THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. LORETO A. OLIVA, ET. AL.,DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.

This is an appeal in three separate criminal cases tried and decided by the Court of First Instance of Cagayan.

In
Case No. 1091-a (now G.R. No. L-6033), for the murder of Fernando Pablo,
the accused Cecilio Rol was acquitted, while the res of his co-accused –
Loreto Oliva, Jose C. Villanueva, Adriano Quinsay, and Daniel Ulsano –
were convicted of the crime, qualified by abuse of superior strength,
and aggravated by the circumstance of having taken advantage of their
public position as municipal policemen, offset by the mitigating
circumstance of lack of intent to commit so grave a wrong as the one
committed; and sentenced to suffer each reclusion perpetua,
to indemnify jointly and severally the heirs of the deceased Fernando
Pablo in the sum of P6,000 without subsidary imprisonment in case of
insolvency, and to pay 1/5 of the costs. From this judgment, the four
convicted accused appealed to the Court of Appeals, which forwarded the
case to us for decision, considering that all the appellants have been
sentenced to reclusion perpetua.

In
Cases Nos. 1092-A and 1093-A for arbitrary detention of Eliseo and
Sofronio Arreola, with physical injuries (now G.R. No.L-6034 and 6035),
accused Angel C. Adap, Alfonso Martinez, Restituto Fronda, Joel
Macatiag, and Marcelo Guillermo were acquitted; while the other
defendants Loreto A. Oliva, Jose C. Villanueva, Daniel Ulsano, and
Adriano Quinsay were found guilty as charged, and all of them were
sentenced in each of the two cases to suffer an indeterminate penalty of
from 4 months of arresto mayor as minimum to years and 4 months of prision correccional
as maximum; to pay jointly and severally to Eliseo Arreola the sum of
P75,00 in Case No. 1092-A and to Sofronio Arreola the sum of P50.00 in
Case No. 1093-A, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency but
not exceeding 1/3 of the principal penalty; and to pay in each of said
cases 1/10 of the costs. From this judgment, the defendants likewise
appealed to the Court of Appeals, and the latter again certified the
case to us, for decision together with the appeal in the murder case,
upon the ground that the three cases arose out of the same acts and
occasion.

During the pendency of these cases in this Court,
appellant Adriano Quinsay moved to withdraw his appeal in all three
cases, which motion was granted. This decision therefore involves only
the appeals of Loreto A. Oliva, Jose C. Villanueva, and Daniel Ulsano

Upon a careful review of the records, we find the following facts to be undisputed:

At
about 10:00 o’clock in the morning of September 3, 1951 a police patrol
composed of ten members of the police force of Aparri, Cagayan composed
of Sgt. Jose C. Villanueva, and Policemen Daniel Ulsano, Alfonso
Martinez, Joel Macatiag, Marcelo Guillermo, and Angel Adap, at the
command of Lieutenant Loreto A. Oliva, headed for barrio Bakiling,
Aparri, to investigate the reported murder or suspicious death of one
Remegio Marcos. The investigation in Bakiling lasted up to about 4
o’clock in the afternoon; and when the partol was about to return to the
poblacion, it was met by a
truck of the Panifual Saw Mill, from which one Anacleto Abarriao (alias
“Big Boy”) alighted and complained to the police that on the previous
day, at the cockpit of Binalan, Aparri, he had trouble with and was
maltreated by the brothers Eliseo and Sofronio Arreola and their
relative Fernando Pablo, all of Fugu, Ballesteros. Wherefore, the patrol
rode on the Sawmill truck and proceeded to Fugu. Upon arrival, Lt.
Oliva instructed his men to summon Eliseo Arreol, Sofronio Arreola, and
Fernando Pablo, for the purpose of settling their trouble with Abarriao.
Policemen Ulsano, Macatiag, and Guillermo picked up Eliseo from his
house and Sofronio from the ricefield where he was plowing; while
Mariano Dancel fetched Fernando Pablo. The three men, who were
interested in having their dispute with Abarriao settled, voluntarily
went with the police, and when brought before Lt. Oliva were asked be
the latter to board the truck and come with the police to Aparri so that
they could save the expense of the fare in going to town the following
day. At Nagsirucan, the patrol picked up three other persons, who were
suspected of being responsible for the death of Remgio Marcos. After
crossing the Cagayan River at Camalaniugan ferry, the party boarded a
Sambrano passenger bus. Upon reaching the town of Aparri, the bus
stopped at the Sambrano garage. Lt. Oliva ordered his men to proceed on
foot to the municipal building with the Arreola brothers, Fernando
Pablo, and the three murder suspects, while he stayed behind to settle a
controversy with the Sambrano inspector.

