ChanRobles Virtual law Library
SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
PLEASE CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST ➔ SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
SECOND DIVISION
[
G.R. No. 110109.
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CRISPOLO VERANO Y MONTILLA alias "Dodong", Accused-Appellant.
D E C I S I O N
ROMERO, J.:
Eight-year old Jason Bagcals young life had an untimely end in
the afternoon of
"That on the 14th day of October 1991 at about 4:30 oclock in the afternoon, more or less, at Quezon St., Tandag, Surigao del Sur, Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, conspiring, confederating and mutually helping one another, with intent to kill, with treachery and evident premeditation, did, then and there, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously attack, assault and strike one Jason Bagcal, an eight year old boy, thereby inflicting upon the latter multiple wounds on his body, which wounds have caused the damage and prejudice of his heirs in the following amount:
P50,000.00 as life indemnity of the victim;
P10,000.00 as moral damages;
P10,000.00 as exemplary damages;
CONTRARY TO LAW. (In violation of Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code), with the presence of the following aggravating circumstances:
1. Abuse of Superior Strength, the victim being a minor.
Tandag, Surigao del Sur,
Arraigned on
The prosecutions evidence showed that in the afternoon of
Martinez and Siman approached the "trisikad" and talked to Verano. Then the three men, together with Jason, entered the cemetery. Cagampang and Quezada were surprised and a little apprehensive, as both Siman and Martinez carried firearms. However, they did not do anything and went upstairs to their house and slept. 4cräläwvirtualibräry
Early the next morning, Cagampang went back to Awasian. That
evening, he heard that a child of a lumber dealer was found dead in the Catholic
Cemetery at Tandag.
5
Meanwhile, in the evening of P65.00. The following morning, Verano came back with Renato
Vistal, also a neighbor of Yolanda and likewise a "trisikad" driver, proposing
to sell her the watch for an additional P185.00, to which she agreed.
Yolandas husband, Julieto Pineda, another "trisikad" driver, saw the watch and
asked her how she got it. She told him that it was originally pledged and later
sold to her by accused-appellant. Yolanda gave the watch to her husband, who
wore it while driving his "trisikad."
6cräläwvirtualibräry
On
It was the victims father Fortunato who led the police officer to the Pinedas. Earlier, while searching for witnesses to his sons death, he talked to Renato Vistal who told him that his sons wrist watch was sold by accused-appellant to Yolanda Pineda. 8cräläwvirtualibräry
Renato Vistal testified that in the early morning of
On their way to the restaurant, appellant suggested that they take the route going inside the cemetery which was near their destination to take a look at the cadaver of a young boy he had killed the night before. Vistal saw the lifeless body of a boy whose identity at that time was still unknown to him, with his backpack school bag still slung on his right shoulder. 10cräläwvirtualibräry
When they reached the restaurant, appellant talked to Yolanda Pineda and received additional money for the wrist watch he had earlier pawned to her. With the additional money appellant received, he invited Vistal to the nearby Central market where they had a drinking spree. 11cräläwvirtualibräry
Accused-appellant was subsequently arrested and brought to the Police Headquarters where he was asked by Fortunato if he was involved in the killing of the latters son Jason. Admitting his culpability, appellant stated that, for a monetary consideration and upon instructions of Siman, he fetched the victim from his school at St. Theresas College at 4:30 in the afternoon and took Jason for a ride to Barangay Mabatang until 7:00 in the evening. However, instead of bringing him home, appellant brought the child to the cemetery where appellants co-accused Benjamin Martinez and Edgar Siman were waiting. Siman then ordered appellant to beat the child to death. The motive given by Siman for the killing was that Jasons father, Fortunato, was the enemy of Simans father-in-law. 12 Appellant also executed a sworn statement reiterating the above and further adding that Siman poked a .38 caliber revolver on his head and threatened to kill him if he refused to kill Jason in turn. He likewise admitted that he pulled a wooden cross from the ground and struck Jason with it, causing him to slump on the ground. When shown a gold-plated wrist watch recovered by the police from Julieto Pineda, appellant admitted that it was the same wrist watch he took from the victim.
