THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE, VS, FAUSTO LACAYA, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.

From a decision of the Court of First Instance of Zamboanga, finding
him guilty of murder with the aggravating circumstance of nocturnity
compensated by the mitigating circumstance of lack of Instruction, and
sentencing him to reclusion perpetua, to indemnify the heirs of the
deceased Pedro Aves in the sum of P2,000.00, and to pay the costs,
Fausto Lacaya is appealing to this Court asking for the reversal of the
said decision and for his acquittal.

In and prior to the month of November, 1946, the deceased Pedro
Aves was living with his wife Sofia Ocupe in the sitio of Conacon,
barrio of Polanco, Dipolog, Zamboanga. In the morning of the 12th day
of the said month of November, Pedro Aves left his home and was never
seen alive thereafter. On November 12th, in the afternoon, his dead
body in an advanced state of decomposition was found floating on the
Dipolog river in the same barrio of Polanco.

The face was battered and mutilated beyond recognition. The right
arm and the left hand were missing and the body showed a number of
wounds and injuries, on the head, neck, chest and legs, including a
complete fracture of two ribs. The left mandible was missing. The body
was duly identified by his wife Sofia and by his brother Manuel, thru
the clothing, by means of the feet, and the trunk, and because of a
gold tooth on the upper mandible. After some investigation by the
Military Police, and because of the testimony or information given by
Pascual Osorio who said that he had seen Pedro Aves in the company of
defendant Lacaya and Brigido Loging passing in front of his house the
night of November 4th between nine and ten, Brigido and defendant
Fausto were questioned but both disclaimed knowledge of the killing or
drowning of the deceased and so were released.

According to Sgt, Teodoro Garcia of the Military Police, however,
while questioning Brigido, and judging from the answers given by him,
he suspected that he (Brigido) was concealing something. In fact the
next day, that is, on November 15th, Brigido returned to the Military
Police and told them that provided they gave him the necessary
protection, he would reveal the truth. Upon assurance that he would be
duly protected he made a written statement (Exh. 1) pointing to Lacaya
as the one who killed Pedro Aves. Acting upon this information, Lacaya
was arrested. On the occasion of his arrest in or near the house of
Tomas Loging, father of Brigido, where he was then staying, Lacaya upon
arrival of the jeep of the Military Police, left the house in haste,
hid behind the latter and later ran away intending to jump into the
river nearby but Tomas went after him and brought him back telling him
that his action might be interpreted by the police as a sign of guilt,
at the same time advising him to submit to the police voluntarily.
Despite this advice, when Sgt. Garcia in the presence of Sgt, Magracia
actually arrested him, he (Lacaya) still made efforts to avoid arrest
and free himself from the hold of Tomas Loging. Taken to Police
Headquarters, he made a written statement (Exhibit M) dated November
16, 1946, still disclaiming knowledge of, much less participation in
the death of Pedro Aves. On December 13, 1946, however, he made another
statement (Exhibit N) stating that Sofia Ocupe had offered him and his
second cousins Brigido and Gregorio Loging the amount of P200 if they
poisoned or killed her husband Pedro Aves because she could no longer
endure the maltreatment to which she was continuously subjected; that
he declined the offer, but it was accepted by Brigido and Gregorio;
that in the evening of November 4th, while in company with the two
brothers and Pedro Aves and while crossing the Dipolog river, he
actually saw the two brothers, particularly Brigido, attack the
deceased with a bolo and an iron bar which they were carrying and then
dump his body into the river; that the next day he witnessed the
delivery by Sofia of P200 to Brigido; and that Sofia gave him P34 in
order to seal his (Lacaya’s) lips while Brigido gave him P16 as his
share of the P200.

Convinced that Lacaya was the one responsible for the death of
Aves, the Police filed the corresponding complaint for murder against
him. While detained in jail, Lacaya escaped on December 31, 1946, but
was recaptured on January 3, 1947. Thereafter, he made another
attempt to escape but was caught in time by the guard. After trial, and
on the basis of the evidence submitted the lower court found him guilty
of the crime charged.

