THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE, VS. ELIAS CADACIO AND JULIAN OBRADOR, DEFENDANTS AND APPELLANTS.

Elias Cadacio and Julian Obrador were charged with

the crime of triple murder, with double frustrated murder,

and attempted murder, in the Court of First Instance of

Batangas, in an information which recited:

“That on or about the 24th day of April, 1955, in
the Barrio of Dayapan, Municipality of Lemery, Province of Batangas,
Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the
above-named accused, together with three unknown persons who are still
at large, armed with firearms, conspiring and confederating together,
acting in common accord and mutually aiding one another, with the
deliberate intent to kill Dionisio de Leus, Serapia Gamboa, Geminiano
Lagrosa, Simplicio Gamboa, Leoncio Razon and Pastor Kamson, by means of
treachery and with evident premeditation, did then and there wilfully,
unlawfully and feloniously without justifiable cause, attack, assault
and fire shots at the said Dionisio de Leus, Serapia Gamboa, Leoncio
Razon, Geminiano Lagrosa, Simplicio Gamboa and Pastor Kamson, suddenly
and without warning, the accused thus employing means and methods in
the execution of the crime which tended directly and especially to
insure its execution without risk to themselves arising from the
defense which the offended parties might make; that as a result
thereof, the accused succeeded in inflicting mortal bullet wounds in
the different parts of the body of said Dionisio de Leus, Serapia
Gamboa and Geminiano Lagrosa, which injuries directly caused their
death; that the said accused succeeded in inflicting upon Simplicio
Gamboa gunshot wound, right waist and upon Leoncio Razon wound
punctured right superciliary area which injuries caused the illness,
required medical attendance and prevented the offended parties from
performing their regular work for a period of one week and two weeks
respectively, thus performing all the acts of execution which should
have produced the crime of murder as a consequence, but which
nevertheless did not produce it by reason of causes independent of
their will, that is, by the timely and able medical assistance rendered
to said Simplicio Gamboa and Leoncio Razon, which prevented their
death; and the said accused did then and there commence the commission
of the crime of murder directly by overt acts, that is, by attacking,
assaulting and firing shots at the said Pastor Kamson, and if the
accused did not succeed in performing all the acts of execution which
should constitute the crime of murder, it was not due to their
voluntary and spontaneous desistance but because the shots failed to
hit the said Pastor Kamson and that he was able to jump out of the jeep
and crawl on the ground; that the crime was committed with the
concurrence of the aggravating circumstances of evident premeditation
and use of superior strength.

After an arraignment wherein both the accused pleaded

not guilty, trial was held; and thereafter the judgment

hereinbefore described, was rendered. Both defendants

appealed in due time, contending that the prosecution had

failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence, their

identity with the killers of Barrio Dayapan, Lemery,

Batangas.

On and before April 24, 1955, in Lemery, Batangas,

Leoncio Razon, Pastor Kamson and Dionisio de Leus,

were partners in the business of buying and selling

swine. That morning, they went to barrio Payapa of

the same town, to purchase some pigs. From Lemery

they rode in a jeepney owned by Martiniano Lagrosa,

but driven by Leoncio Razon. Cruising along barrio

Dayapan, the vehicle passed a man standing by the side

of the road, near the store of Sixto Magsino, accompanied by a woman carrying fish. The man signaled the

jeepney to stop. There was another man beside the

couple.

Because Dionisio de Leus had previously instructed

Razon not to pick up other passengers, for they were carrying much cash, Razon did not stop the jeepney,

but proceeded to its destination.

At about 2:00 o’clock in the afternoon of that day, after buying
pigs, Razon and companions returned home on the same vehicle. As they
neared the house of Simplicio Gamboa, the young nephew of the owner of
the jeepney, named Geminiano Lagrosa, flagged down the vehicle.
Simplicio Gamboa, Geminiano Lagrosa, Serapia Gamboa and the latters two
small children climbed into the jeepney to ride with the three original
passengers (Dionisio de Leus, Leoncio Razon and Pastor Kamson). The
motor car continued its trip but after it had passed the residential
part of Dayapan, its occupants heard a detonation which at first they
thought was a busted tire. Successive shots, coming from all
directions, immediately followed. Leoncio Razon, Pastor Kamson and
Simplicio Gamboa presently beheld two men, one in the middle of the
road in front of the jeepney, the other by the right side near the
ditch. Both held “long firearms” aimed at the vehicle and both fired as
they moved towards it Jumping out of the jeepney, Razon dived into a
nearby ravine. Pastor Kamson and Simplicio Gamboa followed suit. All of
them, although not together and at the same time, crawled and followed
the same trail in the ravine towards Matingsin crossing. They
eventually came upon each other; and together, they proceeded to the
Matingsin road junction, where they hailed a pick-up bus to take them
to the Lemery poblacion.

