Professional Documents
Culture Documents
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 1/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
*EN BANC.
105
due process does not require the State to preserve the semen
specimen although it might be useful to the accused unless the
latter is able to show bad faith on the part of the prosecution or
the police. Here, the State presented a medical expert who
testified on the existence of the specimen and Webb in fact sought
to have the same subjected to DNA test. For, another, when Webb
raised the DNA issue, the rule governing DNA evidence did not
yet exist, the country did not yet have the technology for
conducting the test, and no Philippine precedent had as yet
recognized its admissibility as evidence. Consequently, the idea of
keeping the specimen secure even after the trial court rejected the
motion for DNA testing did not come up. Indeed, neither Webb
nor his coaccused brought up the matter of preserving the
specimen in the meantime.
Criminal Law Alibis and Denials Judges Impartiality Not
all denials and alibis should be regarded as fabricatedindeed, if
the accused is truly innocent, he can have no other defense but
denial and alibi A judge must keep an open mind, guarding
against slipping into hasty conclusion, often arising from a desire
to quickly finish the job of deciding a casea positive declaration
from a witness that he saw the accused commit the crime should
not automatically cancel out the accuseds claim that he did not do
it A lying witness can make as positive an identification as a
truthful witness can.The trial court and the Court of Appeals
are one in rejecting as weak Webbs alibi. Their reason is uniform:
Webbs alibi cannot stand against Alfaros positive identification
of him as the rapist and killer of Carmela and, apparently, the
killer as well of her mother and younger sister. Because of this, to
the lower courts, Webbs denial and alibi were fabricated. But not
all denials and alibis should be regarded as fabricated. Indeed, if
the accused is truly innocent, he can have no other defense but
denial and alibi. So how can such accused penetrate a mind that
has been made cynical by the rule drilled into his head that a
defense of alibi is a hangmans noose in the face of a witness
positively swearing, I saw him do it.? Most judges believe that
such assertion automatically dooms an alibi which is so easy to
fabricate. This quick stereotype thinking, however, is distressing.
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 2/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
For how else can the truth that the accused is really innocent
have any chance of prevailing over such a stonecast tenet? There
is only one way. A judge must keep an open mind. He must guard
against slipping into hasty conclusion, often arising from a desire
to quickly finish the job of deciding a case. A positive declaration
from a witness that he saw the accused commit the crime should
not automatically cancel out the accuseds claim that he did not do
it. A lying witness can make as positive an identification as a
truthful witness can. The lying witness can also say as
forthrightly and unequivocally, He did it! without blinking an
eye.
106
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 3/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
107
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 4/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
108
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 5/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
between the U.S. and the Philippines, said the lower courts took
only about twelve to fourteen hours. If the Court were to
subscribe to this extremely skeptical view, it might as well tear
the rules of evidence out of the law books and regard suspicions,
surmises, or speculations as reasons for impeaching evidence. It is
not that official records, which carry the presumption of truth of
what they state, are immune to attack. They are not. That
presumption can be overcome by evidence. Here, however, the
prosecution did not bother to present evidence to impeach the
entries in Webbs passport and the certifications of the Philippine
and U.S. immigration services regarding his travel to the U.S.
and back. The prosecutions rebuttal evidence is the fear of the
unknown that it planted in the lower courts minds.
Same Same Same Same Same Webbs documented alibi
altogether impeaches Alfaros testimony, not only with respect to
him, but also with respect to the other coaccused.Webbs
documented alibi altogether impeaches Alfaros testimony, not
only with respect to him, but also with respect to Lejano, Estrada,
Fernandez, Gatchalian, Rodriguez, and Biong. For, if the Court
accepts the proposition that Webb was in the U.S. when the crime
took place, Alfaros testimony will not hold together. Webbs
participation is the anchor of Alfaros story. Without it, the
evidence against the others must necessarily fall.
Same Presumption of Innocence In our criminal justice
system, what is important is, not whether the court entertains
doubts about the innocence of the accused since an open mind is
willing to explore all possibilities, but whether it entertains a
reasonable, lingering doubt as to his guilt.In our criminal
justice system, what is important is, not whether the court enter
109
110
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 7/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
111
112
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 9/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 10/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
113
however, be fair, made in good faith, and not spill over the walls
of decency and propriety. And to enhance the open court
principle and allow the people to make fair and reasoned criticism
of the courts, the sub judice rule excludes from its coverage fair
and accurate reports (without comment) of what have actually
taken place in open court.
Same Same Same Due Process The resulting (but
temporary) curtailment of speech because of the sub judice rule is
necessary and justified by the more compelling interests to uphold
the rights of the accused and promote the fair and orderly
administration of justice.In sum, the court, in a pending
114
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 12/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
115
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 13/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
116
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 14/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
117
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 15/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
118
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 16/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
necessarily prove that the very same person actually took the
flight. This Court takes judicial notice of reported irregularities
and tampering of passports in the years prior to the recent
issuance by the DFA of machinereadable passports. In fact, the
proliferation of photosubstituted passports, fake immigration
stamps, assumed identity and double passports, among others,
have been cited as grounds to justify the necessity of amending
the Philippine Passport Act of 1996 (R.A. No. 8239) as proposed in
the Senate, x x x to rally for the issuance of passports using
tamper proof and the latest data encryption technology and
provide stiffer penalties against proliferators of fake passports.
Same Rape with Homicide Conspiracy Although only one (1)
rape was actually proven by the prosecution, as conspirators who
mutually agreed to commit the crime and assisted one (1) another
in its commission, on the occasion of which the rape victim, her
mother and sister, were killed, each of the accusedappellants shall
be criminally liable for rape with homicide.The existence of
conspiracy between appellants Webb, Ventura, Lejano,
Gatchalian, Fernandez, Rodriguez and Filart was satisfactorily
proven by the prosecution. Conspiracy exists when two or more
persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a
felony and decide to commit it. Conspiracy comes to life at the
very instant the plotters agree, expressly or impliedly, to commit
the felony and forthwith decide to actually pursue it. It may be
proved by direct or circumstantial evidence. Although only one (1)
rape was actually proven by the prosecution, as conspirators who
mutually agreed to commit the crime and assisted one (1) another
in its commission, on the occasion of which the rape victim
Carmela, her mother Estrellita and sister Jennifer, were killed,
each of the accusedappellants shall be criminally liable for rape
with homicide.
Same Same Accessories Words and Phrases Accessory is one
who has knowledge of the commission of the crime, yet did not take
part in its commission as principal or accomplice, but took part in
it subsequent to its commission.The Revised Penal Code in
Article 19 defines an accessory as one who has knowledge of the
commission of the crime, yet did not take part in its commission
as principal or accomplice, but took part in it subsequent to its
commission by any of three modes: (1) profiting himself or
assisting the offender to profit by the effects of the crime (2)
concealing or destroying the body of the crime, or the effects or
instruments thereof in order to prevent its discovery and (3)
harboring, concealing, or assisting in the escape of the principals
of the crime, provided the accessory acts with abuse of his
119
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 17/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 18/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
120
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 19/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
Webbs DNA does not necessarily negate his presence at the locus
criminis.
SERENO, J., Separate Concurring Opinion:
Criminal Procedure Public Prosecutors It cannot be
overemphasized that the prosecuting officer is the representative
not of an ordinary party to a controversy, but of a sovereignty
whose obligation to govern impartially is as compelling as its
obligation to govern at all, and whose interest, therefore, in a
criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case, but that justice
shall be done.At the outset, it cannot be overemphasized that
the prosecuting officer is the representative not of an ordinary
party to a controversy, but of a sov
121
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 20/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
respected only to the extent that they are consistent with the
fairness of the trial for the accused.
