employed such means, method or manner of execution as to ensure his or her safety from the defensive or retaliatory acts of the victim; and (2) the said means, method and manner of execution were deliberately adopted. Moreover, for treachery to be appreciated, it must be present and seen by the witness right at the inception of the attack.
Facts:
One evening, Estrella Doctor Casco along with her mother named Damiana and two care- takers Liezl and Angelita, were walking home from Damiana’s medical check-up when Estrella’s cousins Tony Tomas and Benedicto Doctor, together with Nestor Gatchalian, suddenly came out from the side of the road. Without uttering a word, Tomas drew a gun and shot Estrella twice, while Gatchalian, without a gun, allegedly blocked the road, and Doctor positioned himself at the back of Damiana and Angelina and poked a gun at them. Estrella fell down but Tomas fired three more gunshots at the former when she was already down on the ground. After which, the three accused fled from the scene of the crime. The RTC convicted the accused Tomas, Doctor and Gatchalian of the offense of Murder and appreciated the attendance of treachery and conspiracy which the CA affirmed with modification. Hence, this petition was filed.
Issue:
Whether or not aleviosa or treachery attended the commission of the crime.
Ruling:
Yes. The issue of the presence of treachery hinges on the account of eyewitnesses Liezl and Angelita, who witnessed everything from the inception of the attack until accused-appellants fled from the crime scene. Both were not only certain and unwavering in their positive identification of accused-appellants, but their testimony, as aptly noted by the courts a quo, were also factual, straightforward and convincing on how the murder transpired.
While the party of Estrella was walking, accused-appellants suddenly appeared from the side of the road. Without uttering any word, Tomas, Sr. drew his gun and shot Estrella twice, while Doctor simultaneously poked a gun at Angelita and Damiana. And when Estrella already fell down, Tomas, Sr. shot her thrice more perhaps to ensure her death. Then accused-appellants fled. It is, thus, clear that the shooting of Estrella by Tomas, Sr. was done with treachery. The nefarious act was done in a few moments, it was unexpected as it was sudden. The act of Doctor in immobilizing Angelita and Damiana in those brief moments afforded and ensured accused-appellants impunity from the unarmed Estrella and her three similarly unarmed companions.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. ANTHONY C. DOMINGO and GERRY DOMINGO, G.R. No. 184958, September 17, 2009, Velasco, Jr., J.
It is elementary that not all inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimony affect their credibility. Inconsistencies on minor details and collateral matters do not affect the substance of their declaration, their veracity, or the weight of their testimonies.
Page 72 of 116
Facts:
Anthony was charged with murder and frustrated murder. The court a quo found him guilty of the offenses charged. On appeal, aside from reiterating his alibi, he also pointed out the inconsistencies in the testimonies of prosecution witnesses. For one, Nida claimed that the window was open at the time of the shooting which contradicts Vivians testimony that the window was closed. Also, according to Anthony, the inaction of Gina de Pedro, Nidas niece, during the incident was contrary to human nature. Ginas allegation that there was only one shot also contradicts the prosecution’s evidence showing four gunshot wounds on Vivian, two deformed pellets, and one plastic cap recovered from the crime scene. He also contended that since Leopoldo was not among the first to respond to Nidas cries for help, he could not have been at the crime scene and witnessed the attack. Lastly, Anthony attributed ill motive to the prosecution witnesses since they charged him of killing Tenorio, Nidas brother. The CA found no merit in Anthonys contentions. In reviewing the testimonies of the witnesses, the appellate court found no inconsistencies that would question their credibility. Hence, this petition.
Issue:
Whether or not the guilt of Anthony has been established beyond reasonable doubt considering the testimonial evidence presented by the prosecution.
Ruling:
Yes. Nida firmly stated that she saw accused-appellants fire at her. The court further affirms the lower courts reliance on the testimony of Leopoldo, specifically, that the latter was at the crime scene and witnessed the attack. He was not among the first to arrive at Nidas house because he hid behind a pile of soil for three minutes after the shooting incident. Also, a witness inability to move, help or even to run away when the incident occurs is not a ground to label his testimony as doubtful and unworthy of belief. There is no prescribed behavior when one is faced with a shocking event. Moreover, The CA correctly held that a shotgun can fire a single bullet with several pellets that can cause multiple injuries or deaths. Anthonys alibi, that he was at Alfredo Dalidas house, has no merit. Alibi is the weakest of defenses. The Court has patiently reiterated the requisites for alibi to prosper, that is, the accused was not at the locus delicti when the offense was committed and it was physically impossible for him to be at the scene of the crime at the approximate time of its commission. Anthony failed to comply with the time and distance requisites of alibi.
It is doctrinal that the trial courts evaluation of the credibility of a witness and his or her testimony is accorded the highest respect because of the courts untrammeled opportunity to observe directly the demeanor of a witness and, thus, to determine whether he or she is telling the truth. It is also settled that when the trial courts findings have been affirmed by the appellate court, said findings are generally conclusive and binding upon this Court.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. CECILIA LAGMAN y PIRING G.R. No. 197807 April 16, 2012, Velasco, Jr., J.
Page 73 of 116