The ambush caused the death of Dionisio de Leus,

Serapia Gamboa, and Geminiano Lagrosa. The first received four bullet wounds. A bullet hit Serapia Gamboa

above the left eyebrow. Geminiano Lagrosa exhibited

five gunshot wounds. On the other hand, Leoncio Razon

and Simplicio Gamboa suffered physical injuries. Razon

with a punctured wound in his right superciliary area

and Simplicio Gamboa with a gunshot wound in his right

wrist, were treated in the provincial hospital. Pastor

Kamson luckily escaped all injury.

The principal issue involves the identities of those who

did the gun firing. According to the lower court’s decision, conviction rests on the testimony of witnesses

Leoncio Razon, Pastor Kamson and Simplicio Gamboa.

The first pointed to appellant Elias Cadacio as the man

accompanied by a woman carrying fish, who had signalled

their jeepney to stop in the morning of April 24, 1955,

on their way to Payapa. He equally swore that the

man advancing with a rifle in the middle of the road was

none other than Elias Cadacio. He further said that

three days after the ambush, the accused Julian Obrador

went to the store of Pastor Kamson and asked Razon

if he knew the killers. Having admitted that he (Razon),

knew them by face, Obrador told him not to implicate

his compadre, Elias Cadacio.

Simplicio Gamboa and Pastor Kamson corroborated

each other’s testimony that appellant Julian Obrador

was the man advancing and firing with a “long firearm”

from the right side of the road.

Defendants Elias Cadacio and Julian Obrador denied

having taken part in the ambuscade. Through his brother Flaviano Cadacio, Elias tried to show that he was

absent from the scene of the crime. Flaviano said that

he and his brother Elias lived near each other in Dayapan;

that before 3:00 o’clock that afternoon, he, Flaviano was

in his own house; that he saw Elias at that time feeding

his horse nearby; that more or less at about that time,

he heard shots from the north; that because his wife was

scared of the gunshots, they went to the house of his

brother-in-law, about half a kilometer away from their

house; that before he left, he asked Elias to join them;

that Elias told them to go ahead and that he would follow

later.

Appellant Obrador stated that at the time of the ambush, he was in Mahayahay, Lemery, playing “pata”; that

he left and walked from his house in Dayapan at 10:00

o’clock that morning of April 24, 1955, and arrived at

the “patahan” in Mahayahay at about noontime; that the

people in Mahayahay heard about the shooting in Dayapan

at around 5:30 that afternoon of April 24, 1955; that as

he prepared to go home, he met a friend named Enrique,

the barrio lieutenant of Mataas na Bayan who advised

and prevailed upon him not to go home at that time

because he, Obrador might be seen by the ambushers;

that he spent the night in said Enrique’s house.

The defense also presented Paulino Huertas,^[1] alias “Warly” who declared that in the early afternoon of

April 24, 1955, he was told by “Commander Danny”

whose real name was Felix Castillo, to come with him

and a certain “Commander Fidel” on a “huk” mission;

that they went to Dayapan where they deployed themselves on an elevated area by the side of the provincial

road, Commander Danny to his right and Commander

Fidel to his left; that Commander Danny instructed them

to find a jeepney; that as ordered, when such vehicle

came, they fired at its passengers; that Commander

Danny went to the middle of the road, stopped the vehicle

and fired at its passengers; that he “Warly” and Commander Fidel also fired at the victims; that immediately

thereafter they left the place. “Warly” also declared

that said Commanders Danny and Fidel were both dead

already; that they were killed in a combat between the

“huks” and the government forces in Paliparan; that

only the three of them as described above participated

in that Dayapan ambush; that the accused Elias and

Julian Obrador, whom he claimed never to have met

before, had nothing at all to do with the crime.

The trial judge relied on the testimonies of Leoncio

Razon, Simplicio Gamboa and Pastor Kamson. Appellants, however, claim that they are highly improbable

and incredible. It is incredible as well as ridiculous,

they say, that Leoncio Razon who was driving the jeepney

could still look back three times just to see who were

shooting from behind, and then lift the bloody face of

Serapia Gamboa who sat beside him. It is equally

beyond human comprehension, they add, how said witnesses under such condition of stress and excitement,

could remember and recognize the faces of the ambushers,

how they could have escaped alive if as claimed, they

had been continuously fired at even in the ravine where

they lay flat on their faces.