Same Same Presumption of Innocence The presumption of
innocence of the accused is at the center of our criminal justice
systemthe cornerstone, as it were, of all the other rights accorded
to the accused, including the right to due process of law Because
the accused must be presumed innocent, and because they are
entitled to due process of law, it is the duty of the prosecution not
to issue prejudicial statements about them while the trial is being
conducted, a standard which applies with even more force to the
trial judge.The presumption of innocence of the accused is at
the center of our criminal justice systemthe cornerstone, as it
were, of all the other rights accorded to the accused, including the
right to due process of law. In pronouncing the presumption of
innocence of the accused and their right to due process, the
Constitution declares that the risk of letting the guilty walk free
would be error on the side of justice. This outcome is infinitely
better than imprisoning an innocent person. Because the accused
must be presumed innocent, and because they are entitled to due
process of law, it is the duty of the prosecution
122
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 21/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
123
ABAD, J.:
Brief Background
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 23/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
125
_______________
126
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 25/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
Issues Presented
_______________
127
_______________
128
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 27/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
8 People v. Yatar, G.R. No. 150224, May 19, 2004, 425 SCRA 504, 514.
9 Supra note 7.
10488 U.S. 41 (1988).
11Webb v. De Leon, G.R. No. 121234, August 23, 1995, 247 SCRA 652
Webb v. People, G.R. No. 127262, July 24, 1997, 276 SCRA 243.
129
Alfaros Story
131
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 31/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
133
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 32/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
134
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 33/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
135
ATTY. ONGKIKO:
Q. All right, and what was your reaction when Ms. Alfaro
stated that papapelan ko na lang yan?
WITNESS SACAGUING:
A. I said, hindi puwede yan, kasi hindi ka naman eye witness.
ATTY. ONGKIKO:
Q. And what was the reply of Ms. Alfaro?
WITNESS SACAGUING:
A. Hindi siya nakakibo, until she went away.
(TSN, May 28, 1996, pp. 4950, 58, 7779)
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 34/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
13TSN, August 6, 1996, pp. 1341 TSN, May 22, 1997, pp. 72, 81131,
142157 Exhibits 274 and 275.
138
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 37/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
that she got scared (another shift to fear) for she hurriedly
got out of the house after Webb supposedly gave her a
meaningful look.
Alfaro quickly went to her car, not minding Gatchalian,
Fernandez, Estrada, Rodriguez, and Filart who sat on the
car or milled on the sidewalk. She did not speak to them,
even to Estrada, her boyfriend. She entered her car and
turned on the engine but she testified that she did not
know where to go. This woman who a few minutes back led
Webb, Lejano, and Ventura into the house, knowing that
they were decided to rape and harm Carmela, was
suddenly too shocked to know where to go! This emotional
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 39/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
141
_______________
17TSN October 10, 1995, pp. 9798 (Records, Vol. 4, pp. 271272).
142
_______________
143
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 42/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
144
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 43/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
146
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 45/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
147
_______________
31TSN, June 3, 1997, pp. 1433 photograph before the concert Exhibit
295, Records (Vol. 2), p. 208.
32TSN, April 23, 1997, pp. 128129, 134148.
33TSN, April 30, 1997, pp. 6971.
34TSN, June 2, 1997, pp. 5164, 7578.
35TSN, June 16, 1997, pp. 12, 1638, 4359 and 6993.
36Exhibits 305.
37Exhibits 306 and 307.
38Exhibits 344 and 346.
39Exhibits 244, 245 and 246.
40TSN, July 16, 1997, pp. 35, 4142, 4849, 58, 6162.
41TSN, July 16, 1996, pp. 1617, 2332, 6163, 7884.
148
_______________
149
_______________
53Exhibit 212D.
54Exhibit 261.
55Exhibit 260.
56TSN, June 23, 1997.
150
151
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 50/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
152
_______________
58People v. Saban, G.R. No. 110559, November 24, 1999, 319 SCRA 36,
46.
59Rollo (G.R. 176839), pp. 216217.
153
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 52/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
154
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 53/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
155
Conclusion
156
CONCURRING OPINION
CARPIOMORALES, J.:
157
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 56/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
158
_______________
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 58/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
159
_______________
4 Rollo (G.R. No. 176389), pp. 393399 and Rollo (G.R. No. 176864), pp.
80104.
160
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 59/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
161
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 60/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
7 Resolution dated January 26, 2007, Rollo (G.R. No. 176839), pp. 197
214. The resolution was penned by Justice Rodrigo V. Cosico, with the
concurrence of Justices Regalado E. Maambong and Normandie B.
Pizarro. Justices Renato C. Dacudao and Lucenito N. Tagle, dissented.
8 A.M. 06115SC effective October 15, 2007. Section 4 states:
Application for DNA Testing Order.The appropriate court may, at
any time, either motu proprio or on application of any person who has a
legal interest in the matter in litigation, order a DNA testing. Such order
shall issue after due hearing and notice to the parties upon a showing of
the following:
a. A biological sample exists that is relevant to the case
b. The biological sample:
(i) was not previously subjected to the type of DNA testing now
requested or
(ii) was previously subject to DNA testing, but the results may require
confirmation for good reasons
c. The DNA testing uses a scientifically valid technique
d. The DNA testing has the scientific potential to produce new
information that is relevant to the proper resolution of the case and
e. The existence of other factors, if any, which the court may consider
as potentially affecting the accuracy or integrity of the DNA testing.
This rule shall not preclude a DNA testing, without need of a prior
court order, at the behest of any party, including law enforcement
agencies, before a suit or proceeding is commenced.
162
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 61/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
show that the specimen was among the object evidence that
was offered in evidence in the case by any of the parties. It
was in light of this development that accused Webb filed an
urgent motion to acquit on the ground that the
governments failure to preserve such vital evidence has
resulted in the denial of his right to due process.
In the draft decision prepared by Justice Martin S.
Villarama as a basis of this Courts deliberation, the
decision of the appellate court affirming with modification
the trial courts decision was affirmed.
In discussing why the Decision of the Court of Appeals is
being affirmed with modification, the draft decision which
was the basis of this Courts deliberations, started by
stating a fundamental rule, viz.:
_______________
9 People v. Pringas, G.R. No. 175928, August 31, 2007, 531 SCRA 828.
10 People v. De Guzman, G.R. No. 173197, April 24, 2007, 522 SCRA
207.
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 62/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
163
_______________
11 Siao Tick Chong v. Republic, No. L22151, March 30, 1970, 32 SCRA
253, 258.
12 37 N.J. Eq. 130, 132. Cited in Salonga, Philippine Law on Evidence,
774 (1964) and VIII Francisco, The Revised Rules Of Court In The
Philippines, 458459 (1997).
