3ou were oin !ac8 to the place as instructed !3 1everl3
J. :hat did 3ou do at that Island A. he3 tal8ed to a person.
A. After that I !rouht the where the car of @u3a +ene was par8ed, our 0onor. 1efore the3 alihted, 1oton as8ed, dito na &a#$
/. (% i: o &o6 %e )(%e ;si< (ll (o%5
Att3. +ondain
A. As :(r (s I reeer %e %(le) (o% %e pl(&s (o% %e illi&' o: ?( Re&e.#%
So 3ou replied Opo( dyan po pumasok si *uya Rene A. After I alihted the3 ?ust o LsicM around.
J. :here J. :here did the3 ride on Fe!. 2, "662 A. In *reenhills, sir. A. In @atipunan, sir. 13
/. e&, 6(% (ppe&e)5 A. A:%er (l: (& or I s(6 ?( Bo%o&', %e %ree o: %e. e& %e s%oppe) e (&) %e %ree o: %e o(r)e) %e veile. /. (% (ppe&e)5 A. A:%er %e o(r)e), %e (& :ro Bl((& s(i), ano pare, malinis na paggawa nito. e&, I 6(s %ol) Bo%o&' %o ri&' %e %o !ill%op.## 1ased on the f oreoin, the testionies of -anet and Oswaldo clearl3 lin8 appellant to the plannin of the crie. rue, as intiated !3 appellant, she a3 not have !een at the scene of the crie at the tie of the eplosion> #= !ut then aain, if she was, then she would have suffered the sae fate as +e3naldo. 4oreover, the nature of the crie and the anner of its eecution, i.e., via a !oo!3 trap, does not deand the ph3sical presence of the perpetrator at the ver3 tie of its coission. In fact, the ver3 anner in which it was carried out necessitated prior schein and eecution for it to succeed. hus, appellant7s a!sence fro the actual scene of the crie does not neate conspirac3 with +olando in plottin the death of her hus!and. A conspirac3 eists even if not all the parties coitted the sae act, !ut the participants perfored specific acts that indicated unit3 of purpose in accoplishin a criinal desin. #2 4oreover, direct proof of previous areeent to coit an offense is not necessar3 to prove conspirac3 )) conspirac3 a3 !e proven !3 circustantial evidence. #& he testionies of -anet and Oswaldo esta!lished the followin set of circustances which, if ta8en collectivel3, show the uilt of appellant that appellant and +olando conspired, planned and areed to 8ill +e3naldo usin a renade> that appellant duplicated the 8e3 to the red 0onda Accord of +e3naldo so that +olando could ain access to the car> that appellant thereafter ave the duplicate 8e3 to +olando> that on Fe!ruar3 2, "662, appellant told Oswaldo to follow the red 0onda Accord of +e3naldo until the latter par8ed the car> that appellant told Oswaldo to thereafter pic8 up +olando at @atipunan and !rin the latter to where +e3naldo par8ed his red 0onda Accord. +e3naldo died soon after due to in?uries he sustained fro an eplosion caused !3 renades planted in his car. Another nota!le fact is that accordin to the epert opinion of Inspector Selverio Dollesin, Chief of the 1o! Disposal nit of the Eastern Police District, the perpetrator had inforation a!out the victi7s oveents. Dollesin also o!served that the perpetrator 8new his intended victi, since the renade was 14
specificall3 placed in !etween the driver7s seat and the front door. hat the perpetrator 8new the victi7s oveents was further corro!orated !3 the affidavits eecuted !3 the an children, +enevie # and -a Carlo #; , attestin that while the3 spent their Sunda3s with their father, this was the onl3 tie that the3 spent a Sunda3 in *reenhills. Onl3 soeone who had close personal contact with +e3naldo would 8now his oveents, where the car would !e par8ed, and that he was the one who usuall3 drove the red 0onda Accord, such that it was precisel3 positioned to ensure daae to the intended victi. here is no dou!t that, !ased on the testion3 of -anet, it was +olando who planted the renades inside the car of +e3naldo, to wit J. :here did 3ou o A. :hen I was inside the Canter, 1oton '+olando( was as8in e while the vehicle was ovin slowl3. 0e as8ed e what happened in the funeral parlor. J. And what did 3ou sa3 A. I told hi that 4a?or Penalosa called e for an interview !ut I did not sa3 an3thin. hen were alread3 in front of the . Buna 0ospital. CO+ :hat 0ospital A. . Buna, 3our 0onor, alon @atipunan. CO+ Buna in @atipunan A. . Buna is oin to @atipunan, 3our 0onor. It was Ba!or 0ospital, 3our 0onor and not . Buna. e& Bo%o&' %ol) e %(% o& %e )( e pl(e) %e 're&()e, e 6(s seei&' ( '(r) rovi&' (&) so 6(% e )i) si&e e 6(s (lre() perspiri&' (% %(% %ie e rrie)l %ie) %e 6ire i& %e 're&()e.
