EN
BANC
PEOPLE
OF THE
PHILIPPINES,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
G.
R.
No. L-4565
May
20,
1953
-versus-
APOLONIO
RAIZ,
Defendant-Appellant.
D
E C I S I
O N
BAUTISTA
ANGELO, J :
This
is an appeal from
the Decision of the Court of First Instance of Isabela finding the
accused
Apolonio Raiz and Patricio Rebillos guilty of the crime of murder and
sentencing
each to suffer reclusion perpetua, with the accessory penalties
of the law, to indemnify jointly and severally the heirs of the
deceased
in the amount of P6,000, and to pay one-half of the costs.
From this Decision,
both accused have appealed. Subsequently, however, the appeal
interposed
by Patricio Rebillos was dismissed on the ground that he died while in
confinement in the national penitentiary; hence this appeal only
concerns
the other accused, Apolonio Raiz.
The evidence shows
that on the night of May 13, 1948, while Spouses Alfredo de la Cruz and
Fortunata Fabros were sleeping in their house situated in Barrio
Villafuerte,
San Mateo, Isabela, Apolonio Raiz, who was armed with a pistol, and
Patricio
Rebillos, with other companions, came and without much ado woke up and
brought downstairs Alfredo de la Cruz telling him that he should go
with
them somewhere. De la Cruz followed as bidden and shortly after they
were
gone, his wife Fortunata heard the discharge of a gun towards the
northern
part of their house. As De la Cruz failed to return, on the following
morning,
his wife Fortunata reported the incident to the barrio lieutenant, one
Alba, who considered the matter lightly, as he merely advised her to
see
the Mayor of San Mateo. Hoping that her husband might still return, she
desisted from reporting the matter to the Mayor as above suggested.
She,
however, reported the matter to her landlord.
In the night of the
same day, May 13, 1948, Raiz and Rebillos, then special policemen of
barrio
Salinuñgan, San Mateo, went to the house of one Manuel Lazatin
situated
in barrio Villafuerte and summoned to appear before them some residents
of the neighborhood, among them Pedro Achuela, Gabino Rigor, Gabriel
Achuela,
Anastacio Rigor, Paulino Mañgapit, Antonio Achuela and Dionisio
Urbano. After the seven persons so summoned had appeared, they were
ordered
by Raiz and Rebillos to go with them to help them bury the body of
Alfredo
de la Cruz who, according to Raiz and Rebillos, was killed by them.
Raiz
and Rebillos led them to Barrio Dappig and there they found the
lifeless
body of De la Cruz. He was stretched on the ground with an injury on
the
left lower jaw. His clothes were soaked with blood and his two hands
were
hogtied at his back. The seven men were ordered by Raiz to dig a hole
and
dump the dead body into it. Before leaving, Raiz and Rebillos warned
them
under threats of death not to reveal the occurrence to anybody.
While some members
of the local constabulary, with some policemen, were on patrol to
verify
the killing of one Francisco Corpuz which was reported in an anonymous
letter, they came across with Gabino Rigor, Anastacio Rigor, Gabriel
Achuela,
Pedro Achuela, Antonio Achuela, Manuel Lazatin, Dionisio Urbano and
Paulino
Mañgapit who informed them that they buried the body of Alfredo
de la Cruz near the Dappig creek telling them at the same time that
that
man was killed by Apolonio Raiz and Patricio Rebillos. These men also
stated
that they were ordered by Raiz and Rebillos to bury the dead body.
In the afternoon of
November 25, 1948, these constabulary men with Mayor Cornelio Alipio of
San Mateo, Justice of the Peace Padua and other local officials,
including
Fortunata Fabros, wife of De la Cruz, went to the place where the body
was buried. When the body was exhumed, they found only its remains,
part
of the clothes, a leather belt and a piece of rope. The clothes and the
belt were identified by Fortunata as those worn by her husband when he
was taken from their house by Raiz and Rebillos in the night of May 13,
1948.
The defense of Apolonio
Raiz tends to show that he was a special policeman and as such was
given
a .45 caliber pistol by Mayor Alipio of San Mateo. One night in the
month
of May, 1948, he went to Barrio Victoria to wait for his companions,
among
them Florentino Verzosa and Patricio Rebillos. At dawn his companions
arrived
in the house of Manuel Lazatin. Verzosa and Rebillos informed him that
they caught a huk named Alfredo de la Cruz whom they shot when he
attempted
to escape. Verzosa also informed him that upon his order the body of De
la Cruz was buried at the bank of Dappig creek by Manuel Lazatin, the
Rigor
brothers and the Achuela brothers, in the presence of Patricio Rebillos
and three more persons. The evidence for the defense also shows that
Florentino
Verzosa is a fugitive from justice while Manuel Lazatin has disappeared
and his whereabouts is not known.