13 January 4, 2000 RTC Decision, p. 74.
14 Vide TSN, October 18, 1995, pp. 105106.
15 TSN, October 23, 1995, pp. 69.
16 Id., at pp. 2527.
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 63/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
164
_______________
17 Id., at pp. 3536 TSN, October 10, 1995, pp. 8096, 156163.
18 35 N.Y.U.L. Rev. 259 (1960)
19 Ibid.
20 Vide 98 C.J.S. 348.
21 Vide People v. Lewis, 25 Ill. 2d 396, 185 NE 2d 168 where the
Supreme Court of Illinois ruled:
The question of whether a witness is a narcotics addict is an important
consideration in passing upon the credibility of a witness for, as we have
stated, the testimony of a narcotics addict is subject to suspicion due to
the fact that habitual users of narcotics become notorious liars. (citations
omitted)
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 64/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
165
_______________
only witness to the alleged crime, and further urges that the evidence as a whole does not
prove him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. We have repeatedly held that the fact that a
upon his credibility and, while his position is not that of an accomplice, the situation is
such a witness, recognizing the fact that habitual users of narcotics become notorious
liars and that their testimony is likely to be affected thereby. (Citations omitted
emphasis supplied)
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 65/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
166
Atty. M. Ongkiko:
Q: Yes. They could lie on the persons they go out with?
Witness Dr. Rey San Pedro:
A: Yes, Sir.
Atty. M. Ongkiko:
Q: They could lie on the persons they meet?
Witness Dr. Rey San Pedro:
A: Yes, Sir.
Atty. M. Ongkiko:
Q: They could lie on the persons from whom they allegedly get the
drugs?
Witness Dr. Rey San Pedro:
A: Yes, Sir.
Atty. M. Ongkiko:
Q: Is it not correct, Doctor, that the tendency of a drug dependent is to
hide the identity of the drug suppliers. Is this correct?
Witness Dr. Rey San Pedro:
A: This is our experience. I have not encountered a patient who would
tell you where they get their supply.
Atty. M. Ongkiko:
Q: Who would tell you the correct name of the drug supplier?
Witness Dr. Rey San Pedro:
A: Yes, Sir.
Atty. M. Ongkiko:
Q: And who would tell you the correct address of the drug supplier,
correct?
Witness Dr. Rey San Pedro:
A: Correct.
Atty. M. Ongkiko:
Q: Their tendency is to give you misleading information, correct?
Witness Dr. Rey San Pedro:
A: Yes, Sir.
Atty. M. Ongkiko:
Q: Now, would a drug dependent on shabu lie for money?
167
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 66/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
168
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 67/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
169
xxxx
b. CocaineCocaine is a powerful cortical stimulant which
causes a state of euphoric excitement and varying degrees of
pleasurable hallucinations. Under its influence, a person
experiences sensations of great muscular and mental strength
and overestimates his capabilities. He is truly, at least while
under the drugs influence, in an unreal or dream world,
and the majority exception of admitting impeaching testimony
where the witness was under the influence of the drug at the time
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 68/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
Atty. Ongkiko:
Q: Why, why so?
Witness Velasco:
A: Because he is not in his state of mind.
Atty. Ongkiko:
Q: Well, what about the capacity to lie, Governor?
Witness Velasco:
A: Well, the capacity to lie may be very great, Your Honor.
Atty. Ongkiko:
Q: Well, because, you know, for maintaining or for in order to get money, they
will lie.
(underscoring supplied)
170
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 69/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
25 BURRUS AND MARKS TESTIMONIAL RELIABILITY OF DRUG ADDICTS 35 N.Y.U.L. Rev. 259, 262
171
Witness Sacaguing:
A We gave her very special treatment. So, we consider her already the
darling of the group because she was giving us good projects and
she loved it.
Atty. Ongkiko:
Q What do you mean by she loved it, she loved what?
Witness Sacaguing:
A She liked being treated that way.
Atty. Ongkiko:
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 70/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
Q Now tell the Honorable Court, was there ever any time where the
group got tired of giving Ms. Alfaro the VIP treatment?
xxxx
Atty. Ongkiko:
All right, Atty. Sacaguing, how long did you give Ms. Alfaro this
VIP treatment?
Witness Sacaguing:
A Well, she was always there and we treated her very nicely, but later
on, about . . . after the lapse of about one or two weeks, the boys, I
mean, my associates in my team, began teasing her because she
could not give us any project anymore.
Atty. Ongkiko:
Q What do you mean by projects, leads?
Witness Sacaguing:
A Projects, cases we could work on.
Atty. Ongkiko:
Q I see, and what do you mean by teasing?
xxxx
Atty. Ongkiko:
Q Mr. Sacaguing, after your group teased her because, according to
you, she could not give you anymore projects, what was the reaction
of Ms. Alfaro, if any?
Please look at the judge, please do not look at me.
Witness Sacaguing:
A She seemed to have been piqued and she said . . .
172
Atty. Ongkiko:
Q She seemed to have been what?
Witness Sacaguing:
A Piqued, yes, napikon.
Atty. Ongkiko:
Q I see, piqued.
Witness Sacaguing:
A Piqued.
Atty. Ongkiko:
Q Piqued. Ano yun, napikon?
Court:
p i c q u e d. (underscoring in the original)
Atty. Ongkiko:
Q And when she was piqued or napikon, what did she say or what
did she do?
xxxx
Atty. Ongkiko:
xxxx
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 71/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
173
Witness Sacaguing:
A I was quite interested and I tried to persuade her to introduce to me
that man and she promised that in due time, she will bring to me
the man, and together with her, we will try to convince him to act
as a state witness and help us in the solution of the case.
Atty. Ongkiko:
Q Did she ever bring to you or to your office this man that, according
to her, knew about the Vizconde murder case?
xxxx
Atty. Ongkiko:
Q Atty. Sacaguing, were you able to interview this alleged witness?
Witness Sacaguing:
A No, sir.
Atty. Ongkiko:
Q Why not?
Witness Sacaguing:
A Because Jessica Alfaro was never able to comply with her promise to
bring the man to me. She told me later that she could not, and the
man does not like to testify.
Atty. Ongkiko:
Q All right, and what happened after that?
Witness Sacaguing:
A She told me, easy lang kayo, Sir, if I may quote, easy lang, Sir,
huwag kayong . . .
Court:
Q How was that?
Witness Sacaguing:
A Easy lang, Sir. Sir, relax lang, Sir, papapelan ko yan, papapelan ko
na lang yan.
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 72/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
Atty. Ongkiko:
Q And what did you understand by her statement as you quoted it?
Witness Sacaguing:
A I thought it . . .
174
Prosecutor Zuo:
Objection, Your Honor, that is asking for the opinion of this witness,
Your Honor.
Court:
Reform your question.
Atty. Ongkiko:
Q All right, and what was your reaction when Ms. Alfaro stated that
papapelan ko na lang yan?
Witness Sacaguing:
A I said, hindi pwede yan, kasi, hindi ka naman eye witness.
Atty. Ongkiko:
Q And what was the reply of Ms. Alfaro?
Witness Sacaguing:
A Hindi siya nakakibo, until she went away.
Atty. Ongkiko:
Q She what?
Witness Sacaguing:
A She went away, she went out of my office.
Court:
You speak clearly, Mr. Witness, I could hardly get you.
Witness Sacaguing:
A She did not answer anymore, Your Honor. She just went out of the
office.
xxxx26 (emphasis and underscoring supplied)
_______________
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 73/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
175
176
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 74/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
Court:
Q When was that?
Witness Alfaro:
A: About October of 1994.
Court:
Q What prompted you to finally reveal what you have witnessed?
Witness Alfaro:
A: Well, when I started having these nightmares about my daughter
instead of that Jennifer that I see in my dreams. Its my daughter
whom I see crying, and that triggered me, and then I got out from
drugs, and then it came to the point when I saw them accidentally,
so, thats the thing which triggered me, Your Honor.
Court:
Q: Any other reason?
Witness Alfaro:
A: Those are my main reasons.
Court:
Q: Is that your principal reason?