As to what transpired
later in the municipal building, the evidence for the prosecution and of
the defense are at variance. After contrasting and weighing the same,
we find no error in the lower Court’s having taken as proved beyond
reasonable doubt that, after arriving at the municipal building, the
policemen under the direction of sergeant Villanueva separated Fernando
Pablo and the two Arreolas from the suspects of the killing of Remegio
Marcos, and then proceeded to maltreat systematically the first three.
Sergeant Villanueva slapped and boxed Fernando Pablo first, saying “You
rascal, we almost got into trouble because of you”; then assaulted
Eliseo Arreola in the same way, and after him, his brother Sofronio. As
soon as Villanueva had finished with one suspect, policemen Ulsano and
Quinsay took turns in taking up the maltreatment of the detainees. The
worst beating was administered to Fernando Pablo who do not only
received fist blows, but was repeatedly hit in the abdominal region with
the rifle butts until he fell prostate; and when lying thus, Pablo’s
tormentors tried to make him stand up with blows and kicks, and finally
sought to bring him back to consciousness by pouring water on his face.

At
this juncture, Lieutenant Oliva came in asking what happend, to which
Ulsano replied “Zarzuela, sir”, meaning that Pablo was merely feigning
injury. Oliva reprimanded the men, instructed them to desist from
further maltreatment and led Pablo’s companions, the Arreola brothers,
outside the room, telling them to report to him if somebody would again
maltreat them, and advised them to sleep in the municipal building
because it was already late. Oliva then ordered Pablo placed inside one
of the jail cells, with other prisoners. The latter noticed that Pablo
was already dead and called the guard, Rol, to the cell. Finding the
prisoners’ statement to be correct, Rol informed Lt. Oliva of Pablo’s
death, and the two went to the house of Dr. Ricardo Alvarado, President
of the 4th Sanitary Division, woke him up, and informed him of the death
of Fernando Pablo in the municipal jail. At about 12:00 p.m. of
September 3 and 1:00 a.m. of the next day, Dr. Alvarado came with the
policemen to the municipal building, and as he could not perform an
examination of Pablo’s body because it was dark in the cell, he merely
removed the dead man’s outer garments. The next morning, at about 8:00
o’clock, Dr. Alvarado conducted an autopsy of Pablo’s remains, and the
result of his post-mortem examination is stated as follows:

“TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:

This
is to certify that I have this day performed an autopsy on the person
of FERNANDO PABLO, single, resident of Fugu, Balesteros, Cagayan, and
found the following:

1.Externally – Ecchymoses around the pelvis and loin below the umbilicus.

2.Internally
– On opening the the abdomen below the sternum at the line of the linea
alba down to the pelvis and on reaching the peritoneum was found blood
serum and hupermia.On reaching the inner part of the abdomen, blood
serum and dark clotted blood was found along the sides of the intestines
and omentum. The intestines itself were found to be clean and light
pale, but the omentum was mostly hyperemic and congested blood forum
thru out the greater and lesser omentum. The spleen was well exposed and
found that the tail was ecchymotic. Much dark blood was found inside
the abdomen of about 2 or 3 liters. The gall bladder was full and light
greenish in color. The urinary bladder was found to have been emptied
with a tear wound, showing that the urine was extravasated into the
abdomen.

I further certify that the cause of death was internal hemorrhage.

