People Vs Sanchez: 121039-45: January 25, 1999: J. Martinez: First Division

People vs Sanchez : 121039-45 : January 25, 1999 : J.
Martinez : First Division 16/03/2019, 2*46 PM
SYLLABI/SYNOPSIS
FIRST DIVISION
[G.R. No. 121039-45. January 25, 1999]
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. MAYOR ANTONIO L.

SANCHEZ, GEORGE MEDIALDEA, ZIOLO AMA, BALDWIN BRION, LUIS
CORCOLON, ROGELIO CORCOLON, and PEPITO KAWIT, accused-
appellants.
DECISION
MARTINEZ, J.:
. . . a plot seemingly hatched in hell . . .
This was how Judge Harriet O. Demetriou[1] of the Pasig City Regional Trial Court, Branch 70, in her
132-page Decision dated March 11, 1995 now before us on review, emphatically described the Allan Gomez-
Eileen Sarmenta rape-slay that drew strong condemnation from an outraged populace in the middle of 1993.
After a protracted and grueling 16-month trial, she found all those charged therewith, namely: Calauan Mayor
Antonio Sanchez (hereafter the Mayor), George Medialdea, Luis and Rogelio Corcolon, Zoilo Ama, Baldwin
Brion and Pepito Kawit (appellants herein), guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape with
homicide on seven counts and sentenced each one of them:
. . . to suffer the maximum penalty of reclusion perpetua for each of the seven offenses or a total of seven
reclusion perpetua for each accused. In addition, the Court hereby orders all the accused to jointly and
severally pay the victims respective families the following sums by way of civil indemnity:
1. the sum of P3,432,650.00 representing the actual damages sustained by the Sarmenta family;
2. the sum of P3,484,000.00 representing the actual damages sustained by the Gomez family;
3. the sum of P2,000,000.00 as moral damages sustained by the Sarmenta family;
4. the sum of P2,000,000.00 as moral damages sustained by the Gomez family;
5. the sum of P191,000.00 as attorneys fees and litigation expenses incurred by the Gomez family; and
6. the sum of P164,250.00 for litigation expenses incurred by the Sarmenta family.
As to the antecedents, appellants all appear to agree that the trial court, in the very words of counsel[2]
who prepared the consolidated brief for the Mayor and Medialdea, made a very detailed summary of both the
prosecution and defense evidence.[3] This Court can thus conveniently provide a briefer but fairly accurate
account of the respective versions of the State and the defense on the basis of the trial courts summary, rather
than combing the heap of evidence presented by both sides.
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/jan99/121039_45.htm Page 1 of 18
People vs Sanchez : 121039-45 : January 25, 1999 : J. Martinez : First Division 16/03/2019, 2*46 PM
The prosecutions version of the events on that horrible night of June 28, 1993 was based mainly on the
recollections of its star witnesses Aurelio Centeno and Vicencio Malabanan (a member of appellant Sanchez
security team) co-conspirators turned state witnesses. Both admitted having taken part in the abduction of
Eileen and Allan, but denied any personal involvement in the rape of Eileen and the twin killings that
followed. Heres their story.
Medialdea (then the Deputy Chief of the PNP Calauan), together with Centeno who was driving an
ambulance, fetched witness Malabanan at his residence in the early morning of June 28, 1993 on the pretext
that they will apprehend one Rodolfo Calva alias Tisoy a notorious gun runner and drug pusher in the
locality. Next to be picked up was Ama in Barangay Masiit, then Luis Corcolon (hereafter, Luis) in Barangay
Mabacan. On board the ambulance, the five (5) men made stopovers in Barangays Imok and Wawa until they
headed back for Calauan at past 7:00 oclock in the evening, upon orders of Luis.
At the Shell gas station in the poblacion of Calauan, the five (5) men met and picked up Rogelio
Corcolon (hereafter, Boy), Kawit and Brion, then they proceeded to Los Baos. Along the way, Luis
announced to the group that the real purpose behind the Los Baos trip is to take a pretty young lass long
desired by the Mayor and offer her to him as a gift. Luis, to satisfy his companions curiosity, even guaranteed
that her beauty will make their saliva drip.
Not for long, the ambulance arrived at the U.P. Los Baos grounds. Witness Centeno drove the ambulance
around the campus at a snails pace while Luis scoured the area with watchful eyes. As the search inside the
campus proved fruitless, Luis then ordered Centeno to slowly drive out of the university compound and to
stop upon reaching the vicinity of the Agrix complex. Luis, Boy, Ama, Brion and Kawit alighted from the
ambulance and went inside the Agrix complex. Witness Centeno overheard Medialdea informing the Boss,
via the radio, that they were already in the area. The Boss was the Mayor.
Inside the Agrix complex is a restaurant called Caf Amalia. Parked in front of that establishment was a
Tamaraw van. Eileen and Allan were its passengers, both occupying the front seats. She was wearing a T-
shirt, white shorts and rubber shoes. Armed with guns, Luis and Boy approached Eileen and Allan, forcibly
took the two and loaded them at the back of the van. All the appellants boarded the van while Centeno and
Malabanan stayed in the ambulance. Both vehicles then headed for Erais Farm situated in Barangay Curba,
owned by the Mayor.
