G. R. No. L-17214. June 21, 1965
THE PEOPLE of THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF and APPELLEE, VS.CIRIAC0 ALIPIS, ET AL., DEFENDANTS, CIRIACO ALIPIS, DEFENDANT and APPELLANT
BENGZON, J.P., J.:
First Instance of Quezon after finding him guilty of murder with the aggravating
circumstances of “abuse of confidence, nighttime and in band”.
Sergeant Enrique Lloren, a co-accused,was acquitted. Four others—John-Doe,
Peter Doe, Richard Doe and William Doe – jointly accused but unidentified and at
large, were not included in the trial.
The following are facts established in the record and uncontroverted:
Captain Apolonio Pagsuberon was the Commanding Officer of Headquarters and
Headquarters Service Company, the Finance and PX Officer, of the 2nd Battalion
Combat Team, stationed at Atimonan, Quezon.
At about, 5:30 A.M. of October 15, 1957, Sergeant Ciriaco Alipis reported to
the Sergeant of the Guards, Julio Jacinto, that Captain Pagsuberon, their
Commanding Officer, was missing from camp.
Thereupon a search party – composed of Sergeant Jacinto, Sergeant Alipis,
Corporal Remante and Private First Class Billones – set out in a jeep to look
for the Captain.
After a fruitless search in the town proper of Atimonan (about a kilometer
from the camp), the party followed the road to Gumaca, Quezon. On the road,
about 400 yards from the camp, they came upon scattered pieces of paper. At the
bottom of a thirty-foot cliff along the road, they found the lifeless body of
Captain Pagsuberon, still bleeding from a gunshot wound through the head. The
Captain’s .45 caliber pistol was near his body.
Private First Class Billones drove back to camp and reported the discovery to
Major Guillermo T. Marfori, Battalion Commander of the 2nd BCT. Shortly
thereafter, Major Marfori, Captain Aguinaldo and Captain Enriquez arrived at
the aforesaid site. Philippine Constabulary soldiers, the Mayor, Justice of the
Peace, and policemen of Atimonan, came after them. At Major Marfori’s order, the
deceased was placed on a stretcher, loaded in a jeep and brought to the
headquarters at the camp. An empty .45 caliber shell was also found by Major
Marfori somewhere near the place where the body was found.
At the headquarters Major Antonio Briones, Medico-Legal Officer of the
Philippine Constabulary, performed an autopsy, on Captain Pagsuberon’s body. The
Necropsy Report thereon states these postmortem findings:
“A well developed and well nourished adult individual of about 38 years in
the early stage of rigor mortis observed in the neck and trunk region.
Postmortem lividity absent. The following external signs of violence were
found:“1. Contusion, extensive, around the left eye, with reddish brown
discoloration. Slight corneal hemorrhage was observed on the external canthus.
The same contusion but moderate in degree was also noted around the right
eye.“2. Contusion, 5 x 10 cm on the scapular region.of the back of left shoulder,
with reddish brown discoloration.“3. Abrasion 1.8 x 1.4 cm-on the inferior aspect of the chin, 1 cm right of
the median line.“4. Abrasion, 2.5 x 2.5 cm with irregular border on the anterior aspect of
the upper third portion of the left leg about 3 inches below the left knee.“5. Abrasion, 2.5 x 7.5 cm on the anterior medial aspect of the middle third
of left leg with slight amount of hemorrhage“6. A gunshot wound of entrance, .measuring 1.3 x 1.4 cm diameter with
irregular border, with scorched lacerated edge and with carbon deposition in the
dermal layer, tattooing and seinging of the hair. The hole in the outer table of
the skull measured 1.1 x.1.1 cm diameter, circular with marginal radiating
fractures. One meridional fracture running inferiorward is connected with an
anterior segment of a linear fracture of the Tight parietal bone. The path of
the bullet was directed inward toward the left slightly backward and downward
penetrating the substance of both hemispheres of the brain and emerged on the
left lateral side at a point on the parieto-mastoid suture of the skull causing
a compound comminuted fracture on that area of about 2.5 x 2.5 cm with several
fragments of the bone almost detached. The scalp wound of exit measured 1.0 x
2.0 cm, slit-like in appearance with brain-substance coming out of it.“7. There was a linear fracture of the right parietal bone running almost
vertically from the sagittal suture on the vertex down to the right temporal
suture into an anterior branch which connects with a meridional fracture
originating at the point of entrance of the gunshot wound, and an inferior
branch which goes down to the mastoid bone and becomes continuous with the
fracture- on the right middle fossa of the base.“8. The sagittal suture throughout was fissured to a gaping distance of about
0.5 cm. An inch-length, median portion of the coronal suture at its junction
with the sagittal suture, as well as both segments of the lamb-doldal sutures
were fissured.“Various fractures of varying size and shape were also noted at the left
middle and anterior fossa and right middle fossa of the base of the skull.
