THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE, VS. EMILIANO AGCAOILI ET AL., DEFENDANTS. EMILIANO AGCAOILI, SEVERINO TOMAS, MARTIN DIEGO, CORNELIO CORPUZ, AND ALFREDO BA…

On and prior to July 15, 1947, Vicenta Alcon and her son Domingo
Durupan, Jr. lived in the house of. Jeremias and Bleuterio Durupan in
the Barrio of San Jose, municipality of Banna, Ilocos Norte, Jeremias
and Eleuterio being respectively the father-in-law and brother-in-law
of Vicenta. In the evening of said date, Vicenta and Domingo were
killed while sleeping in the sala of. the house-by the explosion of a
hand grenade. None of the other inmates .sleeping in the house was
harmed. The incident was not investigated until the next morning, July
16,. 1947. The inquiry conducted by the justice, of the peace; resulted
in the investigation of Mariano Manzanillo who, though at first falling
to reveal anything, finally incriiminated Emiliano Agcaoili and other
residents of barrio San Lorenzo. This caused the justice of the peace
to have Emiliano and other male residents of San Lorenzo brought to
him. The persons concerned were taken to the municipal building in the
morning of July 17, 1947, where they were lined up. Mariano Manzanillo
thereby pointed to Emiliano Agcaoili, Severino Tomas, Martin Diego,
Cornelio Corpus and Alfredo Barruga, as his (Mariano’s) companions in
the commission of the crime. Mariano admitted his participation in a
confession, Ezhibit 1. An information was filed charging Emiliano
Agcaolli, Severino Tomas, Martin Diego, Cornelio Corpus, Alfredo
Barruga and Mariano Manzanillo with the crime of double murder. Another
information was filed against Emiliano Agcaoili for a violation of
Republic Act No. Mf, for unlicensed possession of a hand granade. The
fiscal subsequently moved for the discharge of Mariano Manzanillo in
order that he might fee utilized as a witness for the prosecution,
which motion was granted.

The evidence for the prosecution, mainly through the testimony of
Mariano Manzanillo, tends to prove that in the evening of July 15,
1947, Emiliano Agcaoili and his co-accused went to Mariano’s house in
barrio Rawrawang. Upon their request, Mariano gave them one bottle of basi
wine, and each drank a big glassful. Emiliano then invited Mariano to
go south, for a walk. While, at first declining, Mariano finally
consented to go with the accused. After covering some distance,
Emiliano manifested that they were going to throw a hand granade into
the house of Durupan, whereupon Mariano indicated his desire to return
home. Emiliano and his-companions, however, objected, the former
threatening to kill Mariano with his hand granade. Mariano was
therefore forced to accompany the accused. Upon arriving at the house
in question, the accused stopped in front of a window on the
northeastern.side of the house, and Emiliano was raised to the window
sill by his co-accused. Emiliano then opened the .window. A few moments
later, after using his flashlight, Emiliano Agcaoili threw the hand
granade inside the house, after which they all ran away. Shortly
thereafter they heard an explosion.

The defense put up by the accused is that they were in the barrio
of San Lorenzo, municipality of Banna, in the evening of July 15, 1947.
The Court of First Instance of Ilocos Norte, relying on the testimony
of Mariano Manzanillo and on the confessions of the accused, found
Emiliano guilty as principal of double murder and sentenced him to
death, to indemnify the heirs of each of the deceased in the sum of
P2,000, with subsidiary liability, in case of insolvency of his
co-accused, for their portion in the indemnity of P1,000 to the heirs
of each of the two deceased. The accused Severino Tomas, Martin Diego,
Cornelio Corpus and Alfredo Barruga were found guilty as accomplices
and sentenced each to suffer an indeterminate penalty of from 10 years
of prision mayor to 17 years and 4 months of reclusion temporal,
to indemnify jointly and severally the heirs of each of the deceased in
the sum of P1,000. In the ease for unlicensed possession of a hand
granade, Emiliano Agcaoili was also found guilty and sentenced to a
penalty of from 5 years to 10 years of imprisonment.

