THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEES, VS. MELCHOR CASTILLO, ELEUTERIO CAMPOS, PABLO MACHICA AND GUILLERMO BOCO, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.

This case is before as en consulta, the Court of First Instance of Samar
having sentenced defendants Melchor Castillo, Eleuterio Campos, Pablo Machica
and Guillermo Boco, for of murder, to the extreme penalty, to jointly and
severally indemnify the heirs of the deceased Segundo Guariño in P6,000 and to
pay the costs.

It is not disputed that while playing the game locally known as
“holing-hoging”, Segundo Guariño and Epitacio Terencio had a misunderstanding
and then quarrelled near the market place of the municipality of Quinapundan,
Samar, on September 12, 1954, at about 4:30 p.m. Policeman Pablo Machica, who
was on duty nearby, approached them, blew his whistle and shouted “justicia”, in
an effort to stop the fight, but Guariño faced Machica and angrily said, “You
demon” – with a drawn knife, according to Machica. The latter aimed his
automatic carbine at Guariño, and seemingly pressed the trigger, for a click was
heard, but the gun did not fire. He, therefore, lowered the muzzle of the
carbine and tried to rechamber it, but, before he knew it, Guariño had stabbed
him on the breast with the knife Exhibit 9. As Machica fell down, with a finger
on the trigger of his unlocked carbine, it fired twice – into the air, according
to Machica and the prosecution – whereupon Guariño ran away. At this juncture,
police Sgt. Eusebio Asebias came. Upon being informed by Machica that Guariño
had stabbed his, Asebias ordered policeman Eleuterio Campos, who arrived, soon
there after, to pursue Guariño”. Campos want after Guariño, then about 300
meters away, and, presently, overtook him as he jumped over a ditch. After
seizing the knife of Guariño, Campos brought him to the municipal building,
where policeman Guillermo Boco hit Guariño on the head with the butt of a
carbine. Then, Melchor Castillo, the local chief of police, came and bade
Guariño to sit on one of the steps of the stairs leading to the second floor of
the municipal building, near its door.

Meanwhile, a constabulary soldier, named Pastor Legista had arrived on board
a bus. As it was nearlng the town hall, Legista saw Guariño being pursued and,
then, overtaken and arrested by Campos. Out of curiosity, Legista alighted from
the buss and followed Campos, Guariño and Boco, who were followed by Machica, to
the municipal building, noticing that Castillo, Boco and Campos were beating
Guariño (Rosario Basario testified that Machica had, also, laid hands upon
Guariño, and this was corroborated by defendant Boco), Legista urged municipal
Mayor, Pamfilo Pabelonia, who had arrived in the meantime, to disuade Castillo
from further castigating Guariño. Then, two gun shots were heard. As Legista
turned, he saw Castillo holding the .45 calibor pistol Exhibit A, pointed at
Guariño, whose body twisted and then fell down, his forehead hitting the floor.
Legista asked Castillo why he had shot Guariño, whereupon Castillo replied: “He
deserves that because he was the one who wounded my policeman and I am
responsible for my acts and I will answer for it.”

According to Dr. Florencio G. Joaban, the Municipal Health Officer vho made a
post-mortem examination of the body of Guariño, the latter died of internal
hemorrhage, and had the following injuries:

“a) One bullet wound on the inferior third, posterior right forearm, passing
through the anterior portion, upper, of the same (right forearm):

“b) One wound at the region of McBurney’s point;

“c) One bullet wound one inch above the McBurney’s point;

“d) Lacerated wound, measuring two inches long, one centimer wide, with
depression of the outer wall postero-internal side of the right parietal region,
parallel to the postero-parieto-occipital joint;

“e) Lacerated wound, measuring one and one-half inch long, one centimeter
wide, one inch above the letter (d), with depression of the outer wall of the
skull.”

It is conceded that the internal hemorrhage that resulted in the death of
Guariño, was caused by the aforementioned bullet wounds. Consequently, the main
issue in this case is: who inflicted said bullet wounds?

In this connection, the testimony of Pastor Legista to the effect that it is
defendant Melchor Castillo, was substantially corroborated by Rosario Basario,
who witnessed the occurrence while she was confined in a cell, in the municipal
building, less than three (3) meters from the place where Guariño was maltreated
and shot. Substantial corroboration was, also, furnished by defendants Machica,
Campos and Boco.