Extensive amount of subdural and subarachnoid hemorrhage was noted at the base
of the brain.“All the organs on the body except the brain were all normal. The brain was
hemorrhagic all throughout and patches of subarachnoid and subdural hemorrhage
were found in the frontal, parietal and occipital regions. The stomach was
partially filled with mixture of mucus and partly digested food. The urinary
bladder was empty. All other organs’ of the body were found
normal.
“CAUSE OF DEATH:
“Cerebral shock and hemorrhage secondary to gunshot wound of the
head.
“REMARKS:
“From the appearance and extent of the rigor mortis and the intestinal
condition, death must have happened between 0300H-0500H of the same day.“The entire brain and about 50 cc of blood from the heart was saved and
submitted to the laboratory for alcohol analysis.“The entrance gunshot wound in the skull indicated that the caliber of the
bullet used was caliber .45′ and was fired in direct contact with the scalp.“The contusions around both eyes, the abrasion below, the chin,, that of the
scapular- region of the right back and the abrasion on the left upper third of
the leg appears to have been inflicted antemortem, (before death or immediately,
before death).“There were indications of traumatic injury of varying amount of force
inflicted all over the head without apparent scalp injury, by the presence of
sub-apponeurotic contusion especially on the frontal parietal and occipital
regions.“The gunshot wound was inflicted antemortem or may have been inflicted while
the victim was already unconscious- to provide the “coup de grace” or to
simulate a case of suicide.“The multiple fractures and fissuring of the cranial sutures may have been
due to the fall of the victim from the precipice after death.“The autopsy was witnessed by Judge C. de Gracia, J.P. Atimonan, Dr. Primo
Montes, MHO, Lt Col Sebastian, Cascade Sector Commander, AFP, Major B. Valdes,
2nd BCT Bn Surgeon, Major Gulllermo Marfori, CO 2nd BCT and all other officer of
the 2nd BCT, Atimonan, Quezon,“Paraffin cast of the victim’s hand, and 6 other suspects were turned over to
the Forensic Chemistry for dermonitrate test.“An empty shell of cal. .4-5 bullet recovered at the scene and 8 pairs of
other empty shells fired from’8 suspected firearms were also submitted to the
laboratory, for examination.”
At about 7:30 A.M. of that day – October 15 – Major Marfori ordered the
investigation of the personnel stationed at the headquarters and the surrender
of their pistols. Supply Sergeant Praxedio Sornilla was able to collect that
morning only the pistols of Sergeant Pacelo, Sergeant Quiries, Sergeant Jacinto
and Sergeant Lloren. Sergeant Alipis was then being investigated by Sergeant
Leafio and his pistol was taken by the Supply Sergeant only at 5:30 in the
afternoon.
At 11:00 A.M. the pistols of Facelo, Quines, Jacinto and Lloren were brought
to the beach and test-fired for ballistic examination of their empty shells. The
ballistics expert, Major Agapito P. Figueroa of the Philippine Constabulary’s
Criminal Investigation. Service, found Sergeant Lloren’s pistol – a 45 caliber,
Remington-Rand, with Serial Number 1991156 – positive for comparison with the
questionable shell that was taken from near the site where the body was
found.
Paraffin tests for gunpowder were also made. They proved negative on
accused Ciriaco Alipis and the other soldiers Julio Jacinto, Cenon Noriel,
Jose Saunar, Mamon Marete, Paustino Medalle and Abelardo Magpaya. They turned
positive on Captain Pagsuberon’s right hand and on both hands of
Sergeant LIoren.
Sergeant Alipis pants was -found stained with human blood.
Philippine Constabulary officers investigated Sergeant Alipis, among other
soldiers. A series of three investigations was made on Alipis: First, in the
morning of October 15, by Sergeant Alberto Leaño second, in the evening of
October 15 up to the early hours of October 16, by Captain Emigdio Jose; and
third, in the evening of October 16, lasting up to midnight, by Captain Onofre
Alzate. The results of the investigations were three statements in writing
purportedly signed by Alipis.
On October 30, 1957, Captain Alzate filed in the Justice of the Peace Court
of Atimonan a complaint for murder against Alipis, Lloren and four unidentified
persons. Preliminary investigation, however, was waived by the accused, and the
record of the case was transmitted to the Court of First Instance for trial.
