THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE, VS. LEONCIO CURAMBAO, GODOFREDO DAGAYLOAN, GERONIMO CRUZ, EUFRACIO SALARDA, VENANCIO CADUNGOG, EUSTAQUIO DURAN, SAYENG SAN…

On July 31, 1954, the provincial fiscal of Zamboanga accused Leoncio
Curambao, Godofredo Dagayloan, Geronimo Cruz, Eufrosino Salarda,
Venancio Cadungog, Eustaquio Duran, Sayeng Sandal, Andres Salibat and
John Doe, of triple murder. It was alleged in the information:

“That on or about the 16th day of September, 1952, in Sitio Gomin,
Barrio Lacsutan, Municipality of Labason, Province of Zamboanga del
Norte, Philippines, within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court,
the above-named accused, armed with carbines, Enfield rifles and pistol
and with evident premeditation to kill, in conspiracy, confederation
and mutual assistance with one another together with certain JOHN DOE
whose identity is yet undetermined, and taking advantage of their
superior strength and public positions, the first six being members of
the police force of Labason, the seventh and eight a barrio lieutenant
and rural policeman of Barrio Lacsutan, Labason, respectively, did then
and there without justifiable motive, willfully, unlawfully and
feloniously shoot to death with their firearms SUBANO BLASA DANSALAN,
SUBANO TIGwASAN MOLAONG AND SUBANO BASILAN LAKTAYAN.

“Contrary to law, with the aggravating circumstances of superior strength and abuse of public positions.”

Immediately before the trial, defendants Sayeng Sandal and Andres
Salibat were, on motion of the prosecution discharged from the
information in order to become state witnesses. After appropriate
proceedings the Court of First Instance of Zamboanga, found the other
defendants, namely, Leoncio Curambao, Godofredo Dagayloan, Geronimo
Cruz, Eufrosino Salarda, Venancio Cadungog and Enstaquio Duran, guilty
as charged, and sentence them three (3) times to life imprisonment, not
exceeding altogether forty (40) years, and to indemnify, jointly and
severally, the heirs of each of the deceased Blasa Dansalan, Tigwasan
Molaong and Basilan Laktayan, in the sum of P3,000, and to pay the
costs.

The aforementioned convicted defendants appealed from
said decision, but, subsequently, five of them, namely, Leoncio
Curambao, Godofredo Dagayloan, Geronimo Cruz, Eufrosino Salarda and
Venancio Cadungog, withdrew their appeal. Hence, this decision deals
only with that of defendant Eustaquio Duran.

The version of
the prosecution and that of the defense are correctly set forth in the
decision appealed from in the following language:

“It
appears from the evidence of the prosecution that all the accused were
on September 16, 1952, members of the police force of the municipality
of Labason, Zamboanga del Norte. At about 9:00 o’clock in the morning
of 16 September, 1952 all the defendants led by the Sergeant Leoncio
Curambao, arrived together at the house of Anton Salibat in Barrio
Lacsutan, Labason; Zamboanga del Norte. All of them were fully armed
with loaded carbines except Eustaquio Duran who carried a mauser also
loaded. In. the house of Anton Salibat, the police posse met rural
police Andres Salibat and barrio lieutenant Saroy Sandal who were on
order of Sgt. Curambao drafted as guides to the house of Blasa
Dansalan, Tigwasan Molaong and Basilan Laktayan, all subanos. The two
were told that the accused were after Blasa, Tigwasan and Basilan.

“With
Sandal and Salibat leading the way the posse finally arrived at sitio
Gomin, barrio Lacsutan, Labason, Zamboanga del Norte, and on nearing
the house of Blasa, Tigwasan, and Basilan the group halted. Only these
3 persons and the wife of Basilan named Udo lived in the house. In the
yard there were growing banana plants and outside the premises was
cogon grass one foot high.

“Sgt. Curambao directed the
guide Sandal to go to the house and order Blasa, Tigwasan and Basilan
to leave the dwelling and lay down their arms. Basilan refused the
order and answered that they would not lay down their arms because they
committed no fault. When Sgt. Curambao was informed of the reply, he
sent back Sandal to insist on the trio to come out and lay down their
arms. At this time, the three obeyed and left the house. Basilan had a
spear and a bale with him; Tigwasan had a bolo in the scabbard which
was tied, around his waist; and Basilan had also a bolo on his left
waist inside the scabbard.