Witness Alfaro:
A: I wanted to change my life already.27 (underscoring supplied)
_______________
177
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 75/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
178
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 76/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
179
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 77/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
180
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 78/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 79/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
181
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 80/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
182
_______________
out of the blue, hurled it at the glasspaneled front door of the Vizconde
residence. His action really made no sense. From Alfaros narration, Webb
appeared rational in his decisions. It was past midnight, the house was
dark, and they wanted to get away quickly to avoid detection. Hurling a
stone at that glass door and causing a tremendous noise was bizarre, like
inviting the neighbors to come.
b. The crime scene showed that the house had been ransacked. The
rejected confessions of the Barroso akyatbahay gang members said that
they tried to rob the house. To explain this physical evidence, Alfaro
claimed that at one point Ventura was pulling a kitchen drawer, and at
another point, going through a handbag on the dining table. He said he
was looking for the frontdoor key and the car key.
Again, this portion of Alfaros story appears tortured to accommodate
the physical evidence of the ransacked house. She never mentioned
Ventura having taken some valuables with him when they left Carmelas
house. And why would Ventura rummage a bag on the table for the front
door key, spilling the contents, when they had already gotten into the
house. It is a story made to fit in with the crime scene although robbery
was supposedly not the reason Webb and his companions entered that
house.
c. It is the same thing with the garage light. The police investigators
found that the bulb had been loosed to turn off the light. The confessions
of the Barroso gang claimed that one of them climbed the parked cars
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 81/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
hood to reach up and darken that light. This made sense since they were
going to rob the place and they needed time to work in the dark trying to
open the front door. Some passersby might look in and see what they were
doing.
Alfaro had to adjust her testimony to take into account that darkened
garage light. So she claimed that Ventura climbed the cars hood, using a
chair, to turn the light off. But, unlike the Barroso akyatbahay gang,
Webb and his friends did not have anything to do in a darkened garage.
They supposedly knew in advance that Carmela left the doors to the
kitchen open for them. It did not make sense for Ventura to risk standing
on the cars hood and be seen in such an awkward position instead of
going straight into the house.
29 G.R. Nos. 12103945, January 25, 1999, 302 SCRA 21.
183
184
member of
the overheard retorted, Oo
group. Webb say, pero ako ang
Pipilahan susunod. The
natin si others
Carmela, pero responded,
ako ang Okay, okay.
mauuna.
What Alfaro did not see After leaving Before going
Alfaro what transpired the accused to the
saw at inside the Webb, Lejano bedroom,
the scene Vizconde and Ventura Alfaro saw
of the residence because inside the Ventura
crime she did not go Vizconde rummaging
in. residence, through the
Alfaro again ladies bag
entered the on top of the
house dining table.
through the She pro
185
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 84/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
187
xxxx
Atty. Aguirre:
Q While assisting Jessica Alfaro, did you notice any action on the part
of anybody which pressured Jessica Alfaro to finish her statement?
Witness Mercader:
A No, Your Honor, none that I have noticed. If I did, I would have
objected to.31
xxxx
Prosecutor Zuno:
Q And that, I believe, to your own perception, at that time she was
giving the facts, the answer, in accordance with her recollection?
xxxx
Witness Mercader:
A Your Honor, at that time what I noticed only was the spontaneity of
the answers of Jessica. Of course, I could not tell whether from
where Jessica was basing it. From the recollection or from a
memorize script, I do not know, Your Honor, about that. But
definitely, whenever she was asked a question, she answers them
readily as if she knows the answer personally.32 (emphasis and
underscoring supplied)
_______________
188
xxxx
[T]he issue of the right of petitioners to crossexamine Jessica
Alfaro on the alleged inconsistencies between her first and second
affidavits is too crucial to be simply brushed aside with a
perfunctory application of the general rule adverted to in the
preceding paragraphs. It may bring about a failure of justice.
Consequently, we consider the actuations of respondent judge in
this regard to be reviewable by certiorari under rule 65 of the
Rules of Court. (Emphasis and underscoring supplied)
Under Section 11, Rule 132 of the Rules of Court, an adverse
partys witness may be impeached (1) by contradictory evidence
(2) by evidence that his general reputation for truth, honesty, or
integrity is bad (3) by evidence that he has made at other
times statement inconsistent with his present testimony
and (4) by producing the record of his conviction of an offense.
Insofar as impeachment by evidence of prior inconsistent
statements however, under Section 13 of the same Rule 132, a
proper foundation must first be laid, in that, the attention of the
witness should first be called to such statements, and he should
be asked whether or not he made them, and afforded an
opportunity for explanation, or affirmance, or denial of the
authenticity of the writing. (emphasis and underscoring in the
original)
_______________
189
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 88/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
35 People v. Rodrigo, G.R. No. 176159, September 11, 2008, 564 SCRA
584, 586.
36 Records, Vol. 17, pp. 186196. Webb argued that:
xxxx
7. Since the semen specimen is still in the custody and possession of
the NBI, accused Webb moves for the submission of the semen evidence to
a DNA analysis by a USgovernment or US government accredited
forensic laboratory, preferably the Federal Bureau of Investigation,
Washington, D.C. If granted, accused Webb reserves his right to be
presented at all stages of the DNA typing process and to have access to
the results thereof.
xxxx
37 Id., at pp. 502529.
38 Records, Vol. 18, pp. 256259.
39 G.R. No. 112229, March 18, 1997, 270 SCRA 1, 3.
190
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 89/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
191
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 90/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
40
41 People v. Tajada, G.R. No. 147200, December 17, 2002, 394 SCRA
159, 166 Monteverde v. People, G.R. No. 139610, August 12, 2002, 387
SCRA 196, 215.
42 People v. Abellanosa, G.R. No. 121195, November 27, 1996, 264
SCRA 722, 746747.
43 People v. Peruelo, No. L50631, June 29, 1981, 105 SCRA 226238.
44 People v. Domingo, G.R. No. 184958, September 17, 2009, 600 SCRA
280.
45 G.R. Nos. 13887475, February 3, 2004, 421 SCRA 530.
192
the crime and the personalities involved. From the time the
charges were filed, the case has captured the publics
interest that an unusual amount of air time and print
space have been devoted to it. Of late, with the publics
renewed interest after the case was submitted for decision,
key personalities have again been unabashedly publicizing
their opinions and commenting even on the merits of the
case before various forms of media. A Senior Justice of this
Court, who was a witness in the case (while he was in
private law practice) and who consequently inhibited
himself from participation, was even publicly maligned in
the print and broadcast media through unsupported
speculations about his intervention in the case. That was
how bad and how low comments about the case had been.
In essence, the sub judice rule restricts comments and
disclosures pertaining to pending judicial proceedings. The
restriction applies not only to participants in the pending
case, i.e., to members of the bar and bench, and to litigants
and witnesses, but also to the public in general, which
necessarily includes the media. Although the Rules of
193
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 92/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
194
_______________
2 A.M. No. RTJ021698, June 23, 2005, 461 SCRA 12, 2425, citing
Choa v. Chiongson, A.M. No. MTJ951063, August 9, 1996, 260 SCRA
477, 484485.
3 Law Reform CommissionNew South Wales, Discussion Paper 43
(2000)Contempt by Publication,
http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lrc.nsf/pages/dp43chp02, last visited
December 9, 2010.
195
_______________
196
_______________
197
_______________
198
_______________
199
_______________
200
DISSENTING OPINION
The Case
_______________
201
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 100/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
The Facts
_______________
202
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 101/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
203
_______________
9 TSN, October 10, 1995, pp. 7981 and 9399 (Records, Vol. 4, pp. 253
255, 267273).