Another point that allegedly puts in doubt the said

witnesses’ credibility is the fact that despite having seen

many people after they had escaped from the ambush,

they never revealed the identity of the perpetrators thereof; that even in their report to the authorities, they did

not mention. anything about the identity of those who

had waylaid them in the barrio.

Aside from the supposedly inherent weakness of the

evidence of the prosecution, appellants assert that there

is strong evidence in their favor: witness Paulino Huertas

excluded appellants from participation in the surprise

attack, in positively identifying his two other “huk”

companions.

Upon consideration of the whole evidence and the

arguments, this Court is convinced that appellants (who

are “huks” angered at the failure to stop the jeep for

appellant Elias Cadacio and his wife, conspired to, and

did, retaliate by force. They waited for the jeepney to

return from the trip. The motive is clearly vengeance.

Nothing was taken from the passengers. Appellants

mercilessly fired at their victims. According to Huertas,

they fired at the passengers of the jeepney and then

immediately left. It is not incredible that witness Leoncio Razon could look back three times to see who were

shooting from behind, lift the bloody face of Serapia

Gamboa and at the same time hold the wheel, because

the vehicle must have stopped. Early that morning as

driver of the jeepney, he saw Cadacio as the latter hailed

the vehicle. Again that afternoon, as the one driving the

jeepney, surely, he could not miss all those on the way,

persons and things along the road. His mind and eyes

were alert for safe driving.

As to appellant Julian Obrador, Simplicio Gamboa was

certain it was he who stood on the right side of the road.

Simplicio knew Obrador for many years; and Pastor

Kamson was positive that it was also Obrador who fired

and advanced from the right side of the road. It was

broad daylight then.

It is readily understandable that the survivors of the

ambush would keep quiet at first over the identity of the

gun-men, the latter being reputedly “huks”.

It may be added that although Leoncio Razon told Captain Paz that he
did not know the name of the ambushers, he, however, said that if the
latter were presented to him, he would be able to recognize them by
face.

The attempted exoneration of appellants by witness Paulino Huertas
alias “Warly” is a futile move. Said witness has been shown to be also
a “huk” like appellants. Supposing he participated in the ambush, with
two other armed companions, we are not disposed to believe his
exculpation of herein appellants.

On the other hand, appellants’ alibi appears to be not only weak but
also inconclusive, because of the proximity of the place wherein they
allegedly were when the crime occured. Cadacio was merely one kilometer
away from the site of the ambuscade, and Obrador was supposedly about
three kilometers from Dayapan, of which they were significantly
residents.

Treachery qualified the killing as murder, the attack having been
sudden with deadly weapons. The lower court appreciated in favor of
appelants, the mitigating circumstances of lack of instruction^[2]
but it is offset by the aggravation of help by armed companions. So,
each of the appellants should be sentenced to three life imprisonments
for the death of Dionisio de Leus, Serapia Gamboa ang Germiniano
Lagrosa with accessory penalties of law, and to indemnify the heirs of
each of the deceased in the amount of P6,000.00^[3].

For each of the three attempted murders committed against Leoncio
Razon, Simplicio Gamboa and Pastor Kamson, each of the appellants is
sentenced to imprisonment for not less than 4 years and 2 months of
prision correccional nor more than 6 years and 1 day of prision mayor.^[4]

As correctly suggested by the Office of the Solicitor-General, the
victims of the attempted murders should be indemnified for their
medical expenses in the amounts of P10.00 for Leoncio Razon and P300.00
for Simplicio Gamboa.

Wherefore, as herein modified, the appealed judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Labrador, Concepcion, Reyes, J.B. L., Barrera, Paredes, Dizon, Regala, and Makalintal, J.J., concur.

 

---

^[1] He was one of the five accused in the information
filed with the Peace Court of Lemery, Batangas. Because he was still at
large, he was not included among the accused in the information filed
with the Court of First Instance of Batangas. Later on, he was
apprehended and charged in separate criminal case (CC No. 259). In the
hearing of Crim. Case No. 259, although he admitted having participated
in the Dayapan ambush, he claimed to have acted under an irresistible
fear of his commanders. The lower court disregarded his defense and
convicted him. As witness in the above case, he never mentioned
anything about the said fear.

^[2] People vs. Talak, et. al., 65 Phil. 696.

^[3] and 

^[4] It is understood that each of the appellants shall not be imprisoned for more than 40 years Art. 70. Revised Penal Code.