THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE, VS. MATIAS ALUPAY, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the Court of First Instance of Ilocos
Norte which found Matias Alupay guilty of murder, under Article 248 of the
Revised Penal Code, and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua, to
indemnify the heirs of the deceased, Timoteo Balbag and Maria Felicitas Agarpao,
in the sum of P4,000 to the accessories of the law, and to pay the costs.

It appears from the evidence that in the latter part of November of the year
1944 when, following the landing of the U.S. forces in Leyte, the tide of the
Japanese control over these Islands was ebbing, a supposed guerrilla unit,
locally known as “Pilpilme,”was operating in the mountains of Vintar and Bangui,
province of Ilocos Norte.

Matias Alupay, also known as “Apo Matias,” was the local chief of the
“Pilpilme,” whose reputation for being responsible for the killing of people at
the behest of its leaders had so impressed the barrio folks that Matias Alupay’s
commands were the law among the men under him.

About sunset, one day in November, 1944, Alupay, accompanied by three men,
called at the houses of Pacifico Ravina and Ricardo Aldos, respectively, in
barrio No. 6, Alao-ao, municipality of Vintar, Ilocos Norte, and under threat of
death compelled them to join his organization as soldiers. In Paddaggan, Alupay
instructed Pacifico Ravina and Ricardo Aldos to fetch from their house Timoteo
Balbag and his wife Maria Felicitas Agarpao, on the pretext that the two victims
shall accompany the group in going to Gabayu. Reluctantly the old spouses
obeyed, joined the party and went on the winding mountain trail to Cabayu.

In the meantime Alupay had separated from the group to rejoin it later,
accompanied by Rufo Balbag, son of the old man Timoteo. Upon reaching the
sitio of Mabilag-Apinas, on the boundary line between Vintar and
Bangui, Alupay, who was giving orders, commanded every one to halt. It was
already midnight, and all the members of the party sat down, except Timoteo
Balbag and Maria Felicitas Agarpao, who remained standing.

This appellant, who was carrying a long bolo, locally known as
calasiao, stepping backward and uttering a cry of triumph and revenge,
said to the old spouses “Now you have to die because you are proud and you
prohibit us to use water of the ditch in our place.” Then, suddenly, he hit
Timoteo Balbag with his bolo at the right parietal region. Timoteo fell to the
ground face downward, and appellant, as if to satisfy himself that his victim
will not rise again, with that bolo gave him another blow, this time on the back
of the neck, below the occipital region. Then, he turned his attention to the
old woman, by hacking her on the right side of the neck below the occipital
region, and when as a consequence of that blow she fell sidewise, appellant gave
another mortal thrust on her breast. After the killing of those victims, he
ordered that the two corpses be removed and thrown into a ravine. This done,
appellant warned everybody around him to keep mum about what they had just seen;
he likewise commanded Rufo Balbag to return to Paddaggan, while the accused and
the rest of his group proceeded to Cabayu arriving there at dawn., and on the
following day returned to Paddaggan.

It would seem strange, almost unbelievable,
that those persons who had witnessed the horrible killing of the old couple, and
subsequently took the stand at the trial of this accused, should have kept this
matter to themselves and refrained from imparting their knowledge of this
gruesome affair to some reliable citizen or responsible official for appropriate
action. But We take cognizance of the existence, during those days of the last
war, of conditions so abnormal that the functions of government were, if any,
under the control of the enemy occupant or someone who had the backing of force.
And it is for this reason that, unless he was looking for trouble or was willing
to endanger his personal safety, and perhaps his life, that discreet people
refrained from airing their just grievances, particularly against those who had
the upperhand in the community. Thus, these eye-witnesses, who kept fresh in
their minds the threats and warnings of the accused, dared not report to the
proper officials, during those troublous days, the commission of the murders now
under consideration; and it was only after liberation, when conditions of peace
and order had improved, that, after the lapse of more than one year from the
approximate day of their perpetration, Rufo Balbag, son of Timoteo Balbag, and
Pacifico Ravina reported the killings to Esteban Garvida, chief of police of
Bangui, Ilocos Norte.

On December 10, 1945, Alfonso Alcoba with Rufo Balbag and Juan Balbag,
secured the written permission of the medical officer in charge of the sanitary
division of Bangui, Ilocos Norte, to bring to town the remains of Timoteo Balbag
and Maria Felicitas Agarpao from the ravine at Mabilag-Apinas, where they were
dumped on orders of the accused in the latter part of November. Rufo Balbag
found the bones of the old couple together with parts of the hat or
salakot, Exhibit “G,” which was identified as the one woven by Juan
Balbag and which his father Timoteo wore on that fateful night; a piece of
leather, Exhibit “H,” which was the holder of the container of a pipe and
tobacco, which the deceased was using, was also found.

On the witness stand, Dr. Castillo of the sanitary division of the
municipalities of Bangui, Burgos and Pasuquin, Ilocos Norte, identified the
bones and referring particularly to the skulls Exhibits Band C, D to D-21 and
two sets of bones, Exhibits E and F, respectively, said that they all belonged
to human beings, that Exhibit Bis the skull of a female person, while Exhibit C
is that of a male individual. Examining the skull Exhibit C, he found an opening
at the right side, on the parietal region, close to the right ear. He said that
the fissure shows a traumatic wound caused by the use of a sharp-edged
thin-bladed knife, for instance, a thin-bladed bolo.