10 TSN, October 18, 1995, pp. 1819, 2740, 54 and 6263 (Records, Vol.
4, pp. 943944, 953966, 980 and 988989) TSN, October 30, 1995, pp. 27
29 (Records, Vols. 5 & 6, pp. 900902) TSN, November 8, 1995, pp. 91,
114, 117118 (Records, Vol. 6, pp. 395, 418 and 421422) TSN, October 16,
1995, pp. 142143 (Records, Vol. 4, pp. 694695) Exhibit A, Records, Vol.
8, p. 508.
11 TSN, October 10, 1995, pp. 99103 (Records, Vol. 4, pp. 273278).
12 Pictures of the Vizconde house at Records, Vol. 1, pp. 8287.
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 103/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
204
_______________
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 104/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
18 TSN, October 10, 1995, pp. 3653 (Records, Vol. 4, pp. 589607).
205
_______________
19 Id., at pp. 4072, 7576 (Id., at pp. 593625, 628 to 628A) TSN,
January 25, 1996, pp. 1415 TSN, February 26, 1996, pp. 104106.
206
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 106/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
20 TSN, October 10, 1995, pp. 7697 (Records, Vol. 4, pp. 628A to 649)
May 22, 1995 Affidavit, Records, Vol. l, p. 96.
21 Id., at pp. 97104 (Id. at pp. 649656) TSN, February 19, 1996, pp.
639 May 22, 1995 Affidavit, Records, Vol. 1, pp. 9798.
207
_______________
208
_______________
209
the three (3) vehicles in (Mike was in the first car). That
was actually the second time he saw Mike and his
barkada that night because he had earlier seen them at
Vinzons St. near the Gatchalian residence. However, he
could no longer remember the precise time he saw the
group on these two (2) instances.30
White, Jr. further testified that on the night of June 30,
1991, policemen took him from the Pitong Daan
Subdivision Homeowners Association and brought him to
the Paraaque Municipal Building. Biong was forcing him
to admit that he was one (1) of those who
_______________
210
_______________
211
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 111/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
33 TSN, March 14, 1996, pp. 12, 1525, 4145, 48, 5154, 6364 TSN,
March 18, 1996, pp. 8897.
34 TSN, March 14, 1996, pp. 7989, 103104.
212
_______________
213
_______________
214
room and on the top of the dining table they saw a shoulder
bag and scattered next to it were various items such as
Carmelas ATM card, her drivers license and calling cards.
Biong proceeded to the main door and removed its chain
lock. When they came out towards the garage area, Biong
saw a stone by the window. He then asked Capt. Bartolome
to go inside the room of the two (2) maids to see for himself
if indeed the noise of the breaking glass could not be heard.
When Capt. Bartolome was already inside the middle room,
Biong shattered the remaining glass of the main door with
the butt of his gun. When Biong asked if he could hear it,
Capt. Bartolome answered in the affirmative. Biong next
inspected the garage where he saw the footmarks on the
cars hood Biong also found fingerprints on the electric
bulb. She was just beside Biong at the time. They followed
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 114/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
215
only Biong who went inside the said house as she waited in
a taxicab. In both instances, Biong came out of the house
with an envelope containing an undisclosed amount of
money. She remembered this because when she was
already staying in Pangasinan on December 7, 1995, she
saw flashed on ABSCBNs TV Patrol News 7:00 p.m.
newscast on television, a video footage of the house of
Senator Webb. She was certain it was that house where
Biong went and came out carrying cash in an envelope.43
Lauro G. Vizconde, husband of Estrellita and father of
Carmela and Jennifer, testified on the personal
circumstances of the victims. At the time of their deaths,
Estrellita was engaged in business (at one time or another
she was a garment manufacturer, taxi operator, canteen
owner and local employment recruiter), Carmela was a
graduating B.S. Psychology student at the University of
Santo Tomas, while Jennifer was a Grade I pupil at
Bloomfield Academy at BF Resort, Las Pias, Metro
Manila. He left the Philippines in November 1989 to work
in the United States of America. He had not since returned
to the countryuntil this unfortunate tragedy befell his
familybut communicated with his wife through telephone
once or twice a month.44
Lauro G. Vizconde further testified that his daughter,
when she was still alive, was so close to him that she
confides her daily activi
_______________
216
_______________
217
Defense Evidence
The accused chiefly assailed the credibility of
prosecution star witness Alfaro, in particular her execution
of two (2) allegedly inconsistent affidavits (one on April 28,
1995 and another on May 22, 1995) and raised alibi and
denial as defenses to the charge of rape with homicide
attended by conspiracy. During the trial, no less than 95
witnesses47 were presented, and voluminous documentary
exhibits were submitted.
The testimonies of the principal witnesses for the
defense are summarized as follows:
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 117/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
218
_______________
219
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 119/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
220
_______________
221
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 121/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
222
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 122/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 123/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
223
_______________
224
_______________
77 Exhibit 338
78 Exhibits 341 and 342, Records, Vol. 21, pp. 69, 40, 6365, 112,
140, 141145 (Vol. 3).
79 Exhibits 369 and 364, Records, Vol. 21, pp. 24, 104142 (Vol. 4).
80 Exhibits 207 to219.
81 Exhibit 207B.
82 Exhibit 212D, Records, Vol. 21, p. 265 (Vol. 1).
83 Exhibit 260.
84 Exhibit 261.
85 Exhibit 262.
86 Exhibit 192, Records, Vol. 21, pp. 253279 (Vol. 1), 17, 157, 158,
169 (Vol. 2), 194 (Vol. 1).
87 Exhibit 215 215B 215C, Records, Vol. 21, pp. 254256, 272
274 (Vol. 1).
88 Exhibit 216 TSN, April 1517, 1997.
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 125/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
225
_______________
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 126/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
226
_______________
227
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 128/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
228
_______________
98 TSN, August 6, 1996, pp. 1341 TSN, May 22, 1997, pp. 72, 81131,
142157 Exhibits 274 and 275.
99 TSN, November 12, 1997, pp. 78, 1719, 3843, 5572.
229
_______________
230
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 131/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
accused to jointly and severally pay the victims surviving heir, Mr.
Lauro Vizconde, the following sums by way of civil indemnity:
1. The amount of P150,000.00 for wrongful death of the victims
2. The amount of P762,450.00 representing actual damages
sustained by Mr. Lauro Vizconde
_______________
231
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 132/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
232
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 133/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
233
_______________
234
Appellants Arguments
Appellants Webb and Lejano set forth the following
arguments in their Supplemental Appeal Brief as grounds
for the reversal of the CA Decision and their acquittal in
this case:
I
THE EVIDENCE ESTABLISHING APPELLANT WEBBS ABSENCE
FROM PHILIPPINE TERRITORY BETWEEN 9 MARCH 1991 AND 27
OCTOBER 1992 ENGENDERS A REASONABLE DOUBT AND
PRECLUDES AN ABIDING CONVICTION, TO A MORAL
CERTAINTY, OF HIS GUILT OF THE CRIME CHARGED. THUS, AS
CORRECTLY APPRECIATED BY JUSTICES TAGLE AND DACUDAO
IN THEIR SEPARATE DISSENTING OPINIONS
A. THE PASSPORT OF APPELLANT WEBB, AS THE OFFICIAL
TRAVEL DOCUMENT ISSUED BY THE PHILIPPINE
GOVERNMENT TO HIM, IS STAMPMARKED AND INITIALED
WITH THE DEPARTURE DATE OF 9 MARCH 1991 AND
ARRIVAL DATE OF 27 OCTOBER 1992, SHOWING THAT HE
WAS NOT IN THE PHILIPPINES BUT ABROAD AT THE TIME
OF THE COMMISSION OF THE CRIME ON 29 JUNE 1991.