Att3. +ondain IHoute na lan natin. CO+ Dinali)dali ni3an i!inuhol an ala!re. hat7s her ter. #6 'Ephasis Supplied( :hat sealed appellant7s fate was that, as o!served !3 the +C, there were alread3 outstandin warrants of arrest aainst appellant and +olando as earl3 as Septe!er "", "66> 3et the3 evaded arrest and were onl3 arrested on Dece!er =, "66;.=% It is well settled that fliht, when uneplained, is a circustance fro which an inference of uilt a3 !e drawn. 5he wic8ed flee, even when no an pursueth> !ut the rihteous are as !old as a lion.5 =" Appellant did not even proffer the slihtest eplanation for her fliht. All told, this Court is convinced !e3ond a reasona!le dou!t that appellant is uilt3 of the crie as chared. 4oreover, considerin the anner in which appellant and +olando planned and eecuted the crie, the +C was correct in appreciatin the aravatin circustances of treacher3, evident preeditation, and use of eplosives. hus, appellant is uilt3 of the crie of Parricide as provided in the +evised Penal Code, to wit Article $=&. Parricide) An3 person who shall 8ill his father, other, or child, whether leitiate or illeitiate, or an3 of his ascendants, or descendants, or is spose, shall !e uilt3 of parricide and shall !e punished !3 reclusion perpetua to death. 'Ephasis Supplied( 4oreover, the +evised Penal Code provides for death as the proper penalt3 Article &#. +ules for the application of indivisi!le penalties. In all cases in which the law prescri!es a penalt3 coposed of two indivisi!le penalties, the followin rules shall !e o!served in the application thereof :hen in the coission of the deed there is present onl3 one aravatin circustance, the reater penalt3 shall !e applied. 15
0owever, as o!served !3 the CA, with the effectivit3 of +epu!lic Act '+.A.( No. 6#=& entitled 5An Act Prohi!itin the Iposition of Death Penalt3 in the Philippines5 on -une $=, $%%&, the iposition of the penalt3 of death has !een prohi!ited. hus, the proper penalt3 to !e iposed on appellant as provided in Section $, pararaph 'a( of said law is reclusion perpetua. =$ he applica!ilit3 of +.A. No. 6#=& is undenia!le in view of the principle in criinal law that +avora&ilia sunt amplianda adiosa restrigenda. Penal laws that are favora!le to the accused are iven retroactive effect. =# In addition, appellant is not elii!le for parole pursuant to Section # of +.A. No. 6#=&, which states SECION #. Persons convicted with reclusion perpetua, or those whose sentences will !e reduced to reclusion perpetua, !3 reason of this Act, shall not !e elii!le for parole under Act No. ="%#, otherwise 8nown as the Indeterinate Sentence Baw, as aended. Bastl3, as to the award of daaes, the +C awarded the followin aounts '"( P2%,%%%.%% as civil indenit3 for death, '$( P ;%,%%%.%% as actual daaes, and '#( P2%,%%%.%% as oral daaes. #avvphi# In the recent case of People v. Regalario,== the Court stated :hile the new law prohi!its the iposition of the death penalt3, the penalt3 provided for !3 law for a heinous offense is still death and the offense is still heinous. ConseHuentl3, the civil indenit3 for the victi is still P2,%%%.%%. the said award is not dependent on the actual iposition of the death penalt3 !ut on the fact that Hualif3in circustances warrantin the iposition of the death penalt3 attended the coission of the offense. As to the award of oral and eeplar3 daaes . 