(Sgd) RICARDO G. ALVARADO
President 4th Sanitary Division”
(Exh. A, p.3, Rec. Case No.1091-A)

In the morning of September 4, Sgt. Villanueva took the Arreola
brothers to the place where they had their breakfast. He asked them to
sign an affidavit to the effect that Pablo fell from the truck and that
he was a Huk, but the brothers refused it was not true. In the
afternoon, Villanueva ordered the brothers to guard the remains of
Fernando Pablo. They stood guard up to the afternoon of September 5,
when they helped bury Pablo’s remains. After the burial, Sgt. Villanueva
still did not permit the Arreola brothers to go home, saying that they
must wait for Lt. Oliva. the Arreolas were actually released only in the
afternoon of September 6. The morning after their release, they went to
the Ballesteros Emergency Hospital, where they were treated by Dr.
Emilio A. Alonso for the injuries inflicted upon them by the policemen
Villanueva, Quinsay and Ulsano. According to the medical certificates
Exhs. H and J (p.69, Rec Case 1092-A; and p.60, Case 1093-A), Dr. Alonso
found on the person of Eliseo Arreola a contusion on the right lower
costal region with marked ecchymosis, which took 20 days to heal, and
contusions on the right and left arms (dorsal), side, which healed in 10
days; while on the person of Sofronio Arreola, he found swellings on
the left arm, right hand, and chest, and also swellings with ecchymosis
on the forearm; which lesions healed in 10 days’ treatment. Dr. Alonzo
charged and received from the brothers P25.00 for medicine used, without
collecting from them any professional fees because they were poor.

The maltreatment of the deceased Pablo and of the Arreola brothers
by appellants Ulsano and Villanueva, (and by the accused Quinsay who has
abandoned his appeal), was amply attested in court not only by Sofronio
and Eliseo Arreola and by Eusebio Caculitan, a detainee who had been
lodged in the prison cells of the municipal building some time before
the arrival of Pablo and the Arreolas, but also by the testimonies of
doctors Alvarado and Alonzo. Upon the other hand, the attempt of these
appellants to attribute Pablo’s death to injuries inflicted by “Big Boy”
Abarriao the day previous, is belied by the seriousness of the
injuries, as disclosed by the autopsy. Were the defense version
truthful, the internal hemorrhage and the rupture of the urinary bladder
would have caused Pablo to expire the next day, even before reaching
the municipal building in the evening of September 3. At least, he would
have arrived at Aparri in a condition that would have caused the police
to immediately call for a physician or take Pablo to the hospital
instead of the jail. Certainly he would not have been able to walk a
hundred meters from the Sambrano bus station to the municipal building.

The same reason militate against the alternative defense that
Fernando Pablo’s death was due to a fall inside the truck where he rode
with the policemen when the speeding vehicle at one time was suddenly
braked to a stop to avoid hitting a carabao. Such a fall could not have
inflicted such extensive injuries as the autopsy has revealed.

We agree with the Solicitor General that the conviction of
Lieutenant Loreto oliva of either murder or arbitrary detention is
entirely without support. Sofronio and Eliseo Arreola, as prosecution
witnesses, testified that Oliva arrived only after Pablo had been
tortured by Sgt. Villanueva and policemen Ulsano and Quinsay, and
already lay dying on the floor of the police quarters. The Arreolas also
asserted that Oliva inquired what happened and angrily upbraided his
men for the maltreatment of Pablo (t.s.n. pp. 66 and 112), a clear
indication that the torture was done without his knowledge. Eusebio
Caculitan, testifying for the prosecution stated that Oliva had taken
one of the Arreolas out of the police department for a separate
investigation and arrived only to order some one to revive Pablo by
pouring water on his face he lay sprawling on the floor (t.s.n. pp.
34-36). Oliva therefore took no hand in the death of Pablo, and there is
no proof that he ordered or conspired with his men to torture the
deceased of that he had any knowledge of it nor opportunity to stop the
maltreatment one time. There is no support for the trial Court’s finding
that Oliva made the maltreatment possible, or that Oliva arrested the
offended parties out of complaisance for “Big Boy” Abrriao.

Neither can appellant Oliva be held responsible for the Arreolas’
detention until September 6, since Eliseo Arreola himself testified that
he and his companions voluntarily went to Aparri with the patrol and
that after the death of Pablo, Lt. Oliva permitted the Arreola brothers
to sleep in the hall of the municipal building.