“Basilan came walking slowly,
towards the group who were at the time deployed. His right hand was
holding the middle of the spear carried parallel to the ground and in
the scabbard tied to his waist was his bolo. At this instant and at a
distance of 14 meters, Sgt. Curambao aimed his carbine and fired at the
slowly walking Basilan. Mortally wounded by Curambao’s bullet Basilan
fell and died instantly. Immediately after firing his carbine Curambao
ordered ‘fire’ and the other accused Dagayloan, Cruz, Salarda, Cadungog
and Duran, then in battle formation and prepared for instant action,
all fired in rapid succession against Tigwasan and Blasa who were at
the time inside the yard and just standing still at the foot of the
ladder. The hail of bullets felled Blasa and Tigwasan and killed them
instantly.

“After the killing, the accused and the two
guides returned to the house of Andres Salibat where they met Bongcasan
Somogo who went there to inquire about the cause and origin of the
rapid firing he had heard. Sgt. Curambao ordered Somogo to bury the
bodies of Tigwasan, Blasa and Basilan and then left with the other,
accused for the town. Somogo upon arriving, at the scene of the
shooting saw the dead bodies. Tigwasan had a gunshot wound on the
forehead and other wounds on the right hand and right lumbar region. He
was in a crouching position. Blasa was lying on his left side with
three gunshot wounds, below the right nipple, right arm and right
lumbar region. A meter away was a bolo in scabbard. Lying about two
meters from Tigwasan was the body of Blasa. Basilan had a bullet wound
mutilating his mouth and other bullet wounds on the right arm, left
thigh and right lumbar region. No weapon was found in his dead body
outside the yard and 25 meters from the house. Tigwasan’s dead body was
found just under the eaves of his house and near him was Blasa’s
corpse. Bongcasan shouted for help and Udo, Modiales, Tobil and
Tiorgis, all residents of the vicinity, came and. together they buried
the bodies of Tigwasan, Blasa and Basilan in one unnamed grave near the
house of the deceased.

“The above is the substance of the
testimonies of Andres Salibat, Sayeng Sandal and Bongcasan Somogo,
witnesses for the prosecution.

“The theory of the accused
is as follows: Sometime in September, 1952, Primitivo Barrios, an
officer of the Bureau of Forestry with station at Dipolog went to Gomin
as head of a party of officers, workers and surveyors to reclassify
some forest land into disposable agricultural land. On the way and from
somewhere a spear was thrust at Mr. Barrios and barely missed him. The
party did not continue the trip, but returned to the town and reported
the incident to the Chief of Police of Labason the following morning.

“Sometime
also that month, one Pausa, a Subano, reported to the Chief of Police
that certain Subano families in sitio Dominolog were kidnapped by the
deceased Blasa, Basilan and Tigwasan and taken to their homes; so on
September 7, 1952, policemen Cenon Silva and Eufrocino Salarda were
sent out by the Chief of Police to verify the report and investigate
the alleged kidnappers. The two policemen left for Lacsutan in the
afternoon of September 7th and passed the night in the house of
Councilor Antonio Salibat. Next morning Silva and Salarda, accompanied
by Andres Salibat their guide, went to the house of the deceased but
the three refused to talk to them. So the two policemen returned to the
town and reported all that transpired.

“On September 15th,
Eufrocino Salarda was sent again together with other policemen
Dagayloan, Duran, Cruz, Cadungog and Sgt. Curambao on patrol duty to
Barrio Lacsutan. On September 16th they went to sitio Gomin together
with Andres Salibat and Sayeng Sandal as their guides. At a distance of
150 meters from the house of the 3 deceased they heard the sounding of
a gong—agong in the local dialect—coming from said house. The guide
Andres Salibat told the group that the sounding of the agong meant
‘they would fight’. The group moved to a distance of 90 meters from the
house and stopped. Sgt. Curambao instructed the two guides to go up the
house and tell Blasa, Tigwasan and Basilan that the policemen wanted to
talk to them. The guides went and returned and informed the sergeant
that the trio would not believe them. Sgt. Curambao sent back the
guides to relay the information that no harm would come to them, that
policemen were not bad people, and that they were there merely to
verify the reports against them. Still the three refused to talk to
them, so Curambao ordered all the policemen to fire shots in the air to
warn the three persons and then ordered the guides to return and talk
again to the trio. At this time the group moved closer and at a
distance of 30 meters from the house, Sandal shouted ‘watch out
sergeant he is going to kill you’. A man came from the house toward
them with a spear in hand and while he was in the act of throwing the
spear at the group, Sgt. Curambao shot him. He fell dead on the spot
about 8 meters from Curambao. After shooting the sergeant shouted
towards the house commanding the occupants to lay down their arms for
the policemen had no bad intention. Before he could even finish
uttering his words, a spear was thrown from the place where the dead
man was and fell near the sergeant. Curambao shouted ‘fire’ and all the
policemen fired their guns at two persons running towards them, one
with a spear and the other with a bolo in hand. The two persons fell
dead about 10 meters from them. Sgt. Curambao then ordered his
policemen to carry the 3 dead bodies to be buried, but unable to find
tools to dig a grave they just abandoned the dead near their house. The
group left and upon seeing Bongcasan, Sgt. Curambao ordered him to bury
the bodies.”