The post mortem examination was conducted by Dr. Floripes A. Lim, Medical Officer III of the Provincial Health Office of Tandag. In his report dated October 17, 1991, Dr. Lim stated the cause of Jasons death as cerebral hemorrhage secondary to massive brain damage. He also said that the victim had already been dead for 48 hours when the cadaver was examined on October 16, 1991. 13cräläwvirtualibräry
The two accused, Martinez and Siman, interposed the defenses of denial and alibi. The trial court stated their version of the events as follows:
". . . . According to accused Benjamin Martinez, the whole day on October 14, 1991, he stayed in the PC Barracks at Tandag. In the early evening, he was in his house, same Poblacion of Tandag, preparing snacks because the image of the Patron Saint of Perpetual Help was scheduled to be brought by the devotees to his house that evening. And because it was raining, after the prayer he decided to stay and did not go out the whole night. He learned sometime on November 10 or 12, 1992, from Chief of Police Romalito Yuhico of Tandag that he was implicated by accused Crispolo Verano in the killing of the child Jason Bagcal. He denied any such participation or involvement. On the contrary, according to him, he helped in the investigation of the killing and even picked up some suspects, who were however released later for lack of evidence. When he asked accused Crispolo Verano why the latter implicated him, he was told that the Police coerced said accused to implicate him and Edgar Siman. He claimed that from October 14 to December 26, 1991, when he was arrested, he did not leave the town.
Accused Edgar Siman also denied participation in the killing of Jason Bagcal. He claimed that the whole day on October 14, 1991, he worked on the cabinet in his house at Tandag. In the evening, he stayed home reading the lectures for the following day of the Southern Baptist Church of Tandag, of which he was a pastor for one month. He learned of the death of Jason Bagcal about a week later when the incident became the talk of the town. According to him, from October 14 to his arrest on December 17, 1991, he never left Tandag and performed his customary work. He believed he was implicated in the killing of the child Jason Bagcal because his mother-in-law, Tersie Martinez, was the competitor in the lumber business of the deceaseds father, Fortunato Bagcal. When he talked to accused Crispolo Verano, he learned that the former was threatened with death by Nerio Bagcal, uncle of the deceased, and Police Officers Rogelio Lorenzana and Mario Balan when Crispolo refused to implicate him."
Accused-appellant waived presentation of evidence. The trial court convicted him of the crime of Murder but acquitted his co-accused Martinez and Siman. The dispositive portion of the decision states:
"WHEREFORE, finding accused Crispolo Verano y Montilla, alias
`Dodong GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of MURDER, qualified by
treachery, and aggravated by nighttime and uninhabited place which facilitated
the commission of the crime, without any mitigating circumstance to offset the
same, and with the imposition of death penalty having been disallowed by the
present Constitution until restored by law, the Court hereby sentences him to
suffer the indivisible penalty of RECLUSION PERPETUA; to pay the heirs
of the deceased-victim Jason Bagcal the sum of Fifty Thousand (P50,000.00)
Pesos as life indemnity, Ten Thousand (P10,000.00) Pesos as moral
damages and Ten Thousand (P10,000.00) Pesos as exemplary damages,
without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency; and to pay the cost.
Being detained, he is credited in the service of his sentence with the full
term of his preventive imprisonment if he signed the agreement whereby he would
abide by the same disciplinary rules imposed on convicted prisoners, otherwise
four-fifths (4/5) thereof.
On ground of reasonable doubt, accused Benjamin Martinez and Edgar Siman are acquitted. No finding of civil liability against either of them.
The Bail Bond of accused Edgar Siman is cancelled and the documents attached thereto are ordered returned to his bondsman.
Accused Benjamin Martinez shall remain under detention it appearing that he is facing another or other criminal cases.
SO ORDERED.
IN CHAMBERS, this 7th day of August, 1992, at Tandag, Surigao del Sur, Philippines."
Accused-appellant assigns the following errors:
"I
THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN CONVICTING THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT ON THE BASIS OF CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT CANNOT SURVIVE THE TEST OF REASON AND JUSTIFY MORAL CERTAINTY.