“A * * * When Milo Tan asked me, I told him that Lt. Oliva
released us the previous night and asked whether we had any place
wherein to sleep and we told him that we would sleep in the house of
Milo Tan and that because it was already late, we slept in the municipal
hall.”(t.s.n. p. 3)

The extrajudicial statements of Olivia’s co-accused are not
competent proof against him, not being made in his presence. They are
not even admissible in rebuttal because Olivia presented no evidence in
his behalf.

The records of the case are thus clear that those really responsible
for the death of Fernando Pablo were Sergeant Villanueva and policemen
Ulsano and Quinsay. Likewise, despite in his denials, it is abundantly
proved that it was the sergeant, Villanueva, who detained the Arreola
Brothers and forbade them from leaving the municipal building until
Pablo was buried, unsuccessfully attempting in the meantime have them
subscribed to an affidavit that Pablo’s death was due to accidental
injuries, and that the deceased was a Huk. The sergeant would not allow
the Arreolas to go home on the 4th of September, when Pablo’s relatives
arrived, notwithstanding the orders of Lieutenant Oliva, so that the
Arreolas were in fact arbitrarily detained by him from the 4th to the
6th of September, when they were finally allowed to depart and tend to
their injuries. While the brothers were occasionally permitted to leave
the municipal building and eat at the house of one Milo ta, the
complainants were evidently too terrorized to take advantage of these
occasional sallies and meekly returned to custody even docilely stood
guard over the remains of Pablo until it was buried. As pointed out by
the Solicitor General in his brief.

” * * *. It clearly appears from this testimony that it was
Sergeant Villanueva who continuously kept them under guard the remains
of Fernando Pablo and to help prepare his coffin, by telling them to
come back to the municipal building after taking their meals outside,
and making sure that they came back by conducting them, and by telling
them not to go until after the burial of the remains of Pablo (pp. 67,
70, 105, 106, 123, 124, 382, 390, t.s.n.) (Brief of Appellee, p. 25)

The cooperation of appellant Daniel Ulsano toward this arbitrary
detention is not satisfactorily shown. The probabilities are that, as a
disciplined subordinate, he left everything to his superior, Sergeant
Villanueva, and anyway he could not presume to overrule the latter’s
orders. For this reason, we are not inclined to hold him responsible for
this charge. But the record is clear that he must stand equally
responsible with the sergeant for the murder of Fernando Pablo, in whose
maltreatment this accused actively participated together with his
co-accused Quinsay and Villanueva, as well as for the physical injuries
inflicted upon the brothers Arreola.

There being no clear evidence that the maltreatment inflicted on the
offended parties was for the purpose of extorting confessions or
information, Art. 235 of the Revised Penal Code does not aplly.

Wherefore, the conviction of appellants Jose Villanueva and Daniel
Ulsano in case No. 1091-A of the Court of First Instance of Cagayan
(G.R. No. L-6033) for the murder of Fernando Pablo (with aggravating
circumstance of public position utilized by the offender offset by the
lack of intent to commit so grave a wrong doing as the one inflicted) is
hereby affirmed. Loreto Oliva is, however, acquitted of this charge,
with costs de oficio.

In the other two cases (Nos. 1092-A and 1093-A of the Court below,
L-6034 and 6035 of this Court),the conviction and sentence of appellant
Jose A. Villanueva, for arbitrary detention complexed with physical
injuries, is likewise affirmed. But appellant Loreto A. Oliva is
acquitted therefrom, with costs de oficio. Appellant Daniel
Ulsano is likewise acquitted from this charge and, instead, conviected
only of less serious physical injuries, aggravated by the circumstance
of having taken advantage of public position (U.S. vs. Yumul, 34 Phil.
169; U.S. vs. Cerdena, 51 Phil. 393), and sentenced to six (6) months of
arresto mayor.

The civil liabilities imposed by the trial Court shall be understood
as imposed only upon appellants Jose Villanueva and Daniel Ulsano, in solidum with the accused Adriano Quinsay, who abandoned his appeal.

Costs in this instance shall be taxed against appellants Jose Villanueva and Adrian Quinsay. So ordered.

Paras, C.J., Pablo, Bengzon, Padilla, Montemayor, Reyes, Jugo, Bautista Angelo, and Concepcion, JJ., concur.