Accordingly, an information was filed in the Court of First Instance of
Quezon on February 24, 1958, alleging:
“That on or about the 15th day of October 1957 in the Municipality of
Atimonan, Province of Quezon, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this
Honorable Court, the said Accused, Sgt. CIRIACO ALIPIS and Sgt. ENRIQUE LLOREN,
together with JOHN DOE, PETER DOE, RICHARD DOE and WILLIAM DOE who are still at
large, conspiring and confederating together and mutually helping each other,
with intent to kill and evident premeditation and treachery, armed with a piece
of wood and pistol caliber 45, Serial Number 1991156, Remington, did then and
there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously, attack, assault and hit with the
said piece of wood Captain APOLONIO PAGSUBERON, Commanding Officer of Hq. and
Hq Service Company, in the different parts of his body and after rendering him
unconscious, same was brought to barrio Angeles, Atimonan, Quezon, and while
thereat, was shot at the right temple with the said pistol, passing thru and
thru and later dumped the body of said Captain from the precipice of the river
band which caused his instantaneous death.“That in the commission of the above described crime, the aggravating
circumstances present were: (1) Night time, (2) In band, (3) Superior strength
and (4) Abuse of confidence, the deceased, being their superior
officer.”
Duly assisted by counsel, Alipis and Lloren pleaded not guilty and stood
joint trial. On December 3, 1959, the trial court rendered judgment, as
aforestated, thus:
“PREMISED on the foregoing considerations, the Court hereby finds the accused
CIRIACO ALIPIS: GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of murder, defined
and punished by Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, committed with the three
aggravating circumstances of abuse of confidence, nighttime and in band, without
any mitigating to offset them, and hereby sentences him to die by electrocution
as provided by law, to Indemnify the heirs of the deceased Captain Apolonio
Pagsuberon in the sum of to P6,000, and to pay the costs.“The accused ENRIQUE LLOREN is hereby ACQUITTED on the ground of reasonable
doubt, with one-fifth of the costs de oficio, declaring the bail bond executed
by him for his provisional release from the custody of the law cancelled and of
no further force and effect.“So ordered.”
Defendant Alipis appealed to this Court.
A review of the record has shown no direct and positive evidence that
appellant, alone or with others, killed Captain Pagsuberon. The court a
quo, however, premised his conviction upon a “series of circumstances”,
as follows:
“(1) Sergeant Alipis was the first to broadcast the news before the reveille
( 5:30 o’clock, a.m., October 15) that Captain Pagsuberon was not in the camp
and was missing; (2) the body of Captain Pagsuberon was found by Alipis himself
by pretending to have seen it from an elevated cement ramp on the road to Gumaca
overlooking the place where Captain Pagsuberon lay dead; (3) Sergeant Alipis
gave several versions of the whereabouts of Captain Pagsuberon on October 14 and
of his death, attributing it to suicide which was impossible because of the
presence of marks of violence on the person of the victim inflicted ante-mortem
(See supplement to medico legal report, Exhibits B-l, B-l-B, B-l-C, B-l-D and
B-l-E); (4) in one statement (Exhibit Z) Sergeant Alipis admitted having
squeezed the trigger of the pistol of Captain Pagsuberon which the latter aimed
with his left hand at his right temple; (5) it is awkward, nay out of the
ordinary that with the left hand Captain Pagsuberon would point his pistol at
his right temple because if Captain Pagsuberon really wanted to commit suicide
he would have used his pistol with his right hand and point it to his right
temple be insure the success of the end sought instead of using the left hand to
point to the right temple; (6) Sergeant Alipis was alone when he returned at
4:00 o’clock a.m. on October 15 to the house of Tamares asking for women; (7)
when he arrived later at the mess hall at 4:30 a.m., he asked the mess sergeant
(De Luna) if the latter had heard a shot to which De Luna answered no (“wala”),
remarking that Alipis might be dreaming; (8) at that precise moment, Sergeant
Tredente arrived in the mess hall and joyfully embraced Alipis, saying Peace
time na, meaning that they both rejoiced over the death of Captain Pagsuberon;
(9) at 9:00 a.m., October 15, before his investigation by the authorities,
Alipis changed the slide assembly of his pistol and attached it to the pistol of
another sergeant (Lloren) to escape detection and to shift to another party the
responsibility for the crime (10) Sergeant Sornilla became a turncoat against
the prosecution after the release on bail of Alipis but it is still a fact that
the change of the slide assembly of Alipis’ pistol took place at 9:00 a.m. while
his investigation started at 9:30 a.m. on October 15; (11) the story of Alipis
picturing the desperate financial situation of Captain Pagsuberon prior to the
murder stating that Captain Pagsuberon asked Alipis to borrow P600 from any
party in Atimonan is highly incredible, there being no concrete evidence that
the deceased was really short in his money and property accountability; (12) the
lower portion of Alipis’ pants bore stains of human blood.”