II
THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN NOT ACQUITTING THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT ON THE GROUND THAT, LIKE HIS TWO CO-ACCUSED, HIS GUILT HAD NOT BEEN PROVED BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT." [14cräläwvirtualibräry
On the first assigned error, accused-appellant claims that the circumstances proved in the trial case are not enough to sustain a conviction.
We do not agree.
Although the evidence in the instant case is largely circumstantial, it is sufficient for conviction as it meets the following requirements:
(a) There is more than one circumstance;
(b) The facts from which the inferences are derived are proven; and
(c) The combination of all the circumstances is such as to produce a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt. [15cräläwvirtualibräry
Circumstantial evidence is evidence of circumstances which are strong enough to cast suspicion upon the defendant and which are sufficiently strong to overcome the presumption of innocence, and to exclude every hypothesis except that of the guilt of the defendant. 16 Many decisions are to the effect that circumstantial evidence may be fully as satisfying as positive testimony and will sometimes outweigh it. In cases where the facts or circumstances which are proved are not only consistent with the guilt of defendant, but also inconsistent with his innocence, such evidence, in its weight and probative force, may surpass direct evidence in its effect upon the court. 17 We have said: "When circumstantial evidence constitutes an unbroken chain of natural and rational circumstances corroborating each other, it cannot be overcome by inconcrete doubtful evidence submitted by the opposite party. 18cräläwvirtualibräry
Below are the findings of the trial court.
"Close scrutiny of prosecutions evidence accused Crispolo Verano
waived presentation of evidence in his defense it has been sufficiently
established that (1) in the early evening of October 14, 1991, accused Crispolo
Verano, then driving a trisikad with the deceased young boy Jason Bagcal as
passenger, entered the Catholic Cemetery at Dagocdoc, Tandag, Surigao del Sur;
(2) that same evening, he pledged for P65.00 a gold-plated seiko wrist
watch to Yolanda Pineda at Bachelor Terminal Kitchenette, where she worked as
waitress, and which Terminal was adjacent to the Catholic Cemetery; (3) early
the following morning, Crispolo Verano, neighbor and long time friend of Renato
Vistal went to the latters residence at Barangay Awasian, same municipality,
and requested the latter to accompany him to downtown Tandag, and while on
their way to Bachelor Terminal, led Renato to the place at the Cemetery where,
according to Crispolo, he killed a young boy the night before, whom they saw
lying prostrate on the ground facing `as if looking at (them); (4)
proceeding afterwards to the nearby Bachelor Terminal Kitchenette, Crispolo
asked for additional amount of P185.00 from Yolanda Pineda for the wrist
watch he pledged the night before, which he decided to sell to her; (5) Yolanda
gave the wrist watch to her husband, Julieto Pineda, who used it while driving
his trisikad until the same was spotted by Policeman Lorenzana who, upon
investigation, established that the wrist watch belonged to the deceased Jason
Bagcal; (6) the deceased, who was discovered two days later, on October 16,
1991, was examined by Dr. Floripes A. Lim, who estimated the approximate time
of death to be about 48 hours before; and (7) in the sworn statement he gave to
Judge Jose M. Garcia of the Municipal Trial Court of Tandag, while the latter
was conducting the preliminary investigation of the instant murder case, Crispolo
Verano admitted authorship of the death of Jason Bagcal, admitted that he took
the wrist watch of the deceased, which he later pledged and then sold to
Yolanda Pineda, and admitted the exhibit wrist watch shown to him by Judge
Garcia as the one he took from the deceased.
The above proved circumstances constitute an unbroken chain which leads to the only fair and reasonable conclusion which points to accused Crispolo Verano, to the exclusion of all others, as the guilty person." [19cräläwvirtualibräry
The concatenation of events and circumstances has been satisfactorily proven by the prosecution and their combination establishes beyond reasonable doubt the conclusion that appellant indeed killed Jason. 20 Against this phalanx of positive evidence, appellants belated denial cannot prevail.
Appellant further claims that certain portions of the testimonies of the prosecutions witnesses contained inconsistencies, citing the following:
1) Witness Cagampang stated on direct examination that he only became aware of what happened to the child that appellant took inside the cemetery on the night of October 15, 1991, when he was informed by a barangay mate that a child had been found dead therein. However, on cross-examination, he stated that he received the said information in the afternoon of that date.