Upon the other hand, Castillo would have us believe that the fatal injuries
of Guariño were caused by Machica, for, after wounding him on the breast,
Guariño tried to stab him once again, whereupon he twice fired his carbine at
Guariño. In support of this pretense, Castillo introduced Exhibit 5, an
alleged affidavit, to this effect, of Machica, and Exhibit 4, which is claimed
to be an an ante mortem declaration of Guariño, stating that Machica was the one
who shot him. The defense introduced, also, the testimony of: (a) Francisco
Obillo and Jacinto Calzado, in order to prove that Pastor Legista had arrived
after the occurrence; (b) Maria Yakit, in order to establish that Rosario
Basario was not confined in the municipal jail until after said occurrence; and
(c) Mayor Pabelonia, with respect to the circumstances under which said Exhibits
4 and 5, and the affidavits of Maria Takit and Bosario Basario were allegedly
sworn to before him. It, likewise, placed Guillermo Jabulan, Victor Longatan
and Luis Abit, on the witness stand, Their testimony, as regards,
circumstances under which Machica’ carbine was fired, is compatible, however, with
the theory of the prosecution. Lastly, the defendants testified in their own
behalf, although the story given by Castillo conflicts with that of his
co-defendants Machica, Campos and Boco.

The lower court held that the bullet wounds of Guariño were inflicted, not by
Machica, as contended by Castillo, but by Castillo himself, as contended by the
prosecution, and we are of the opinion that this finding is correct.

To begin with, upon exhumation and autopsy of Guariño’s body, what was found
therein was a slug .45 Caliber, which is that of Castillo’s pistol, and could
not have come from Machica’s .30 caliber carbine. Hence, neither Guariño nor
Machica could hare possibly made said statements (Exhibits 5 and 4). Moreover,
the record shows that Exhibit 4 was prepared by Castillo, who caused the
thumbmark of Guariño to be affixed thereon, when Guariño was dead already, and
that Machica affixed his signature on Exhibit 5 – without having a chance to
read it, and without the presence of Mayor Pabelonia, before which it purports
to have been sworn – because his (Machica’s) superior officer, Castillo,
threatened to shoot him unless he signed it. This is borne out by the fact that
Machica’s signature appears written with a pen and ink other than those used by
Pabelonia, who is a cousin of Castillo’s wife, and was interested in his
welfare. What is more, Pabelonia admitted that Guariño did not state to him
under oath that the contents of Exhibit 4 is true, although the instrument
purports to have been sworn to before him; that, in fact, Guariño did not say a
single word to him, in connection with said document; that two policemen held
Guariño by the armpits, with his arms hanging on both sides, while Castillo was
preparing Exhibit 4; that when Pabelonia asked Guariño whether the contents
thereof, were true, Guariño’s head merely bowed; that the head was never raised
thereafter; and that he (Pabelonia) did not verify whether Guariño was dead or
not.

Again, during the presentation of the evidence for the defense, at the joint
trial of the accused herein, several incidents took place which deserve special
notice. After defendant Campos had given testimony indicating that Castillo was
the one who shot Guariño, Atty. Gerardo Pabello withdrew his appearance as
counsel for Campos, upon the ground that he (Pabello) had expected Campos to
tall the truth. When, thereafter, defendant Boco gave a similar testimony,
adverse to Castillo, Atty. Generoso Juaban withdrew as counsel for Boco, upon
the ground that, before taking the witness stand, he had given a different
version to his aforementioned counsel. Thereupon, Atty. Cinco – who, like Atty.
Pabello, had entered his appearance as counsel for Castillo – moved for a
separate trial (which was denied), upon the ground that Boco’s testimony was
“against our concerted agreement with all counsels representing the accused”.
Soon thereafter, Atty. Pabello informed the court that one of the bondsmen of
Campos was withdrawing as such, for appropriate action as regards this accused,
who was, accordingly, ordered detained. Thus, the acts of Attorneys Pabello and
Juaban, in the lower court, tended to affect adversely their clients therein.
Campos and Boco. Now, we find brief, filed with this Court, for defendant
Castillo – tending to show that the fatal wounds of Guariño were caused by
Machica – is signed by Attys. Juaban and Pabello, both of whom had entered their
appearance in the lower court as counsel for Machica – aside from Campos, as
regards Pabello, and Boco, as regards Juaban. In short, Castillo’s present
counsel, who are urging his acquittal, were the very attorneys who represented,
in the lower court, his co-defendants Machica, Campos and Boco. It is not
surprising, therefore, that the latter’s aforementioned counsel in that eourt
had reached a “concerted agreement” with Atty. Cinco, who represented Castillo,
exclusively. Inasmuch as the testimony of Campos and Boco – and, hence,that of
Machica, which is substantially the same, as regards the author of Guarifio’s
bullet wounds – was “against” said concerted agreement, it follows that the
theory agreed upon by counsel for the defendants in the lower court – or, at
least, between Attys. Cinco, Pabello and Juaban – was that said injuries were
inflicted by Machica. One of the most important implications of the foregoing
circumstances, is that the version of Castillo was the product of study,
deliberation and agreement, whereas the testimony of Machica, Boco and Campos,
pointing to Castillo as the author of said bullet wounds, bear all the earmarks
of being candid, frank and unvarnished,said testimony having bean given without
the assistance or knowledge, and even against the advice, of their
aforementioned counsel – who acted as if they had been supplied by Castillo
himself or by those interested in his acquittal.