Section 5, Rule 133 (formerly Section 98 of Rule 123) of the Rules of Court
provides that circumstantial evidence is sufficient for conviction if: “(a)
There is more than one circumstance; (b) The facts from which the inference’s
are derived are proven; and (c) The combination of all the circumstances is such
as to produce a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt.”
We shall examine the “series of circumstances”, Separately and as a whole, in
the light of these requisites.
“(1) Sergeant Alipis, was the first to broadcast the news before the reveille
( 5:30 A.M., October 15) that Captain Pagsuberon was not in camp and was
missing;” -.
The record shows that Sergeant Alipis was the one who reported to the
Sergeant of the Guards that Captain Pagsuberon was missing. Nothing therein
justifies the statement that he was the first to broadcast the news”. As a
subordinate of Captain Pagsuberon, it was appellant’s duty to report that he was
missing. The record-further shows that Sergeant Alipis was previously instructed
by the Captain to wake him up that morning.
“(2) The body of Captain Pagsuberon was found by Alipis himself by pretending
to have seen it from an elevated cement ramp on the road to Gumaca overlooking
the place where Captain Pagsuberon lay dead;”
Prosecution witness Sergeant Jacinto testified that Sergeant-Alipis was the
first to find the Captain13 body. But no one testified that Sergeant Alipis
“pretended” to have seen it. Furthermore, Sergeant Alipis denied that he was the
first to see the body, stating that Sergeant .Jacinto-saw it ahead of him.
Private First Class Biliones, also a member of the search party, te.s-tifled
that Sergeant Jacinto was the one who first saw the Captain’s body (Tsn., Feb.
2, 1959; p. 25). We do not find it clearly proven that Sergeant Alipis was the
first to find the Captain’s body.
“(3) Sergeant Alipis gave several versions of the whereabouts of Captain
Pagsuberon on October 14 and his death, attributing it to suicide which is
impossible because of the presence of marks of violence on the person of the
victim inflicted antemortem;”
Appellant’s purported statements are Exhibit BB, from the investigation by
Sergeant Leaño; Exhibit Y, from the investigation by Captain Jose; and Exhibit
Z, from the’ investigation by Captain Alzate. They differ as to what transpired
between 3:00 A.M. and 5:00 A.M, of October 15.
Regarding this, we quote from Exhibit BB:
ginawa?
pumunta sa lugar na kanyang (Apolonio Pagsuberon) tinutulugan, subalit siya ay
wala kung kaya’t ako’y muling tumulog sa ang oras na noon ay mag aalas
3:30.
yaon?
4:30 ng umaga ng fecha 15 ng Octobre 1957 at muling pumunta ako sa higaan ni
Captain Pagsuberon upang alamin kung siya ay naroroon na.
Pagsuberon?
Club ay aking natagpuan si Col. Faustino Medalle, S/Sgt. Julio Jacinto at N/Sgt.
Noriel ng 17th BCT. At aking ipinagtanong kung nakikita nila si Captain
Pagsuberon, ngunit sinabi sa akin nila na hindi nila nakikita, kung kaya’t ako’y
muling bumalik na sa barracks.
matagpuan ay saan ka na pumunta at ano na iyong ginawa?
ginawa ay ako ay muling bumalik sa barracks at sinabi ko kay T/Sgt. Juan Facelo
na wala si Captain Pagsuberon sa kanyang
quarter.”
from Exhibit Y:
everything you know from 9:30 PM 14 October 1937 up to the time you saw Captain
Pagsuberon dead?
sitting beside me on my cot. It was dark and I could not recognize him, I
recognized his voice to be that of Capt. Pagsuberon. Our conversation was as
follows:
mo’.
nagpakamatay’.“After the above conversation Capt Pagsuberon immediately left my room and I
saw him passed the Mess Hall and jumped the fence behind the mess hall. I opened
the light and put on my pants and shoes without tying them and tried to follow
Capt Pagsuberon passing behind the house of Sgt Cordova. I ran all over the town
looking for him. My route was as follows: From Marivic to Zigzag Hotel, to the
beach behind of the Governor, and from there I proceeded to the street where the
house of Sgt Catakutan is located. But I could not still find him so I returned
to camp asking the guard on post,. Cpl Javier, and he told me that the CO has
not returned to camp, after which I returned to my cot and rested. At about 4:40
AM while I was inside my room I heard a shot in the direction of the cemetery. I
went out of my room and I saw S/Sgt de Luna and asked him where the shot came
from. S/Sgt de Luna who was at the time cooking answered back that I am only
dreaming. At 5:00 AM I reported the matter to T/Sgt Facelo that the CO is not in
his quarters.