2) Witness Yolanda Pineda
said that the watch was pledged to her for P65.00 and that she later
gave P185.00 to pay off the item making the total price of the watch to
be P250.00. However, Renato Vistal said that Yolanda Pineda gave P50.00
to appellant as a final purchase price, meaning that the pledge was for P150.00
and not P65.00. Later, Vistal
said the watch was pawned for P75.00 initially and then later P175.00
was paid for it.
Witness Julieto Pineda, in his sworn statement, gave another
amount saying that appellant added P115.00 to the amount he originally
paid Yolanda. During trial, he testified that the additional amount given was P100.00.
The Court finds these alleged inconsistencies to be minor and as such, do not affect the credibility of the witnesses. 21 As for the supposedly conflicting statements in the various affidavits, we have opined in People v. Villanueva, that: 22cräläwvirtualibräry
". . . . It has often been noted by this Court that an affidavit being taken ex-parte is almost always incomplete and often inaccurate, sometimes from partial suggestions and sometimes from want of suggestions and inquiries, . . . . Moreover, affidavits are frequently not complete reproductions of what the declarants had in mind, considering that the affidavits are frequently prepared by the administering officer and cast in the latters language as the latters understanding of what the affiant had said . . . ."
Time and again, we have held that minor lapses even enhance the veracity of the testimonies of witnesses as they erase any suspicion of a rehearsed declaration. 23cräläwvirtualibräry
Appellant also impugns the credibility of witness Renato Vistals testimony that he (appellant) told the latter about killing Jason. We see no cogent reason to disturb the trial courts acceptance of said testimony. It is this Courts bounden duty to refrain from reviewing findings of fact by the lower court, considering that it has all the opportunity to directly observe the witnesses and to determine by their demeanor on the stand the probative value of their testimonies. 24 Furthermore, the fact that Vistal did not immediately reveal to the authorities what he knew of the killing does not affect his credibility. It is not uncommon for a witness to a crime to show reluctance about getting involved in a criminal case, as in fact the natural reticence of most people to get involved is of judicial notice. 25 This is especially true in this case where the parties involved are not just townmates but immediate neighbors. 26cräläwvirtualibräry
W HEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the decision appealed from is hereby AFFIRMED.
SO ORDERED.
Regalado (Chairman), Puno, Mendoza, and Torres, Jr., JJ., concur.
Endnotes:
1 TSN, April 8, 1992, pp. 28-30.
2 TSN, p. 31, ibid.
3 TSN, pp. 32-34, ibid.
4 TSN, pp. 34 and 39, ibid.
5 TSN, pp. 34-35, ibid.
6 TSN, April 10, 1992, pp. 5-8.
7 TSN, pp. 2-3, ibid
8 TSN, pp. 12-13, ibid
9 TSN, April 8, 1992, pp. 6-7.
10 TSN, pp. 7-9, ibid
11 TSN, pp. 10-11, ibid.
12 TSN, pp. 16-17, ibid
13 TSN, April 8, 1992, pp. 3-4; TSN, April 10, 1992, pp. 26-27.
14 p. 8, Brief for Appellant, Rollo, p. 39.
15 Rule 133, Sec. 5, Rules of Court.
16 U.S. v. Douglass, 2 Phil. 462.
17 Bowie v. State, 185 Ark. 834, 49 S.W. (2d) 1049, 83 A.L.R.
18 Erlanger and Galinger v. Exconle, G.R. No. L-4792, September 30, 1953.
19 Rollo, pp. 21-22.
20 People v. Bracamonte, G.R. No. 95939, June 17, 1996.
21 People v. Jumanog, 221 SCRA 334.
22 G.R. No. 96469, October 21, 1992.
23 People v. Beltran, G.R. No. 119306, July 31, 1996; People v. de la Cruz, 251 SCRA 77 (1995).
24 People v. Bracamonte, ibid; People v. Gomez, 229 SCRA 138, 144 (1994).
25 People v. Rubio, G.R. No. 118315, June 30, 1996.