SC affirms death penalty for 4 kidnappers

Giving more "weight" to the testimony of a young victim than to the alibis of his kidnappers, the Supreme Court (SC) upheld the death sentence imposed by a lower court on a husband and wife who, along with two other men, abducted a nine-year-old boy and collected more than P548,000 ransom in 1997.

In a 25-page decision, the SC said the alibis and denials of the couple, Elvie Ejandra and Magdalena Calunod, and Edwin Tampos and Roel Revilla, could not prevail over the "credible, positive and straightforward" statements of their victim, Ed Henderson Tan.

The SC also ordered the kidnappers to pay the victim and his parents P835,000 in moral and actual damages.

In ruling against the appellants, the SC cited a previous case where it held that children were more likely than adults to be correct and truthful in details.

"We have meticulously reviewed the records and find no justification to deviate from the findings of facts of the trial court, its assessment of the credibility of Ed Henderson and the veracity and probative weight of his testimony," it said.

The case stemmed from information filed before the Quezon City Regional Trial Court (QC—RTC), where the appellants were charged for the kidnapping of Tan on July 2, 1997.

Tan had finished his tutorial class in Quezon City and was waiting for his father to fetch him when he was accosted by Tampos, Ejandra and Revilla.

The three threatened to shoot the boy if he refused to come with them. After he was brought to a one-story house, he was ordered to write down his father’s contact numbers.

The kidnappers demanded a P10 million ransom from the boy’s father. They threatened to cut the boy’s finger and ear and even to kill him and dump his body if their demands were not met.

The amount was later reduced to P548,000, after the father pleaded with the kidnappers that that was all he could raise by borrowing from friends and relatives.

Near the Sto. Domingo Church on Quezon Boulevard the victim’s father handed the ransom money to Calunod, who reassured him she would have the boy brought to the Tan residence.

On July 4, 1997 the abductors released the boy on E. Rodriguez Ave. Calunod gave him P50 so he could board a taxi and be reunited with his family.

During the trial, Tan identified Calunod as the one who took care of him and fed him while he was in captivity.

But the appellants all claimed they were nowhere near the scene where the kidnapping supposedly took place.

Tampos said he was busy in his business as a butcher, and as he was earning well, had no need to engage in kidnapping for ransom.

Revilla said he arrived from Sogus, Southern Leyte, only on Aug. 5, 1997.

Ejandra said he and Calunod sold onions and ready-to-wear clothes in Baclaran and Divisoria. They said they left for Iligan City when business had gone bad and tended fighting cocks. Ejandra argued that they returned to Quezon City on July 9 or 10, so it was impossible for them to have committed the crime. — Aurea Calica