4:00 AM who were persons you saw and that saw;
gambling house near Coco Grove Nite Club and there I talked to Medalle asking
him the whereabouts of the CO, Capt Pagsuberon and he told me he is there in the
Cabaret, so I went to the cabaret and I found out it was closed already. 1 also
saw M/Sgt Noriel/ Sgt Jacinto in the gambling house.
house?
said I do not know and I returned to the
camp.”
and from Exhibit Z:
at about 11:00 P.M. to sleep/ were you able to sleep on that
night?
October 1957.
up.
up?
at the front of the house of Governor LEON GUINTO.
available prostitutes.
prostitutes in the prostitution house?
near the cemetery.
he has no querida and that was only his alibi.
going to Gumaca and he held my right arm. When we reached to the place where
garbage being thrown (basuran) he (Capt PAGSUBERON) sat down on the cement wall
still holding me and pulled his pistol caliber 45 with his left-hand, he hold it
pointing to his right temple. I advised not to do that because of his family and
children. He still insist and grab my hand (right) telling me to pull the
trigger of the pistol and told further that after squeezing the trigger I will
throw the pistol away, but I refused to do it, he grabbed again my hand and
placed again to the trigger of the pistol, but not knowing the pistol was locked
I was forced to squeeze the trigger and the pistol exploded, causing him to fall
down.
pistol?
ravine”.
him from falling into the deep ravine.
trigger, as instructed by Capt PAGSUBERON?
fell into the ravine.
that night?
The statements afore-quoted contain several versions; but that Exhibits Y and
Z are statements of appellant is doubtful. Appellant denies the signatures in
Exhibit Z, the only statement linking him to the Captain’s death, and a
comparison of said signatures with those that, are admittedly genuine (Exhibits
BB-1, Y-2, and Y-4) shows a striking dissimilarity. Furthermore, the original of
Exhibit Y is unsigned at the end; the carbon copy of Exhibit Y, namely, Exhibit
Y-3, is signed at the end, but the signature (Exhibit Y-5) Is also disowned by
appellant, and likewise appears different from the admitted signatures. Finally
Exhibits Y and Z are not under oath, whereas Exhibit BB appears subscribed and
sworn to before the Justice of the Peace.
“(4) in one statement (Exhibit Z) Sergeant Alipis admitted having squeezed
the trigger of the pistol of Captain Pagsuberon ‘ which the latter aimed with
his left hand at nisi right temple;” (5) if is awkward, nay out of the ordinary that with his left hand Captain
Pagsuberon would point his pistol to his right temple: because if Captain
Pagsuberon really wanted to commit suicide he would have used his pistol with
his right hand and point It to his right temple to insure the success of the end
sought instead of using the left hand to point to the right
temple;”
Number 5 is not a separate circumstance but an opinion of [the court
regarding circumstance Number 4.
Serious doubts, as stated, exist as to whether the statement Exhibit 2 is
that of the appellant. Furthermore, the statement therein is “I was forced to
squeeze the trigger and the pistol exploded”, It is therefore identified
thereunder with the very act by which Captain Pagsuberon allegedly shot himself.
As such, it suffers from the same improbability that impelled the court a quo to
disbelieve the aforesaid act of suicide and it cannot be isolated into an
independent statement that Alipis shot Captain Pagsuberon.
“(6) Sergeant Alipis was alone when he returned at 4:00 o’clock a.m., on
October 15 to the house of Tamares looking for women; “
Segundo Tamares, the owner of the ill-reputed house, testified as follows: At
10 P.M. of October 14 Sergeant Saunar and three persons unknown to him went to
his house Sergeant Saunar presented to him one Captain Pagsuberon; they were
looking for girls but he told them he had none; after five minutes, they left.