B. THE CERTIFICATIONS AND COMPUTER PRINTOUT
ISSUED BY THE UNITED STATES INS NONIMMIGRANT
INFORMATION SYSTEM, WHICH INDICATE EXACTLY THE
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 135/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
235
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 136/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
I
THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN GIVING CREDENCE TO
THE INCREDIBLE TESTIMONY OF SUPPOSED EYEWITNESS
JESSICA AL
_______________
236
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 137/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
237
V
MICHAEL GATCHALIAN RESPECTFULLY INVOKES HIS
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS ON THE GROUNDS
OF BIAS AND PREJUDICE, AND FOR ALL THAT IT IS WORTH, HIS
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO A SPEEDY TRIAL AND A SPEEDY
DISPOSITION OF HIS CASE.109
_______________
238
_______________
111 People v. Comanda, G.R. No. 175880, July 6, 2007, 526 SCRA 689.
112 People v. Pringas, G.R. No. 175928, August 31, 2007, 531 SCRA
828.
113 People v. De Guzman, G.R. No. 173197, April 24, 2007, 522 SCRA
207.
239
_______________
240
_______________
115 People v. Comiling, G.R. No. 140405, March 4, 1004, 424 SCRA
698, 719, citing Francisco, Evidence, Vol. VII, 1990 ed., p. 743.
241
_______________
116 People v. Simon, G.R. No. 130531, May 27, 2004, 429 SCRA 330,
352, citing People v. Rostata, G.R. No. 91482, February 9, 1993, 218 SCRA
657.
242
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 143/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
117 People v. Zinampan, G.R. No. 126781, September 13, 2000, 340
SCRA 189, 200.
118 Fukuzume v. People, G.R. No. 143647, November 11, 2005, 474
SCRA 570.
119 G.R. No. 12103945, January 25, 1999, 302 SCRA 21.
120 Id., at p. 50.
243
_______________
121 TSN, October 17, 1995, pp.1215, 23, 4041, 139, 152, 161 TSN,
October 18, 1995, p. 180 TSN, July 2, 1996, pp. 74, 8286 TSN, July 11,
1996, pp. 4352.
122 People v. Pineda, G.R. No. 141644, May 27, 2004, 429 SCRA 478,
495, citing People v. Quima, No. L74669, 14 April 1988, 159 SCRA 613
citing People v. Alto, 135 Phil. 136 26 SCRA 342 (1968).
244
_______________
123 People v. Rodrigo, G.R. No. 176159, September 11, 2008, 564 SCRA
584, 597.
124 People v. Meneses, G.R. No. 11742, March 26, 1998, 288 SCRA 95,
97, citing People v. Teehankee, Jr., 319 Phil. 128, 179 249 SCRA 54, 94
(1995).
245
_______________
125 People v. Magallanes, G.R. No. 136299, August 29, 2003, 410 SCRA
183, 197.
126 People v. Rodrigo, supra at p. 596.
127 People v. Mosquerra, G.R. No. 129209, August 9, 2001, 362 SCRA
441, 450, citing People v. Batidor, G.R. No. 126027, February 18, 1999,
303 SCRA 335, 350 People v. Realin, G.R. No. 126051, January 21, 1999,
301 SCRA 495, 512 People v. Tulop, G.R. No. 124829, November 21, 1998,
289 SCRA 316, 333.
128 Id., at p. 450, citing People v. Saban, G.R. No. 110559, November
24, 1999, 319 SCRA 36, 46 People v. Reduca, G.R. Nos. 12609495,
January 21,
246
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 147/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
1999, 301 SCRA 516, 534 and People v. De Labajan, G.R. Nos. 12996869,
October 27, 1999, 317 SCRA 566, 575.
129 Id., at p. 451, citing People v. Hillado, G.R. No. 122838, May 24,
1999, 307 SCRA 535, 553 and People v. Balmoria, G.R. Nos. 12062021,
March 20, 1998, 287 SCRA 687, 708.
130 People v. Florentino Bracamonte, G.R. No. 95939, June 17, 1996, as
cited in People v. Aonuevo, G.R. No. 112989, September 18, 1996, 262
SCRA 22, 36.
247
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 148/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
248
hap also testified that on the same evening of July 16, 1997, at
about 8:00 oclock, she saw Marijoy and Jacqueline talking to two
(2) men at the West Entry of Ayala Center. She recognized the
two (2) men as Larraaga and Josman, having seen them several
times at Glicos, a game zone, located across her office at the third
level of Ayala Center. Williard Redobles, the security guard then
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 149/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
132 En Banc Resolution, July 21, 2005, 463 SCRA 654, 662664.
249
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 150/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
250
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 151/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
tions which the said office issued regarding the basic information
under its direct control and custody.
It is to be remembered that as part of his evidence, Webb
presented the explanation of one Steven P. Bucher, Acting Chief
of Records Services Branch of the U.S. INS, who admitted that
the U.S. INS had previously reported on August 10, 1995,
erroneously, that it had no record of the arrival and departure of
Webb to and from the United States. The said office later on
admitted that it failed to exhaustively study all information
available to it. We are not convinced with this explanation. It is to
be noted that the U.S. INS is an agency well known for its
stringent criteria and rigid procedure in handling documents
relating to ones travel into and out of its territory. Such being the
case, it would therefore be hard to imagine that the said agency
would issue a certification that it had no record of a persons entry
into and exit from the United States without first conducting an
efficient verification of its records.
We do not also believe that a second search could give rise to a
different conclusion, considering that there is no showing that the
records searched were different from those viewed in the first
search. The later certifications issued by the U.S. INS modifying
its first certification and which was issued only a few weeks
earlier, come across as a strained effort by Webb at establishing
his presence in the United States in order to reinforce his flimsy
alibi.
It is not amiss to note that a reading of the first Certificate of
Nonexistence of Record (Exhibit 212D) subscribed by Debora
A. Farmer of the U.S. INS would show that the U.S. INS had
made a diligent search, and found no record of admission into
the United States of Webb. The search allegedly included an
inquiry into the automated and nonautomated records systems of
the U.S. INS. Be it also noted that the basis of the U.S. INS
second certification (Exhibit 218) was a printout coming also
from automated information systems.
As pointed out by the Office of the Solicitor General in its
appeal brief, how it became possible for the U.S. INS
Archives in Washington, which is supposed to merely
download and copy the information given by the San
Francisco INS, to have an entry on accusedappellant
Webb when the said port of entry had no such record was
never sufficiently addressed by the defense.
It is with this view that the Court recognizes little if not nil
probative value in the second certification of the U.S. INS.
xxxx
(b) Passenger Manifest of United Airlines Flight
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 152/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
251
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 153/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
252
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 154/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
concert has little probative value. It must be pointed out that the
image in the picture itself does not depict the date or place
it was taken, or of any Dee Lite concert allegedly attended
by Webb. Likewise, we observed that the photograph appears to
have been trimmed down from a bigger size, possibly to
remove the date printed therein. It is also to be noted that
Esguerra admitted
253
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 155/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
del Toro, and therefore, are not reliable proofs of Webbs presence
and occupation in the United States around the time of the
Vizconde killing.
