Flight from fear

When in doubt, it is better to set an accused person free than allow him to languish in jail. This truism is once more demonstrated in the case of Alfredo.

One early morning about seven years ago, the lifeless bodies of Aling Norma and her son, Dado, were found by the police inside their house after receiving a report regarding the tragic incident. Further investigation revealed that Aling Norma had been strangled and fatally wounded at the nape while Dado sustained wounds on the head. The weapons used in the killing were an axe and a nylon cord. Some items, like a radio and cassette player and P30,000 cash, were missing so the police concluded that the motive was robbery.

One of the persons who immediately responded to the reported incident was Pat. Torres, a nephew of Aling Norma whose house was only a few meters away. He immediately proceeded thereafter to the police station where he got orders from the Station Commander to arrest a possible suspect in the person of Joma whom they found inside a boat at the pier, lying in the upper deck listening to a casette player. Seized from Joma was a casette player and a radio found beside him.

Joma used to work as domestic helper with Pat. Torres himself and also with Aling Norma and Dado three months prior to the incident. He was accused of and tried for the crime of robbery with homicide in connection with the death of Aling Norma and Dado and the taking of the radio, cassette and the missing cash.

Those who testified against him were: (1) Pat. Torres himself who described how they arrested Joma and found the radio and casette player upon Joma’s arrest; Aling Norma’s husband, Mang Isidro, who was not in their house when the incident occurred but who declared that he was convinced that Joma did it because only the latter had access to their house and his belief was confirmed when he saw the items, allegedly belonging to the victims, in Joma’s possession, particularly the radio and casette player; (3) Alma, the niece of Aling Norma, who said that she encountered Joma, whom she knew only by face, in the early morning of the day of the incident about 4:30 a.m. when she boarded the jeepney. She said that Joma seemed perturbed and showed signs of fear and was at the rear end of the vehicle carrying a chicken, a black bag and a black radio, which was the same radio belonging to the victims. Her testimony was supported by the jeepney driver who positively identified Joma as Aling Norma’s helper and whom he saw in his jeep.

But Joma had another story to tell. He pointed to Pat. Torres himself as the assailant because he harbored a grudge against Aling Norma over a piece of land. In fact, he said that he had twice been prevented by Torres from tilling the victims’ land claiming that it was his. On that particular evening, Joma said that when he and the two victims were about to sleep, the door suddenly swung open and Torres, without a word, hacked Aling Norma. Horrified, he scampered for safety and hid between two tapayans 2-1/2 feet high. Torres and his two companions failed to find him because it was dark so they turned their ire on Dado whom they mercilessly killed. When he saw that the trio were gone, he said, he hurriedly left without ascertaining whether the victims were still alive. Neither did he report the incident to the police because he knew Torres was a policeman assigned at the place.

When he was picked up by Torres and another policeman at the pier, he was brought to a place and maltreated for four days until he was taken by Maj. Santos, another son of the deceased, who transferred him to a municipal building. But whenever Maj. Santos was not around, Torres and another police, would resume their torture and even forced him to implicate a certain "Jimmy". He said that the radio and casette found in his possession were placed in his bag by Dado himself.

But after trial, the Lower Court still convicted Joma of robbery with homicide based on the circumstantial evidence as testified to by Mang Isidro, Pat. Torres, Alma and the jeepney driver. Was the Lower Court correct?

No. The mere presence of Joma at the scene of the crime and in possession of certain items belonging to the victims cannot be solely interpreted to mean that he committed the crime. His presence in the house was not unusual as he was serving as domestic helper. His explanation that Dado himself placed the radio and casette in his bag prior to the incident is equally plausible. It was not unusual that Dado could have allowed Joma to use and keep these items as they could have been easily lent. Moreover, the taking of the personal property, with intent to gain, must be established beyond reasonable doubt. There must be conclusive evidence of the physical act of taking by the accused and that his intention was robbery and homicide was perpetrated to consummate the robbery. Evidence beyond reasonable doubt to this effect was lacking in this case.

Joma’s flight and failure to report the incident and the fact that he was seen perturbed inside the jeep are also susceptible of interpretation consistent with his innocence. He fled not because of guilt but for fear that the suspects, who knew he witnessed the dastardly act, would run after him. These circumstances proffered by the prosecution, although credible, only go so far as to create a suspicion that Joma perpetrated the crime. But suspicion alone is insufficient, the required quantum of proof being beyond reasonable doubt. The conviction of an accused must rest on the strength of the prosecution’s evidence and not on the weakness of the defense. Joma should, therefore, be acquitted (Pp. vs. Geron, G.R. 113788, Oct. 17, 1997).