We are convinced, therefore, beyond reasonable doubt, that the fatal shots
were fired by defendant Castillo, under the conditions testified to by the
witnesses for the prosecution.

What was the nature of the participation of Machica, Campos and Boco in the
commission of the crime charged?

Campos testified that, after apprehending Guariño, and turning his over to
Boco, in the municipal building, he took a bath in a river nearby and then
changed clothes in his house, after which he returned to the town hall, where he
found that Guariño was dead already. Upon the other hand, Boco asserted that,
after Guariño was taken from hint by Castillo, supposedly for investigation, he
(Boco) processed towards the door of the municipal building, where he was when
Castillo shot Guariño. Machica, in turn, declared that, after stabing him,
Guariño ran away, whereupon Sgt. Asebias came and ordered Campos to pursue
Guariño, after which Asebias brought him to the second floor of said building,
where he was when the fatal shots were fired.

Testifying as defense witness, Boco admitted, however, that he had beaten
Guariño with a wooden club, although adding that he did so upon orders of
Castillo; that Campos had similarly clubbed Guariño; and that Machica kicked hia
during the investigation. This evidence for the defense merely corroborates the
testimony of prosecution witness Rosario Basario who witnessed the beating and
assassination of Guariño while confined in a cell less than three (3) meters
away from the scene of the occurrence. It, also, corroborates the testimony of
Pastor Legista, although the latter did not see Machica lay hands on Guariño,
which is understandable, for, while trying to persuade Mayor Pabelonia to avoid
unnecessary cruelty,he was not looking at Guariño and his tormentors. At the
same time, the failure of the testimonies of Pastor Legists and Rosario Basario
to dovetail with each other in this respect, indicates that their versions are
not the product of a “concerted agreement” – unlike the theory of the
defense.

In any event, we do not believe that the circumstances surrounding the case –
particularly the presence of Machica, Campos and Boco at the scene of the
occurrences; the beating administered by them to Guariño, without competent proof
that they wanted or intended to kill him; and their failure to prevent Castillo
from firing at Guariño – are sufficient to hold Machica, Campos and Boco
responsible for his (Guariño’s) death. There was no previous indication that
Castillo intended to kill Guariño. Castillo did not say that he would shoot
Guariño, or utter anything that would warn his co-defendants of his (Castillo’s)
intent to fire at Guariño. Castillo just drew out his gun and fired. It would
even appear that his co-defendants could not have stopped it, even if they
wanted to. The whole thing was over in a split second. Accordingly, the
responsibility of Machica, Campos and Boco should be limited to the effects of
their respective acts in the maltreatment of Guariño. Unfortunately, the
evidence thereon is not as specific and detailed as it should be. It appears,
however, that, in addition to the bullet wounds inflicted by Castillo Guariño
had the following injuries:

“Lacerated wound, measuring two inches long, one centimeter wide, with
depression of the outer wall posterior-internal side of the right parietal
region, parallel to the postero-parieto-occipital joint;

“Lacerated wound, measuring one and one-half inch long, one centimeter wide,
one inch above the letter (d), with depression of the outer wall of the
skull,”

Although there is no direct evidence on the effect of these
injuries, the Court takes cognizance of the fact that the depressions in the
occipital region indicate fractures in the cranium, which would have, at least,
required medical treatment for more than ninety (90) days. Hence, Boco, Campos
and Machica are guilty of serious physical injuries, under subdivision 3, in
relation to the penultimate paragraph, of Article 263 and Article 248 of the
Revised Penal Code, the crime having bean committed with, treachery cruelty and
abuse of public position. Accordingly, defendants Eleuterior Campos, Pablo
Machica and Guillermo Boco are hereby sentenced to an indeterminate penalty
ranging from two (2) years and four (4) months to six (6) years of
prision correccional, with the accessory penalties provided by law.

As regards defendant Melchor Castillo, we find him guilty of murder,
qualified by treachery, with the generic aggravating circumstances of cruelty
and abuse of public position, without any mitigating circumstance to offset the
same. The proper penalty is death, which cannot be imposed, however, for lack of
the requisite number of votes. Consequently, said defendant is hereby sentenced
to life imprisonment, with the corresponding accessory penalties.

Thus modified as to the penalty, the decision of the lower court is hereby
affirmed, therefore, in all other respects, with costs against the
defendants.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Paras, C.J., Bengzon, Montemayor, Reyes, A., Bautista Angelo,
Labrador, Reyes, J.B.L., Endencia, and Felix, JJ.,
concur.