After a careful review of the record of this case we find the following facts to have been duly established:

It seems that the married life of Pedro Aves and his wife Sofia
Ocupe was not a happy one. He continually maltreated her. The wife
suspected that he had a mistress in the sitio of Tolibung. Whenever he
came home from said mistress, and specially when she showed disapproval
of his conduct and his infidelity, he would become enraged, ill-treat
her and even kick her. Such was her mental and physical suffering that
once she complained to the Mayor of Dipolog, saying that she wanted to
separate from her husband. She complained also to her barrio
lieutenant, named Hilarion Diaz and at one time, went to the extreme of
asking for some poison with which to dispose of her husband. The barrio
lieutenant advised her against any illegal act but said that what she
should do was to catch her husband with his mistress in the act of
infidelity and perhaps, the authorities could then do something about
it.

Late in the evening of November 4, 1946, Brigido Loging returning
from sitio Tolibung to his home in sitio Conacon, met or rather
overtook Pedro Aves and Fausto Lacaya and joined the party for they
were all going in the same direction. Lacaya was then carrying a long
iron bar over his shoulder and had a bolo strapped to his waist. Upon
passing the house of Pascual Osorio, Pedro Aves inquired from the
latter if he had some tuba to drink but Pascual said he had
none. This is the same Pascual who informed the Military Police that he
had seen the trio passing his house and which information led the
Military Police to question Lacaya and Brigido. The three men continued
their trip toward their homes and upon reaching the bank of the Dipolog
river, Brigido untied the raft which they were going to use to cross
the stream and the three boarded on it. Upon reaching the other side,
Brigido being in a hurry because his home was the farthest and due to
the lateness of the hour, asked leave of his two companions to go ahead
which he did. After walking a few meters he heard a thud or dull noise
as of a blow, and on looking back and because it was a moonlight night
he saw Lacaya striking Aves with the long iron bar which he carried,
which blows felled the victim to the raft. Scared and not wishing to be
a witness or party to the crime, he ran until he reached home and
immediately went to bed. About 20 minutes later, the defendant came to
Brigido’s house and warned and enjoined him not to tell anyone,
otherwise he (Lacaya) would kill him and his entire family.

The following morning Lacaya returned to Brigido’s house and
repeated the threat and at the same time suggested that it would be
better if he lived in the house of Brigido who was his second cousin so
as to be in a better position to watch him. He even suggested that they
go away for a while. Brigido answered him that he could not go away
because he was busy. Thereafter, Lacaya left in the direction of the
river. Brigido, presumably wanting to avoid Lacaya, left the house for
the sitio of Gumay, in order to dig up camotes (sweet potatoes) for the
consumption of his family. On the way however, at the sitio of Ginlis
he was overtaken by the appellant who joined him and even accompanied
him to Gumay where they stayed until November 13 when news of the
discovery of the dead body of Pedro Aves reached them. They returned
home only to be taken in and questioned by the Military Police.

During their stay in sitio Gumay, Lacaya, in a communicative mood,
and possibly feeling the need of unburdening himself for relief, told
Brigido that while he was living in the house of Pedro Aves as a tenant
of theirs, he used to witness the continual abuse and ill-treatment
suffered by his aunt Sofia at the hands of Pedro; that on those
occasions he would almost invariably abuse her relatives, particularly
the Lacaya family telling his wife that he was not afraid of and would
fight anyone of them; that finally Sofia induced and persuaded him to
poison or kill her husband, offering him P200, which offer he accepted;
that before he attacked Pedro on the river that night of November 4 he
rubbed his ears in.order to warm himself up and feel brave, and that he
felt as if the devil was inside him; and that he cut off the arms and
legs of Pedro and smashed his face and his chest so that instead of
floating his body would sink.

