Simple but still grave

If a victim is taken and brought against his will to another place merely to facilitate his killing, the crime is not kidnapping with murder but only murder even if there is a subsequent demand for ransom. This is explained in this case of Marissa and Teddy.

Marissa was married but her husband had left her already and gone abroad. Teddy was one of her lovers although she was also seeing Mandy, a businessman who used to lend her and her husband some money in times of need. Marissa got angry with Mandy after he lent money to her husband enabling the latter to leave the country without her knowledge. On the other hand, Teddy was jealous of Mandy with whom Marissa also had a relationship. So they agreed to get rid of Mandy.

On October 10, 1995, they carried out their plot by inviting Mandy to a QC bar-restaurant. Marissa also invited Harry one of their friends to meet them there after telling Harry that she would settle her debt to Mandy and then “deretsong dukot na rin kay Mandy”. Harry assumed however that Marissa was only joking.

Mandy arrived past midnight and talked to Marissa for a while. Then the group headed for Mandy’s car with Marissa seating beside Mandy who was driving, as Teddy and Harry took the back seat. Not long after, Teddy pulled out a gun, pointed it on Mandy and ordered him to stop the car. Then Teddy pulled him to the back seat as Marissa also transferred at the back. They then tied Mandy’s hands behind his back and taped his mouth. Teddy then ordered Harry to take over the wheels.

Harry tried to dissuade the two from pursuing their plan but they replied that they would have to kill Mandy so that he would not take revenge. Mandy then told Marissa, “bakit mo nagawa sa akin ito sa kabila ng lahat” to which Marissa replied, “bayad na ako sa utang ko sa iyo ngayon”.

On Teddy’s instruction, Harry drove to a secluded place in Bulacan and then Marissa and Teddy brought Mandy to a grassy place. Later on Teddy resurfaced with bloodied hands and the three headed back as Marissa and Teddy talked about how they killed the victim with Teddy telling Marissa, “honey wala na tayong problema dahil siguradong patay na si Mandy sa dami ng saksak na nakuha niya”.

Then they proceeded to a drug store to clean their hands. Along the way Marissa and Teddy threw out Mandy’s attaché case after emptying and getting its contents. Marissa later told Teddy, “Honey, sana hindi muna natin piñatay si Mandy para makahingi pa tayo ng pera sa magulang niya”. Then they abandoned the car somewhere in Bulacan.

The following day Teddy and Marissa proceeded to Harry’s house and started calling the victim’s mother demanding a P15 million ransom later reduced to P10 million as the mother said she could not afford. Later they went to Greenhills where they still reduced the ransom money to P5 million with P1 million advanced. The ransom payment was not however consummated as the three sensed the presence of policemen. Teddy and Marissa just sold Mandy’s gun, watch and necklace and gave P7,000 to Harry as his share.

Seven months later, Harry surrendered to the NBI, followed by Teddy who admitted to the police that he killed Mandy. Marissa was thereafter arrested and the three were charged with kidnapping with murder. Later Harry was discharged as a state witness.

After trial and mainly based on the testimony of Harry who turned state witness and narrated the events above set forth, the Regional Trial Court (RTC) found Teddy and Marissa guilty of “kidnapping on the occasion of which the victim was killed” and sentenced them to death. On review by the Court of Appeals (CA), the guilty verdict was affirmed but for the crime of kidnapping with murder. Was the CA correct?

The CA is correct is finding them guilty but not for the crime of kidnapping with murder. In special complex crime like that charge in this case, the prosecution must prove each of the component offenses with the same precision and beyond reasonable doubt as if they were made the subject of separate complaints.

In this case kidnapping was not sufficiently proven. Although Teddy and Marissa bound and gagged Mandy and brought him to Bulacan against his will, they did all these acts to facilitate the killing, not because they intended to detain or confine him. As soon as they arrive at the place of the crime, they wasted no time in killing him. Their intention from the beginning was to kill Mandy and this is confirmed by the conversation that Harry heard in the car and narrated to the court.

The subsequent demand for ransom was an afterthought which did not qualify their prior acts as kidnapping. Where the taking of the victim was incidental to the basic purpose to kill, the crime is only murder and this is true even if before the killing, the victim was taken from one place to another. The fact alone that ransom money is demanded would not per se convert the act of preventing the liberty of movement of the victim into the crime of kidnapping. Hence Marissa and Teddy are guilty of murder only also punishable by death because of aggravating circumstance of use of motor vehicle. But in view of R.A. 9346 prohibiting the imposition of death penalty, they are only sentenced to reclusion perpetua (People vs. Estacio and Ang, G.R. 171655, July 22, 2009).

*      *      *

E-mail: [email protected]