At 12:00 midnight these same persons, returned; they asked if there were girls,
and, upon being told there were none, they left. At about 3:00 A.M. of October
15 three persons came to his house; these persons were different from the four
that came at 10:00 P.M. and 12:00 midnight; the person introduced to him as
Captain Pagsuberon was not in this group; this group stayed for ten minutes; one
of them “laid on the lap of Rosie”, “the other one was laughing and the other
one was sitting.” (Tsn., pp. 43-56.)
Rosa Caballero, a prostitute in Tamares’ house, testified, thus: At about
10:00 p.m. of October 14 Captain Pagsuberon, Sergeants Saunar and Tredente came
to Tamares house; they asked for a woman, but left when told there was none. At
about 3:00 A.M. of October 15 they returned but Captain Pagsuberon was not with
them; specifically, Tredente and Caluyo were the ones who came at 3:00 A.M. Rosa
Caballero noticed that Tredente’s uniform had plenty of sand; she asked
Tredente where he came from and he said they crank somewhere. They left after
five minutes. At 4:00 A.M. Alipis came and asked for women. (Tsn., pp.
64-71.)
These witnesses, therefore, testified that Sergeant Alipis went to the house
of Tamares alone and only at 4:00 A.M. of October 15. They did not see him with
Captain Pagsuberon nor with the group that went with Captain Pagsuberon. The
court a quo had no basis in finding that appellant “returned” to the
house of Tamares at 4:00 A.M., since, as stated, he was not among those who went
there earlier that night.
“(7) when he arrived later at the mess hall at 4:30 A.M., he asked the mess
sergeant (De Luna) if the latter had heard a shot to which de Luna answered no
(‘wala’), remarking that Alipis might be dreaming;”
The foregoing incident was testified to by Sergeant De Luna and by appellant
himself; however, they did not state that the time was 4:30 A.M. Sergeant De
Lima said he was in the kitchen at 3:45 A.M., and Alipis approached him “after
four o’clock” (Tsn., p. 324.) Appellant testified that at 4:00 A.M. he woke up,
went to the quarters of Captain Pagsuberon to wake him up per instructions, saw
he was not there, went back towards his own room, heard a shot, proceeded to the
kitchen and asked De Luna if the latter heard it. (Tsn., p. 706.)
“(8) at that precise moment, Sergeant Tredente arrived in the mess hall and
joyfully embraced Alipis, saying, ‘Peace time NA,1 meaning that they both
rejoiced over’ the death of Captain Pagsuberon;”
Sergeant De Luna testified for the prosecution that: Alipis returned to his
room after he had told Alipis he heard no shot; five minutes later Alipis
returned and asked for a cup of coffee; another enlisted man, Sergeant Tredente,
came to the kitchen. (Tsn., pp. 325-326.)
Still on direct examination, Sergeant De Luna went on:
the kitchen?
came and embraced Sergeant Alipis, saying ‘Peace time’ and both of them
laughed.
Sergeant Alipis ‘Peace time NA’ did you hear some more words aside from that
from Sergeant Tredente and Sergeant Alipis?
time,’ not ‘Peace time na.’
Aside from the words ‘Peace time’ as uttered by Sergeant Tredente did you hear
some more words from Sergeant Tredente aside from the words “Peace time?
talking in a language which I think was Ilongo, I could, not understand it very
well. They were talking about women.” (Tsn., pp. 326-327; italics
supplied.)
Appellant testified that Sergeant Tredente “told me ‘Peace time’ and the
latter laughed and told me he was not able to fuck a woman because she is
bleeding”. (Tsn., 720.)
There is nothing in the record to show that Sergeant Tredente and appellant,
by the words “Peace time”, or in any other way, rejoiced over the death of
Captain Pagsuberon.
“(9) at 9:00 A.M., October 15, before his investigation by the authorities,
Alipis changed the slide assembly of his pistol and attached it to the pistol of
another sergeant (Lloren) to escape detection and to shift to another party the
responsibility for the crime;”
Supply Sergeant Praxedio Sornilla testified that upon orders of Captain
Alvarez he collected the pistols of Sergeants Lloren, Facelo, Quines and Jacinto
when they were in formation at about 7:30 A.M. of October 15; that after putting
tags on the pistols he placed them inside the estante at the supply room; that
at about 9:00 A.M. Alipis came to the supply room, poked a pistol at him and
threatened him:. “Noy, Huag kang umimik, at kung iimik ka ay isusunod kita”;
that Alipis went inside the supply room, took a pistol from the estante and,
from behind a partition, did something that produced the sound of changing spare
parts of pistols that Alipis came out, placed a pistol in his waist and
left.