4oral daaes are awarded despite the a!sence of proof of ental and eotional sufferin of the victi7s heirs. As !orne out !3 huan eperience, a violent death invaria!l3 and necessaril3 !rins a!out eotional pain and anuish on the part of the victi7s fail3. If a crie is coitted with an aravatin circustance, either Hualif3in or eneric, an award of eeplar3 daaes is ?ustified under Article $$#% of the New Civil Code. his 8ind of daae is intended to serve as deterrent to serious wrondoins and as vindication of undue sufferins and wanton invasion of the rihts of an in?ured, or as a punishent for those uilt3 of outraeous conduct. 0owever, consistent with recent ?urisprudence on heinous cries where the iposa!le penalt3 is death !ut reduced to reclusion perpetua pursuant to +epu!lic Act No. 6#=&, the award of oral daaes should !e
increased fro P2%,%%%.%% to P2,%%%.%% while the award of eeplar3 daaes should !e increased fro P$2,%%%.%% to P#%,%%%.%%. Consistent therewith, the +C7s award should !e odified the civil indenit3 should !e increased to P2,%%%.%%, and oral daaes to P2,%%%.%%. 4oreover, althouh not awarded !3 the +C and pursuant to Regalario, eeplar3 daaes in the aount of P#%,%%%.%% is li8ewise warranted !ecause of the presence of the aravatin circustances of intent to 8ill, treacher3, evident preeditation and the use of eplosives. he iposition of eeplar3 daaes is also ?ustified under Art. $$$6 of the Civil Code in order to set an eaple for the pu!lic ood. =2 0owever, the award of P ;%,%%%.%% !3 the +C as actual daaes is deleted for lac8 of copetent evidence to support it. Onl3 su!stantiated and proven epenses, or those that appear to have !een enuinel3 incurred in connection with the death, wa8e or !urial of the victi will !e reconi9ed !3 the court. =& In lieu thereof, appellant should pa3 teperate daaes in the aount of P$2,%%%.%%, said aount !ein awarded in hoicide or urder cases when no evidence of !urial and funeral epenses is presented in the trial court, = and in accordance with prevailin ?urisprudence. =; nder Article $$$= of the Civil Code, teperate daaes 5a3 !e awarded when the Court finds that soe pecuniar3 loss has !een suffered !ut its aount cannot, fro the nature of the case, !e proved with certaint3.5 Finall3, Section "", +ule "$$ of the +ules of Court provides that An appeal ta8en !3 one or ore of several accused shall not affect those who did not appeal, ecept insofar as the ?udent of the appellate court is favora!le and applica!le to the latter. Since +olando did not appeal the decision of the CA, onl3 portions of this ?udent that are favora!le to +olando a3 affect hi. On the other hand, portions of this ?udent that are unfavora!le to +olando cannot appl3 to hi. hus, he cannot !e ade lia!le to pa3 for eeplar3 daaes, as the sae were not awarded !3 the +C.=6 0owever, he !enefits fro this Court7s findin that, instead of actual daaes, onl3 teperate daaes should !e awarded to the heirs of the victi. !EREFORE, the Court of Appeals Decision dated Nove!er "#, $%%& and +esolution dated Septe!er $#, $%%#, findin appellant 1everl3 i!o)an uilt3 !e3ond reasona!le dou!t of Parricide and sentencin her to suffer the penalt3 of 16
RECLUSION PERPETUA are here!3 AFFIRME#. Appellant is inelii!le for parole and is further ordered to pa3, ?ointl3 and severall3 with +olando 4ali!iran, the heirs of +e3naldo an the aounts of P2,%%%.%% as civil indenit3, P2,%%%.%% as oral daaes and P$2,%%%.%% as teperate daaes. In addition, appellant is solel3 lia!le to pa3 the heirs of +e3naldo an the aount of P#%,%%%.%% as eeplar3 daaes.