It appears that during the days of the Japanese occupation, the deceased
Timoteo Balbag as head man of the village was in charge of the distribution of
water for irrigation purposes. Appellant felt that the water was not evenly
distributed by Timoteo, that he was being discriminated against, that he should
have been allotted a certain amount of water for the irrigation of his land.
Matias Alupay who, in the meantime towards the end of the occupation period, had
risen into power, and had become the chief of the “Pilpilme” in the locality,
became angry at Timoteo and his grudge against the deceased reached a point
when, on that fateful night, he avenged a fancied personal wrong by liquidating
not only Timoteo but the latter’s wife.

The defense did not deny that Timoteo Balbag and Maria Felicitas Agarpao were
treacherously killed in the manner alleged in the information and described by
the eye-witnesses for the prosecution. The clear narration made by those
witnesses and the retrieval and expert identification of the bones of the
victims, exhibited at the trial, and other personal belongings of Timoteo,
constitute an over-whelming proof that they met violent death at the hands of
the accused as contended by the prosecution.

In an endeavor to shift the blame to others, the defense tried to prove that
Elias Pastor and Fernando Dais, of the “Pilpilme,” had admitted responsibility
for the killing of the spouses. It was alleged that Ellas Pastor had reported to
Lt. Escobar of the “Pilpilme” headquarters, that Timoteo Balbag and his wife
were killed by them, because the deceased would not evacuate nor put out their
lights when they were told to do so.

But the testimonies of Rufo Balbag, Pacifico Ravina and Ricardo Aldos of the
prosecution are so convincing, the details given by them of how Matias Alupay
hacked the two old victims with his long bolo, that we have not the slightest
doubt that this simple country people had no base motives to falsify the truth
to the extent of pinning on the appellant the commission of two capital
offenses. As against the flimsy explanation allegedly given by Pastor that
Timoteo Balbag and his wife were killed because they would not evacuate nor put
out their lights, We have the strong and convincing motive which impelled this
appellant to liquidate his victims, because he had sharply resented the attitude
of Timoteo Balbag in denying him the use of irrigation water to which he—a man
who became powerful in the community and had under his command the members of
the ” Pilpilme,”—believed himself entitled.

The presence at the scene of the crime of the prosecution witness Pacifico
Ravina, had been admitted by the defense, and the only reason given why Ravina,
Aldos and Balbag testified against this accused is that ha had acted only as
guide of the “Pilpilme”. According to the evidence of the prosecution, he was
not only a guide of the expedition on that fateful night, but he was the head of
the same because he was giving orders to the others, and those government
witnesses had seen and recognized him, and consistently pointed to him alone and
to nobody else as the real and only perpetrator of the killing of Timoteo Balbag
and Maria Felicitas Agarpao. It has been shown that the moon had just appeared
on the horizon when the accused killed his victims. Those witnesses could not,
therefore, have been mistaken about the identity of the perpetrator of the
crime.

Again, the testimony of Ricardo Aldos that subsequent to the killing, Matias
Alupay had given him stiff warning not to reveal to anyone that he had killed
the old spouses, amounts to an admission of guilt, inasmuch as such warning was
given immediately after the killing had taken place. By such warning he was
trying to prevent his prosecution by sealing the mouths of the persons who had
witnessed the commission of his crimes.

The efforts made by the defense to shift to others the responsibility for the
killing of the spouses can deserve not the slightest consideration. To all
appearances such persons are fictitious. The evidence of the defense failed to
give any indication as to their identity, their residence and whereabouts; in
fact, Pacifico Ravina of the prosecution, testifying in rebuttal, stated that he
had never heard of such persons named Elias Pastor and Fernando Dais. In this
connection, appellant has not made any effort to bring to the bar of justice
those alleged killers, if he really knew their identity and whereabouts.

Finally, our attention is invited to alleged contradictions and
inconsistencies discovered by the defense in the testimonies of the witnesses of
the prosecution. We must not lose sight of the fact that a witness has his own
way of stating the facts as they are known to him and come to his perception.
Such inconsistencies and contradictions, rather than weakening the probative
value of their testimonies, strengthened them, for if they should have given
exactly identical statements, the defense would be justified in alleging that
they have been reciting their lessons in court. (People vs. Caballero,
53 Phil. 592; People vs. Limbo, 49 Phil. 94).

Upon the above considerations, we have come to the conclusion that the guilt
of this appellant as the perpetrator of the killing of Timoteo Balbag and his
wife Maria Felicitas Agarpao, has been established beyond reasonable doubt, and
that each killing, being qualified by the circumstance of treachery, constitutes
one crime of murder defined and penalized in Article 248 of the Revised Penal
Code.

We note the attendance of the aggravating circumstances of the crimes having
been committed in an uninhabited place, and that the victims of the offender
being then 70 and 60 years old, respectively, when they were killed by him, is
also another aggravating circumstance present in the commission of these
offenses. We, however, disagree with the Solicitor General in taking into
consideration in favor of the accused the circumstance of lack of instruction of
the defendant. He was, as head of the “Pilpilme” in his community, a powerful
man whose commands were obeyed by those under him and it cannot, therefore, be
justly alleged that he was an ignorant man.

By unanimous vote of all the Justices present in the consideration of this
case, it, therefore, becomes our painful duty to modify the judgment of the
lower court by imposing upon appellant the penalty of death, which shall be
carried out and executed in accordance with the provisions of Articles 81 and 82
of the Revised Penal Code, on a day to be fixed by the trial court, within
thirty days after the return of the record of the case to the said court. With
costs.

Moran, C.J., Ozaeta, Pablo, Bengzon, Padilla, Tuason, Montemayor,
Reyes, and Torres, JJ., concur.

Moran, C. J.:

Mr. Justice Paras voted for the modification of the Judgment appealed from,
and the imposition of the death penalty on this appellant, but, on account of
his being on leave at the time of the promulgation of this opinion, his
signature does not appear herein.