According, however, to Manuel Campomanes the policeman who helped in Sergeant
Leaño’s investigation of Alipis – all the time from 8:00 A.M. to 11:00 A.M. of
October 15, Alipis was inside the room of Major Baga under investigation by
Sergeant Leafio (Tsn. p. 595). There is no reason to doubt this testimony from
an impartial source. Furthermore, Praxedio Sornilla later retracted upon
cross-examination, stating that Alipis did not come to the supply room at all
and that he so testified only because he was threatened by Captain Alzate (Tsn.,
p. 353) In his rebuttal testimony, Captain Alzate never denied this point.
“(10) Sergeant Sornilla became a turncoat against the prosecution after the
release on bail of Alipis but it is still a fact that the change of the slide
assembly of Alipis1 pistol took place at 9:00 A.M. while his investigation
started at 9:30 A.M. on October 15;”
The investigation of Alipis by Sergeant Leaño in the room of Major Baga was,
as stated, from 8:00 A.M. to 11:00 A.M. Sergeant Sornilla even stated, in
testifying for the prosecution:
“COURT:
the pistols were surrendered?
being investigated at that time in the office of the S-2 by the PC.” (Tsn., p.
99.)
There is no basis in the record for stating that the aforesaid investigation
started at 9:00 A.M. Policeman Campomanes, on the other hand, positively
testified that it started at 8:00 A.M.
“(11) the story of Alipis picturing the desperate financial situation of
Captain Pagsuberon prior to the murder, stating that Captain Pagsuberon asked
Alipis to borrow P600 from any party in Atimonan is highly incredible, there
being no concrete evidence that the deceased was really short in his money and
property accountability;”
A fact established in the record is that Captain Pagsuberon paid only
one-half of his men on the pay-clay of October 14 (Tsn., p. 657). This tends to
support Alipis testimony that Captain Pagsuberon was short of funds. If this
were not true, the result of the postmortem auditing of his funds as the Finance
Officer of ‘the 2nd Battalion Combat Team could have easily rebutted it. But,
none was offered and the authorities concerned were conspicuously silent on this
point.
There are further indications that Captain Pagsuberon used to borrow money
from civilians in and out of Atimonan (Tsn. p. 696) and used to spend a lot (of
money on women (Tsn., p. 722).
“(12) the lower portion of Alipis’ pants bore stains of human
blood.”
This point is a fact duly proved; but so is the fact that Alipis was one of
those who, upon Major Marfori’s order, carried the bleeding corpse of Captain
Pagsuberon on a stretcher, loaded it on a jeep and brought it to the camp.
(Tsn., 704; Feb. 2, 1959. P. 31.) The lower court evidently assumed that the
stains of human blood were in Alipis’ pants from the time the Captain was
killed up to the time Alipis was investigated Considering however that according
to the autopsy the victim must have been killed between 3:00 A.M. and 5:00 A.M.,
Alipis had plenty of time to change his pants to avoid’ detection of such
incriminatory stains of blood on his pants, instead of going around with it in
company with the other soldiers and officers searching for the missing
commanding officer whom he himself reported to be missing to the guard on duty.
That is assuming an unusual behaviors on the part, of a guilty person. Alipis’
explanation is more in consonance with the ordinary occurrence of events.
Accordingly, as far as the record shows, the circumstances duly proven are as
follows: (l) Appellant was the first to report, at about 5:30 A.M. of October
15, 1957 that Captain Pagsuberon was not in camp; (2) At 4:00 A.M. of October
15, 1957 appellant went to Tamares’ house alone, “looking for women”; (3) After
4:00 A.M. of October 15, 1957 appellant, at the camp’s kitchen, asked Mess
Sergeant De Luna if he heard a shot and the latter replied “No,”; (4) Shortly
afterwards , Sergeant Tredente came, embraced appellant, said “Peace time” and
talked about women; and (5) Appellant’s pants was stained with human blood.
We do not find the foregoing’ set of circumstances inconsistent with
appellant’s innocence: singly or collectively, they do not suffice to establish
beyond reasonable doubt that appellant, alone or with others, shot Captain
Pagsuberon to death.
The Insufficiency of the circumstances afore-stated becomes all the more
clear when we consider them together with-the rest of the facts and
circumstances duly proven, upon which prosecution should have been directed
against others rather than accused Alipis.
Such facts and circumstances are:
Captain Pagsuberon was seen going with a group of enlisted men, among them
Sergeants Tredente and Saunar, shortly before he was killed, but appellant was
not seen, with him or with the group that went with him. The ante-mortem
injuries of Captain Pagsuberon indicate that he was assaulted by several
persons, whereas the prosecution’s evidence showed Alipis to be alone when he
went to Tamares’ house.