Thus, the main issue raised in
the lower court was one of credibility of the testimony of the opposing
witnesses, which was settled by His Honor, the trial Judge, in favor of
the prosecution, for the following reasons:

“Reports
against the conduct of the deceased were made to the office of the
Chief of Police, including that one made by Sayeng Sandal to the
municipal mayor to the effect that the trio refused to work and
cooperate in the construction of the barrio school, in defiance of
mayor’s order. Then there was the report of policemen Cenon Silva and
Eufrocino Salarda about the refusal of the deceased to be investigated
by them on September 7, 1952. The accumulated reports against the three
must have incurred the ire of the police force. The suspicion that they
were engaged in acts of lawlessness must have induced the police force
to do something to remedy the situation. So, on September 16, 1952, all
the accused, fully armed and well prepared went to Gomin to confront
the deceased.

“Their suspicion—which unfortunately turned
into conviction in the minds of the accused—that the deceased were the
enemies of peace and order in that part of the community, was based on
wild rumors and also on suspicion. The deceased maintained that they
committed no wrong, so they at first refused to be investigated. They
were not fugitives from justice, they were not desperate criminals, so
that the testimonies of the accused to the effect that Sgt. Curambao
fired and killed Basilan at the time he was near and about to hurl his
spear at him is improbable and incredible; also incredible and
improbable was their claim that they fired and killed Blasa and
Tigwasan because they, defied them and tried to throw their spears at
them. The deceased knew that they were fully armed, as when Sgt.
Curambao ordered his policemen to fire in the air as an advance
warning. The deceased knew that their spears—if any they had—were no
match to the long-range fire power of the weapons of the accused; and
that the three were assured by the messenger that the accused meant
well and meant no harm. Under these circumstances and considering that
the instinct of self-preservation is inherent, it would require the
faith of ten men to believe that all the deceased were killed because
they attacked the accused without provocation on their part. Only an
idiot or a desperate criminal would dare do such a suicidal act
attributed to the deceased. The accused would also want the Court to
believe that the deceased approached them stealthily and attacked
treacherously. How could the trio do it when from the very beginning
their attention and eyes were focused on the house where the deceased
were? The sounding of the agong and the growth of tail cogon grass were
mere concoction to lead a touch of realism to the accused’s theory that
they fired in self-defense. Evidence to be believed must be in accord
with common experience and observation of mankind. Accused’s evidence
is a far cry from what may be termed ‘dear and convincing’, for it
cannot stand the test of logic and appears to be unnatural upon the
standard of common experience.

“The court is convinced that
the events in dispute happened as narrated by the witnesses for the
prosecution; that Basilan was killed while obeying Curambao’s order to
lay down his arms and submit to an investigation; and that Tigwasan and
Blasa were killed while standing harmlessly at the foot of their ladder
far from the accused.”

A review of the
record has disclosed nothing that would warrant interference with the
foregoing findings. On the contrary, the police blotter for September
16, 1952, which was introduced as Exhibit 9 of the defense, contradicts
the testimony of its witnesses. Indeed, the latter would have us
believe that, after coming down from his house, Basilan Laktayan rushed
towards the peace officers with the avowed intention of attacking them.
However, the police blotter says that Basilan Laktayan “stealthily”
approached the peace officers, which, by the way, is, likewise, false
and was impossible, for the policemen had deployed themselves a few
meters away from said house. Hence, when—at the behest of Salibat,
acting upon instructions from Sgt. Curambao—Basilan Laktayan, Tigwasan
Molaong and Blasa Bansalan emerged therefrom, they were clearly within
the view of the six (6) policemen, who were watching them closely and
could not have failed to detect any of their (victims’) moves.