There are vital considerations that led us to doubt the guilt of
the herein appellants. The record does not reveal any sufficient motive
for the appellants to kill, much less by a hand granade, Vicenta Alcon
and her son Domingo Durupan, Jr. The trial court appears to have
believed that on one occasion appellants Emiliano Agcaoili, Severino
Tomas and Martin Diego were insulted by the deceased Vicenta Alcon for
trespassing over a rice field, and that on another occasion Vicenta
Alcon, refusing to sell a pig to Emiliano, later sold it to another at
the same price offered by Emiliano. This theory is of little or no
significance, not only because it is established by appellants’
confessions which had been repudiated but also because its effect is
negatived by the evidence tending to show that the deceased Vicenta
Alcon was to receive a pension for the death of her husband who died in
Bataan, and this necessarily leads to the conjecture that the killer or
killers of Vicenta Alcon and her son were those who may have a right to
succeed to said pension. And this cannot be the herein appellants who
are not related to Vicenta and her son or her husband.

The testimony of Mariano Manzanillo cannot be readily accepted. It
comes from a polluted source. It is not pretended by the prosecution
that Mariano and appellant Emiliano Agcoili were in such intimate
relations as to justify Emiliano in seeking the help and cooperation of
Mariano in the commission of the crime. Upon the other hand, Mariano is
from a barrio different from that where the appellants lived, and there
is even evidence tending to show that Mariano on a previous occasion
was maltreated by appellants Emiliano Agcoili, Severino Tomas and
Martin Diego. The fact that Mariano had no sufficient attachment to
Emiliano is further proved by the very testimony of Mariano that ha had
to be compelled by the appellants to join the alleged criminal
expedition.

It is surprising that, notwithstanding the fact that there were
other inmates in the house, only Vicenta Alcon and her son were killed.
It is not improbable that those who killed Vicenta Alcon and her son
were familiar with the layout of the house, such that they were able to
carry out their purpose without injury to any other person. This theory
is of course to be linked to the supposition that the assailants had an
eye on the right to succeed to the pension of the deceased hasband of
Vicenta.

The alleged confessions of the appellants can neither be the basis
of their conviction, in view of their repudiation grounded on torture.
We are inclined to accept the argument of the defense on this point, as
it is supported by the testimony of Dr. Maximiano L. Agbayani who examined
the persons, of appellants on July 21, 1947, or only six days after the
incident in question, and found traces of injuries on appellants’
bodies. It is not pretended that Dr. Agbayani could have any motive for
making a false certification.

The record also shows that the principal witness for the
prosecution, Mariano Manzanillo, made two conflicting affidavits
(Exhibits 1 and 2) in that, while in Exhibit 1 he incriminated the
appellants in the way he testified at the trial, he retracted the
contents of said exhibit in the subsequent affidavit, Exhibit 2. This
is certainly destructive of Mariano’s credibility which cannot easily
be overcome by the explanation of the prosecution that the later
affidavit was obtained through machinations of attorneys for the
defense. The point is that a witness who changes his statements as
often as he wants to suit his convenience, is unreliable. Indeed, it is
also a fact of record that Mariano did not spontaneously incriminate
the appellants, because when he was first questioned by the justice of
the peace, he did not reveal anything and, on the other hand, alleged
that he was in the house of his brothers on the night of July 15, 1947.
Even when he allegedly broke down before the justice of the peace
who.investigated the case, Mariano did not definitely incriminate the
appellants, but merely jointed to Emiliano Agcaoili and others from
barrio San Lorenzo as the possible authors of the crime. All the
accused are from Laoag, a distant municipality, and went to Banna at
the time for the only purpose of planting palay, the season having just
started. They did not even know the family of the deceased.

Upon the whole, the guilt of the herein appellants has not been
proved to a point of moral certainty, and we are therefore constrained
to decree their acquittal.

Wherefore, the appealed judgment is hereby reversed and the appellants are acquitted. So ordered with costs de oficio.

Ozaeta, Pablo, Bengzon, Padilla, and Reyes, JJ., concur.

OZAETA, J.:

I certify that Chief Justice Moran voted for acquittal.