The place where the body of Captain Pagsuberon was found was sandy. Sergeant
Tredente, whose statement “Peace time” ‘was construed together with his
behaviour by the court a quo as indicative of a guilty conscience/ went to
Tamares1 house at 3:00 A.M. of October 15 with “plenty of sand” spread in his
uniform; the same was not true of Alipis when he went to Tamares ‘ house that
same morning.
Furthermore, no paraffin test was made on Sergeant Tredente, and the pistols
of Sergeants Tredente and Saunar were not among those taken for ballistic
tests.
The inference that appellant shot ‘Captain Pagsuberon is rendered further
doubtful, notwithstanding the purported statement of Alipis in Exhibit Z, by the
fact that the paraffin test on him proved negative. The court a quo explained
such negative results by stating that Alipis could have fired the shot in the
direction of the wind or with gloves in his hands, an assumption that has no
basis upon.the record. As noted earlier, it was Sergeant Enrique Lloren whose
hands showed positive under the paraffin test.
Similarly, from the ballistic, tests, Lloren’s pistol was found positive for
identifying marks akin to those on the shell taken near the place where Captain
Pagsuberon1 was found. Notwithstanding such evidence, the court a quo found
appellant guilty, upon the reason that:
“An examination of Exhibit V shows that the slide assembly described by
Lloren as the slide assembly of his pistol Exhibit D is now attached to this
service pistol of Alipis Exhibit W. The lettering on the slide assembly is very
clear, which shows that it is not a very old slide assembly. This goes to prove
conclusively that the slide assembly now attached to the service pistol of
Alipis, Exhibit W, is the slide assembly of Lloren’s service pistol Exhibit D,
Serial No. 1991156. This pistol of Lloren after its slide assembly was changed
was fired twice for test purposes and the empty shells resulting from the firing
resembled the questionable empty shell Exhibit D-2. This result is but natural
because both pistols of Alipis and Lloren were Remington .Rand, caliber .45. The
empty shell fired from the slide assembly of the service pistol of Alipis would
be the same as the empty shells that were fired from the slide assembly of
Alipis which is now attached to the service pistol of Lloren, so that it is safe
to conclude that the questionable empty shell was fired from the service pistol
of Alipis as well as the two empty shells fired for test
purposes,”
The finding that Exhibit W is the pistol of Alipis is not supported by any
evidence. The record shows that Exhibit VI – Remington Rand, caliber .45, Serial
Number 2458306-is that of Sergeant Cells (Tsn., 342-343). In fact, the same was
presented in court only because Major Marfori used it to demonstrate how fast
slide assemblies of two pistols could be changed.(Tsn., 312.) Finally, appellant
testified, and nothing to the contrary has been adduced, that his pistol is the
one marked “Exhibit 4-Lloren”, which is a Colt, and not a Remington Rand (Tsn.3-
679). Clearly, therefore, the court a quo convicted the appellant under the
erroneous assumption that the slide assembly attached to Lloren’s gun came from
appellant’s pistol.
Finally, no motive has been shown for appellant to kill Captain Pagsuberon.
The court a_ cju£ stated it could think of “no other motive than robbery” but
this, again has no support in the record.
In the case at bar, we do not find from ,the circumstantial evidence an
unbroken chain leading to a fair and reasonable conclusion that appellant, to
the exclusion of all others is guilty of shooting Captain Pagsuberon. Appellant,
therefore, cannot be convicted upon the strength of such circumstantial evidence
( U.S. vs. Villos, 6 Phil. 510; People vs. Subano, 73 Phil. 6921 People vs.
Labita, L-8481, Sept. 15, 195d) They do not link him conclusively to be the
author of the crime charged; on the contrary, taken with the other facts on
record, they point towards other suspects.
Consequently, the combination of all the circumstances does not produce
conviction beyond reasonable doubt. By reasonable doubt is meant “doubt
engendered by an investigation of the whole proof and an inability, after such
investigation, to let the mind rest easy upon the certainty of guilt”. (United
States vs. Lasada, 18 Phil. 90, 96.)
.
WHEREFORE, the judgment appealed from is reversed, and appellant Ciriaco
Alipis is hereby acquitted, with costs de oficio. So ordered.
Bengzon, C.J., Bautista Angelo, Reyes, J.B.L., Dizon, Regala,
Makalintal, and Zaldivar, JJ., concur.