The alleged check payments of Webbs salary are also
unreliable. The check dated June 13, 1991 was made payable to
Cash, while the other check which appeared to be payable to
Hubert Webb was however dated only July 10, 1991. Neither of
the said checks squarely placed accusedappellant Webb in
the United States at the time of the Vizconde kill
254
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 156/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
255
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 157/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
256
_______________
257
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 159/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
258
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 160/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
139 People v. Malones, G.R. No. 12438890, March 11, 2004, 425 SCRA
318, 339340, citing People v. Aliposa, G.R. No. 97935, October 23, 1996,
263 SCRA 471.
140 Soriano v. People, G.R. No. 148123, June 30, 2008, 556 SCRA 595,
605.
141 Fernan, Jr. v. People, G.R. No. 145927, August 24, 2007, 531 SCRA
1, 31, citing People v. Balacano, G.R. No, 127156, July 31, 2000, 336 SCRA
615, 621.
259
_______________
260
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 162/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
143 Exhibits YY, DDD and 2131D, Records, Vol. 9, pp. 1142,
1147 and Records, Vol. 26, p. 270.
144 Exhibits XX and LLL, Records, Vol. 9, pp. 1141 and 1157.
161
_______________
145 Exhibits 30, 33 and 34, Records, Vol. 9, pp. 708, 711713.
146 Cited by reference in Exhibit III, Records, Vol. 9, p. 1154.
You were informed by the San Francisco District Office of the
Immigration and Naturalization Service that no records responsive to you
request could be located in its file. It has been determined that this
response is correct. For your information, the INS normally does not
maintain records on individuals who are entering the country as visitors
rather than as immigrants. A notation concerning the entry of a visitor
may be made in the Nonimmigrant Information System (NIIS), but many
visitors are not entered into this system. The NIIS was searched,
and no records pertaining to Mr. Webb are found. I am informed by
the San Francisco District Office that this matter is still pending in that
office and that a formal response to your request will be issued shortly.
It is possible that either the State Department or the United States
Customs Service might have information concerning Mr. Webbs entry
into the country. I suggest you write to those agencies to request the
information you seek.
262
_______________
147 Vide: Soriano v. People, G.R. No. 148123, June 30, 2008, 556 SCRA
595, 604.
148 Exhibit 42M, Records, Vol. 9, p. 440.
263
_______________
264
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 166/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
265
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 167/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
On August 14, 1997, [Webb] testified that he did not make any
application since the procedure in California provides for a walk
in system, that he did not submit any photograph relative to his
application for a Californian Drivers License, inasmuch as a
photograph of him was taken, and that, his drivers license was
issued sometime on the first week of June, 1991. On the other
hand, on September 1, 1997, the accused suddenly and completely
changed his testimony while still on direct examination. He
claims that the picture appearing on the drivers license was the
very same he submitted together with his application for the
drivers license. Thus, the discrepancy as to the source of the
photograph (Exhibit 334E) between the testimony given on
August 14, 1997 where the accused Webb said that the California
Department of Motor Vehicle took his picture, and the testimony
given on September 1, 1997 where he said that he submitted it to
the California DMV as an attachment to his supposed drivers
license application renders the accused Webbs testimony as
unbelievable and unworthy of credence.
It is beyond belief that the same picture submitted by the
accused Webb became the picture in the drivers license allegedly
issued on June 14, 1991. Moreover, it is contrary to human nature
and experience, aside from the fact that it is likewise contrary to
the procedure described by the accused Webb in obtaining a
drivers license in the State of California. Since a drivers license
is one of the principal means of identification in the United States
as well as in the Philippines, to allow the applicants to produce
their own pictures would surely defeat the purpose in requiring
them to appear before the Department of Motor Vehicle, that is, to
ensure the integrity and genuineness of the drivers license.
The Court takes note that the accused Webb, in his fervent
desire to exculpate himself from criminal liability, earlier offered
in evidence the letter dated January 10, 1992 of Mr. Robert
L. Heafner, Legal Attache of the Embassy of the United
States to the then Director of the National Bureau of
Investigation, Alfredo S. Lim, (Exhibit 61) which stated in very
clear terms that the accused Webbs California Drivers
License Number A8818707 was issued on August 9, 1991.
Furthermore, the said letter states the listed address of the
accused Webb at the time of the issuance of the drivers license
was 532 So. Avenida Faro Ave., Anaheim, California 92807. The
said listed address of the accused Webb at the time his drivers
license was issued has demolished the testimony of the defense
witness Sonia Rodriguez that the accused Webb was supposed to
be already living with the Rodriguez family in Longwood, Florida
by the first week of August, 1991.
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 168/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
266
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 169/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
267
_______________
268
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 171/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
269
_______________
270
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 173/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
271
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 174/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
272
_______________
273
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 176/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
166 People v. Sicad, G.R. No. 133833, October 15, 2002, 391 SCRA 19,
34, citing People v. Diaz, G.R. No. 110829, April 18, 1997, 271 SCRA 504,
515 and People v. Abordo, G.R. No. 107245, December 17, 1999, 321 SCRA
23, 39.
167 CA Rollo, Vol. IV, p. 3081.
168 People v. Antonio, G.R. No. 128900, July 14, 2000, 335 SCRA 646,
677, citing People v. Malvenda, G.R. No. 115351, March 27, 1998, 288
SCRA 225.
274
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 177/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
169 People v. Magana, G.R. No. 105673, July 26, 1996, 259 SCRA 381,
402.
276
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 179/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
277
appreciated for the first time on appeal and (d) this Court
failed to elucidate an exceptional circumstance to justify its
decision to consider a question of fact, as this Court itself
acknowledged in its April 20, 2010 Resolution that the
result of DNA testing is not crucial or indispensable in the
determination of appellant Webbs guilt for the crime
charged.173
On May 21, 2010, Atty. Roberto Makalintal, Jr., Branch
Clerk of RTC Paraaque City, Branch 274, submitted his
Comment on The Compliance and Manifestation Dated
April 27, 2010 of the NBI stating that: (a) There is no
showing of actual receipt by RTC Branch 274 of the
specimen/vaginal smear mentioned in Dr. Cabanayans
affidavit dated April 27, 2010 (b) Based on available
records such as the TSN of January 31, 1996 and February
7, 1996 during which Dr. Caba
_______________
278
within ten days from notice. However, the NBI has not
complied with said directive.
In his Comment on the OSGs motion for
reconsideration, appellant Fernandez argued that when
this Court, in the higher interest of justice, relaxed the
Rule on DNA Evidence to afford Webb the fullest extent of
his constitutional rights, the prosecution was not thereby
denied its equally important right to due process. Contrary
to the OSGs claim that this Court immediately granted
DNA testing without observing the requisites under
Section 4 of the Rule on DNA Evidence, and without due
notice and hearing, appellant asserts that the Resolution
dated April 20, 2010 clearly defines the parameters of the
DNA analysis to be conducted by the UPNSRI assisted by
the NBI. Indeed, there are ample safeguards in the Rule to
assure the reliability and acceptability of the results of the
DNA testing. Fernandez, however, objected to the
statement of the OSG that in the light of positive
identification of appellant Webb by the principal witness
for the prosecution, Jessica Alfaro, the existing
circumstances more than
_______________
279
_______________
280
_______________
178 See City Prosecution Office of General Santos City v. Bersales, A.M.
No. MTJ041552, June 9, 2004, 431 SCRA 430, 436.
179 Id., at p. 432.
281
_______________
180 149 Misc. 2d 844, 570 N.Y.S. 2d 765 (Sup. Ct. Westchester Co.
1990).
181 467 U.S. 479 (1984).
182 373 U.S. 83 (1963).