The defense, likewise, maintains that, after shooting Basilan Laktayan,
Sgt. Curambao bade Blasa Dansalan and Tigwasan Molaong to lay down
their arms, because the policemen meant to do them no harm, but, before
he finished his utterance, a spear fell near him. No such thing was,
however, mentioned in the police blotter, which thus corroborates the
version of the prosecution. In a further effort to justify the killing
of Blasa Dansalan and Tigwasan Molaong, the defendants stated, in said
police blotter, that the aforementioned Subanos “advanced and fought
with their cris (Kris)”. This statement and the theory of the defense
were refuted, however, by the fact that, immediately after the
occurrence, the dead bodies of Blasa and Tigwasan were found at the
foot of the aforementioned house, with their “barong” inside the scabbards.

Counsel for defendant-appellant Duran maintains that the lower “court
erred in holding that there was conspiracy in the case at bar”. Insofar
as said conspiracy was essential to hold Duran responsible for the
death of Basilan Laktayan, appellant’s pretense is well-taken. Indeed,
the record shows that the policemen went to the scene of the
occurrence, mainly for the purpose of bringing Blasa Dansalan, Tigwasan
Molaong and Basilan Laktayan to the police station for investigation.
Although prepared to use force, if necessary, the policemen intended to
accomplish their task peacefully, if possible. In fact, they bade
Sayeng Sandal and Andres Salibat to urge Blasa, Tigwasan and Basilan to
submit peacefully to the authorities. Lastly, policeman Duran cannot be
held responsible for the act of his superior, Sgt. Curambao, in
shooting Basilan. Insofar as the killing of Blasa and Tigwasan is
concerned, it makes no difference whether there was conspiracy or not,
it appearing that Duran had fired at them.

It is next urged
that the lower court erred in convincing appellant “when the
prosecution failed to prove by direct, clear and convincing proof” that
he had “actually fired and shot” Blasa and Tigwasan. There is no merit
in this pretense. Andres Salibat and Sayeng Sandal, as witnesses for
the prosecution, and defendants Salarda, Dagayloan and Curambao as
witnesses for the defense, testified that, upon being ordered by
Curambao to fire, the five policemen under his command—including,
therefore, Duran—did so. And this is borne out by the fact that
according to the police blotter Exhibit 9—the policemen consumed 50
rounds of ammunitions on that occasion. In this connection, it is
interesting to note that appellant Duran did not take the witness stand
to deny his participation in the killing of Blasa and Tigwasan. Worse
still, counsel for the defense announced in the lower court that he
would “dispense with the presentation” of the testimony of defendants
Cruz, Cadungog and Duran, because such testimony “would just be
corroborative” of that of Curambao, Dagayloan and Salarda.

We agree, however, with appellant herein that the lower court erred in
finding him guilty of triple murder. As above stated, Duran cannot be
held responsible for the death of Basilan, which was due solely to an
act of Sgt. Curambao. As regards the death of Blasa and Tigwasan, the
qualifying circumstance of treachery, upon which the lower court relied
in characterizing the crime committed as murder, is not alleged in the
information. Besides, the generic aggravating circumstance of treachery
should not be considered against Duran, for he did not employ means,
methods or forms, in the commission of the offense, tending directly
and especially to insure its execution, without risk to himself arising
from the defense which the offended party may make, but merely, fired
when, and because, his superior, Sgt. Curambao, gave the order to do
so. For the same reason, and in view of the other conditions under
which appellant acted, we do not deem it fit to consider against him
any other aggravating circumstance.

In short, he should be
acquitted of the charge, insofar as the death of Basilan Laktayan is
concerned. As regards the death of Blasa Dansalan and Tigwasan Molaong,
he should be convicted of two (2) homicides, and the penalty therefor
should be twice imposed in its medium period. Accordingly, appellant
should be sentenced twice to an indeterminate penalty ranging from
eight (8) years and one (1) day of prision mayor, to fourteen (14) years, eight (8) months and one (1) day of reclusion temporal.

So modified, the decision appealed from is hereby affirmed, in all
other respects, with the costs of this instance against
defendant-appellant Eustaquio Duran. It is so ordered.

Padilla, Bautista Angelo, Labrador, Reyes, J. B. L., Barrera, Gutierrez David, Paredes, and Dizon, JJ., concur.