Patricio Rebillos on
his part testified that one night in the month of May, 1948, some
special
policemen headed by Wing Verzosa showed up in his house and asked him
to
go along with them to conduct some patrol. Upon nearing the group of
houses
in Barrio Villafuerte, Verzosa told him to wait on the road as he was
going
to get somebody. Shortly thereafter, Verzosa returned with the man and
on their way to Victoria, another barrio, the man tried to escape and
Verzosa
fired killing him. Rebillos asked why he shot the man and Verzosa
replied
that he was a huk. Upon arriving in Victoria, Rebillos and
Verzosa
informed Apolonio Raiz, who was then waiting for them in the house of
Manuel
Lazatin, that Verzosa shot somebody who turned out to be Alfredo de la
Cruz.
The question to be
determined is whether Alfredo de la Cruz was killed by Apolonio Raiz
and
Patricio Rebillos, as claimed by the prosecution, or was shot to death
by Florentino Verzosa, as claimed by the defense. After a careful
examination
of the evidence of record the only conclusion that can be drawn is that
the authors of the killing are Apolonio Raiz and Patricio Rebillos.
This
is so in view of the overwhelming evidence submitted by the
prosecution.
Thus, the straightforward declarations of Gabriel Achuela, Gabino
Rigor,
Pedro Achuela, and Paulino Mangapit to the effect that they, together
with
Anastacio Rigor, Antonio Achuela, Manuel Lazatin and Dionicio Urbano,
were
ordered by Raiz and Rebillos to bury the dead body of Alfredo de la
Cruz
at the bank of Dappig creek, after admitting to them nonchalantly that
they are the ones who shot and killed him, proved conclusively that
Raiz
and Rebillos, and not Florentino Verzosa, are the authors of his death.
The defense has not shown any reason or motive why said witnesses would
testify against them and would impute to them a heinous crime. The
lower
court, who had the opportunity to observe their conduct and demeanor
while
at the witness stand has been highly impressed by the sincere and
straightforward
manner they have given their testimony. It may be argued that it seems
unnatural for Raiz and Rebillos, after committing the dastardly act, to
have ordered other people to bury the body of their victim thus
exposing
themselves to a sure prosecution, but there is nothing strange in such
an attitude considering the fact that Raiz was then a special policeman
and was given instructions by the Mayor of San Mateo to go after the
huks
or the bad people in the vicinity so much so that he was given a .45
caliber
pistol, and must have acted the way he did in the belief that he was
doing
an act of heroism by eliminating a man who was a sympathizer of the
huks.
Be that as it may, the fact remains that the consistent testimony of
said
witnesses points to him in bold relief as the author of the crime.
The evidence for the
prosecution is further strengthened by the testimony of Fortunata
Fabros,
wife of the victim, who categorically affirmed that her husband was
taken
from their house by the two accused in the night of May 13, 1948, and
that
shortly thereafter, she heard the discharge of a gun coming from the
northern
part of said house. Her testimony was given full credit by the Court a
quo.
The pretense of the
accused that it was Florentino Verzosa who shot to death Alfredo de la
Cruz cannot be sustained in the face of some developments that took
place
while this case was under trial. It appears that while the accused Raiz
was then confined in the provincial jail, he wrote a letter to his
brother-in-law,
Constantino Balmoje, wherein he suggested ways and means to weaken the
evidence for the prosecution by urging the prosecution witnesses to
testify
in a manner favorable to him, but he never made any mention in that
letter
of the fact that Verzosa was the author of the killing. This same
letter
also reveals a culpable conscience considering the attempt he has made
to exert pressure on the prosecution witnesses and have them testify in
his favor. It likewise appears that in another letter he wrote to one
Anastacio
Rigor sometime after he had written the first, the accused made mention
for the first time of the claim that it was Verzosa who killed the
victim.
Evidently, this is a mere afterthought concocted at the eleventh hour
in
an effort to secure his exculpation. Moreover, in the confession signed
by Patricio Rebillos, the co-accused of Raiz, when this case was then
being
investigated by the authorities, Rebillos pointed to Raiz as the author
of the crime. While this confession may not be directly introduced in
evidence
against a co-accused, it may nevertheless be taken into consideration
in
passing upon the weight and credibility of the witnesses of opposing
parties
[People vs. Emiliana Go, 88 Phil. 203].
Finding no error in
the Decision appealed from, the same is hereby affirmed as regards the
accused Apolonio Raiz, with costs.
Paras, C.J.,
Feria, Pablo, Bengzon, Tuason, Montemayor, Reyes, Jugo and Labrador, JJ.,
concur. |