282
_______________
183 Id.
283
_______________
284
_______________
285
can be left on the victims body or at the crime scene. Hair and
fiber from clothing, carpets, bedding, or furniture could also be
transferred to the victims body during the assault. Forensic DNA
evidence is helpful in proving that there was physical contact
between an assailant and a victim. If properly collected from the
victim, crime scene or assailant, DNA can be compared with
known samples to place the suspect at the scene of the crime.
The U.P. National Science Research Institute (NSRI), which
conducted the DNA tests in this case, used the Polymerase chain
reaction (PCR) amplification method by Short Tandem Repeat
(STR) analysis. With PCR testing, tiny amounts of a specific DNA
sequence can be copied exponentially within hours. Thus, getting
sufficient DNA for analysis has become much easier since it
became possible to reliably amplify small samples using the PCR
method.
In assessing the probative value of DNA evidence,
courts should consider, inter alia, the following factors:
how the samples were collected, how they were handled, the
possibility of contamination of the samples, the procedure
followed in analyzing the samples, whether the proper standards
and procedures were followed in conducting the tests, and the
qualification of the analyst who conducted the tests.
In the case at bar, Dr. Maria Corazon Abogado de Ungria was
duly qualified by the prosecution as an expert witness on DNA
print or identification techniques. Based on Dr. de Ungrias
testimony, it was determined that the gene type and DNA profile
of appellant are identical to that of the extracts subject of
examination. The blood sample taken from the appellant showed
that he was of the following gene types: vWA 15/19, TH01 7/8,
DHFRP2 9/10 and CSF1PO 10/11, which are identical with semen
taken from the victims vaginal canal. Verily, a DNA match exists
between the semen found in the victim and the blood sample
given by the appellant in open court during the course of the trial.
Admittedly, we are just beginning to integrate these advances
in science and technology in the Philippine criminal justice
system, so we must be cautious as we traverse these relatively
unchartered waters. Fortunately, we can benefit from the wealth
of persuasive jurisprudence that has developed in other
jurisdictions. Specifically, the prevailing doctrine in the U.S. has
proven instructive.
In Daubert v. Merrell Dow, it was ruled that pertinent
evidence based on scientifically valid principles could be
used as long as it
286
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 189/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 190/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
287
_______________
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 191/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
288
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 192/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
289
in fact raped and not that Webb was the source of the
sperm/semen. As noted by the RTC when it denied Webbs
motion for DNA on November 25, 1997, prevailing
jurisprudence stated that DNA being a relatively new
science then, has not yet been accorded official recognition
by our courts. The RTC also considered the more than six
(6) years that have elapsed since the commission of the
crime in June 1991, thus the possibility of the specimen
having been tampered with or contaminated. Acting on
reasonable belief that the proposed DNA examination will
not serve the ends of justice but
290
_______________
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 194/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
191 People v. Bato, G.R. No. 134939, February 16, 2000, 325 SCRA 671,
678, citing People v. Juntilla, G.R. No. 130604, September 16, 1999, 314
SCRA 568, 583 People v. Sacapao, G.R. No. 130525, September 3, 1999,
313 SCRA 650, 659 and People v. Manuel, G.R. No. 121539, October 21,
1998, 298 SCRA 184.
192 People v. Pascual, G.R. No. 172326, January 19, 2009, 576 SCRA
242, 260, citing People v. Sevilleno, G.R. No. 152954, March 10, 2004, 425
SCRA 247, 257.
193 Nueva Espaa v. People, G.R. No. 163351, June 21, 2005, 460
SCRA 547, 555556, citing People v. Opuran, G.R. Nos. 14767475, March
17, 2004, 425 SCRA 654, 673.
194 G.R. No. 166723, August 2, 2007, 529 SCRA 109, 118.
291
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 195/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
SERENO, J.:
The duty of the prosecution is not merely to
secure a conviction, but to secure a just conviction.
This highly publicized case became the center of the
nations attention owing to the public outrage over the
atrocious nature of the crime committed in what was then
thought to be a relatively secure
_______________
195 People v. Arellano, G.R. No. 176640, August 22, 2008, 563 SCRA
181, 189.
196 Id.
197 People v. Pascual, supra at pp. 260261.
198 Nueva Espaa v. People, supra at p. 558.
292
_______________
293
_______________
294
_______________
7 The Prosecution Role in Upholding the Right to a Fair Trial and Responding
to Victims/Witnesses, The Prosecutor Papers, November 2005 at p. 10.
8 R v. Boucher, (1954) S.C.R. 16.
9 Stuart, Don, CHARTER JUSTICE IN CANADIAN CRIMINAL LAW, 2001, p. 7.
10 G.R. No. 113630, 5 May 1994, 232 SCRA 192.
295
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 199/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
296
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 200/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
297
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 201/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
13 G.R. No. 127262, 24 July 1997, 276 SCRA 243 342 Phil. 206.
298
299
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 203/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
300
301
Section 14:
(1) No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense
without due process of law.
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 205/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
302
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 206/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
304
305
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 210/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 211/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
307
_______________
308
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 213/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
309
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 214/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
_______________
20 G.R. No. 125901, 8 March 2001, 406 Phil. 449 354 SCRA 17.
21 G.R. No. 150224, 19 May 2004, 428 SCRA 504.
22 Resolution dated 20 April 2010.
310
_______________
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 215/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
was in its infancy, still embroiled in litigation over its reliability and
admissibility.
In the two decades since it was first used, forensic DNA typing has
continued to progress. At this point, scientists have developed three
generations of tests. The current, dominant generation of technology is the
polymerase chain reaction (PCR). This approach analyzes DNA taken
from the nucleus of a cell. PCR allows the DNA in a biological sample to
be replicated only a minute amount of DNA is needed and the sample
from which it comes can be highly degraded. Only a few cells are required
for reliable results. Usable DNA can be recovered from a myriad of items,
including computer keyboards, hats, bandannas, eyeglasses, facial tissue,
cotton swabs, dirty laundry, toothpicks, chewing gum, cigarette butts,
envelope seals, the mouths of bottles, the rims of glasses, or urine stains.
311
are now only eight (8) states that have not adopted
statutes allowing postconviction DNA testing,25 with some
requiring the correlative duty to preserve DNA evidence.
So far, 261 convicts in the United
_______________
available. Among other things, mtDNA has identified one of the unknown
soldiers in the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier in Arlington National
Cemetery, the remains of Czar Nicholas II and his family, and the likely
offspring of Thomas Jefferson and Sally Heming.
Since 1985, the field of forensic DNA typing has continued to progress.
Emerging Ychromosome analysis focuses on variations in male genetic
material it may prove to be helpful in sexual assault cases involving
multiple male perpetrators. Handheld or portable devices with labsona
chip may be developed that allow for rapid DNA testing at a crime scene.
Robotic systems are already being used to help process DNA samples.
Similarly, computer software compares and interprets STR data. In short,
forensic DNA typing will continue to become increasingly automated,
faster, cheaper, and more accurate. This, in turn, ought to affect the due
process calculus when the state loses or destroys potentially exculpatory
evidence. The context in which such problems arise today is entirely
different than when Youngblood was decided. (Citations omitted.)
312
_______________
313
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 218/222
8/21/2016 SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME638
Due process must also take into account the burdens that the
preservation of evidence places on the police. Law enforcement
officers must be provided the
_______________
314
315
_______________
316
Copyright2016CentralBookSupply,Inc.Allrightsreserved.
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000156ac84ceb838b91ecc003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 222/222