In his defense Lacaya told the court that in the evening of November
4, 1946, he was invited by Brigido and his brother Gregorio to go to
Tolibung and drink tuba and eat somsoman in the
house of Maxima Osorio which invitation he accepted; that at the time,
Brigido was carrying a bolo while Gregorio was carrying an iron bar
which he used as a cane; that they passed by the house of Sofia and on
their way to Tolibung near the river, they met the deceased Pedro who
told them that he had just come from the house of Maxima and he invited
them to go to the house of Pascual Osorio, which they did; that later,
on their way home, as they were about to cross the river on the raft,
he saw Brigido inflict several bloxtfs on Pedro with his bolo and upon
seeing this, he (Lacaya) jumped Into the river and finally reached the
other side; that Brigido asked him to wait for him, which he did; that
it was Brigido and Gregorio who really killed Pedro; that Brigido
finally crossed the river on the raft, leaving his brother Gregorio
behind and then the two went to the house of Brigido.

Sofia Ocupe partly corroborated Lacaya, saying that about 10
o’clock that evening she was gathering firewood near her house and that
she saw Lacaya, Brigido and Gregorio pass in front of her house, the
three telling her that they were going to the house of Maxima to eat somsoman; that Brigido was carrying a bolo while Gregorio carried an iron bar.

Continuing with his testimony, Lacaya further said that he had been
severely maltreated and tortured by the Military Police and that for
that reason he signed his statement presented as exhibit N by the
prosecution.

The decision in this case depends in great measure upon the
credibility of witnesses. After observing the demeanor of said
witnesses during the trial as well as the nature and reasonableness of
their testimonies, the trial court discredited the witnesses for the
defense and rejected their story. In this we believe that the trial
court acted correctly. As the trial court said, it is improbable that
Sofia would select the late hour of 10 o’clock in the evening to gather
firewood, just to be able to see Lacaya and the Loging brothers to pass
in front of her house. The lower court equally rejected as unreasonable
the story given by Sofia to the effect that the reason for the killing
of the deceased by the Loging brothers was that their father Tomas had
a grudge against Pedro who, because he was not given a share in the
corn harvest, took the ease to court. The lower court reasoned out that
even assuming that this misunderstanding or difference existed, it was
not enough to induce the two brothers to kill the deceased.

The Solicitor General well observes that the fact that Tomas in
order to settle his difference with the deceased Pedro, took the case
to court, shows that he was a law-abiding citizen who did not want to
take the law into his hands. In this connection it may be added that
examining the decision (Exhibit 3) of the court in that civil case
between Tomas on one side and Pedro Aves and a certain Chinaman (Chino
Puana) on the other, judgment was rendered in favor of Tomas, ordering
said Chinaman to deliver 40 cavans of corn to Tomas, If there had been
any grudge at all because of the corn, it could not have been
entertained by Tomas who won the case, certainly not against Pedro Aves
who was not sentenced to do anything, which means that he was not to
blame for the withholding of the grain from Tomas.

Equally disregarded by the trial court as improbable is the story
given by the defense witness Macario Masayon who claimed that he was a
prisoner in jail when Lacaya was confined therein; that one day Brigido
visited Lacaya and asked him to own up the killing of Pedro and assume
responsibility therefor because Brigido and his family would help and
take care of him, to which Lacaya countered, saying, why should he
plead guilty when they had previously agreed that Brigido would not
reveal anything and when as a matter of fact, it was Brigido who boloed
Pedro to death against the very advice of Lacaya. In the first place,
said witness Masayon was then in jail because he had been convicted of
the crime of robbery after pleading guilty to the charge; and as the
trial court well observed, while Masayon claimed that he distinctly
overheard the supposed conversation between Lacaya and Brigido, he did
not overhear the conversation between other prisoners and their
visitors on the same occasion. Neither could he recall any other
incident that took place in jail at that time.

Considering the whole case, we agree with the trial court that the
story of the prosecution is more reasonable and more worthy of
credence. In addition, his unexplained attempt to escape from the house
of Tomas in order to avoid arrest by the Military Police who had gone
there for said purpose, shows that his conscience was not entirely
clear. To this might be added that appellant’s act of escaping from
jail once while under detention and making a second attempt to escape
does not exactly favor his claim of Innocence.

In conclusion, the court finds the guilt of the appellant to have
been established beyond reasonable doubt. Finding no reversible error
in the decision appealed from, the same is hereby affirmed with, costs.

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

MORAN, C. J.:

Mr. Justice Paras, and Mr. Justice Padilla voted for affirmance.