As soon as the group arrived at the farm, the two (2) captives were brought down the van. Eileen was
gagged by a handkerchief and her hands, like Allan, were tied. A white towel was wound around Allans
mouth. The Mayor, then wearing a jogging attire, emerged from the resthouse and asked the group: My
children, whats the problem? To this Luis respondent: Mayor, this is our gift to you, the girl youve been
longing for. Shes really beautiful. But whos that man? asked the Mayor. Eileens companion, boss. Medialdea
replied. We brought him along to avoid complications, he continued.
The two youngsters were then brought inside the resthouse where Eileen was taken to the Mayors room.
Allan was badly beaten up by Luis, Boy, Ama and Medialdea and thereafter thrown out of the resthouse.
Kawit followed-up by striking Allans diaphragm with the butt of an armalite, causing Allan to fall against a
cement box. Brion thought Allan was already dead, but Kawit said: :His death will come later.
Meanwhile, Centeno, while waiting for further orders, joined the Mayors personal aides Edwin Cosico
and Raul Alorico watch television at the adjacent resthouse. Alorico told Centeno that the Mayor had been
eagerly waiting for the group and worried that they will not arrive.
At around 1:00 a.m. of the next day, a crying Eileen was dragged out of the resthouse by Luis and
Medialdea her hair disheveled, mouth covered by a handkerchief, hands still tied and stripped of her shorts.
The Mayor, clad merely in white polo, appeared and thanked Luis and Medialdea for the gift. I am through
with her. Shes all yours, the Mayor uttered in contentment. When asked what will happen to Allan,
Medialdea assured the Mayor that they will also kill him for full measure. Eileen and Allan were then loaded
in the Tamaraw van by the appellants and headed for Calauan, followed closely by the ambulance.
En route to Calauan, Centeno, who was driving the ambulance, noticed the van swaying from side to
side. Then he heard gunfire coming therefrom. The van pulled over whereupon Kawit dragged Allan, whose
head was already drenched in blood, out of the vehicle onto the road and finished him off with a single
gunshot from his armalite. The ambulance and van then sped away.
The next destination was a sugarcane field in Sitio Paputok, Kilometro 74 of Barangay Mabacan. It was
here that Luis announced that its tiime for the group to feast on Eileen (the exact words of Luis were
Turbohin na rin natin ang tinurbo ni Boss). She was laid at the back of the van, with her hands and legs being
held by the appellants while waiting for their turn. Then the gang-rape began. The first to ravish Eileen was
Luis, then Medialdea, Boy, Ama, Brion and finally, Kawit. Bewailing the helplessness of her situation, Eileen
pleaded, in between sobs and whimpers, for the torture to stop. However, her tears for compassion fell, weak
and ineffective, upon the insensitive brutes. Kawit invited Centeno to join the sexual fiasco but the latter
refused as he cannot, in conscience, bear the bestiality being committed on Eileen who appeared to be dead.
After Kawits turn, Eileen knelt on the seat of the van and begged for her life. Unmoved, Luis muted Eileens
cried by forcing an object into her mouth and then fired his baby armalite at her. Centeno was thereafter
ordered to get rid of Eileens dead body. Moments later, all eight (8) men boarded the ambulance and
proceeded to Calauan, leaving the Tamaraw van with Eileens remains behind. Along the way, Centeno and
Malabanan watched in dismay as Luis, Boy, Medialdea, Ama, Brion and Kawit savored the nights escapade,
to their sickening delight. Appellants and Malabanan were then brought to their respective homes by Centeno.
June 29, 1993 and the day following were tense moments for the group. In the morning of June 29,
Medialdea and Centeno fetched Malabanan, Luis and Ama. They were going to Barangay Imok to make it
appear that they were conducting some police operations in that area. Upon reaching Barangay Imok, the
group saw Allans body which they dumped a few hours earlier. Luis, Medialdea and Malabanan alighted
from the ambulance, whereupon Luis ordered Centeno to drive back to the municipal hall.
Boy Corcolon, who was at the municipal hall, informed Ama that a dead female loaded inside a
Tamaraw van was found in Barangay Mabacan. Ama then radioed the PNP Chief of Calauan, Major Cao,
who at that time was summoned by the Mayor. Major Cano thereafter arrived and ordered one SPO2
Melencio Nuez to investigate the matter. Meanwhile, Centeno received word that he was to fetch Malabanan,
Luis and Medialdea in Barangay Imok. After picking up the three (3), Centeno drove the ambulance to
Barangay Mabacan where the dead Eileen was found.
Eileens body lying inside the Tamaraw van was a pitiful sight. Her face bore a gunshot wound; a
handkerchief was stuffed in her mouth; her T-shirt was rolled up revealing her breasts; and her panty was
rolled down on one of her feet still with rubber shoes on. Medialdea covered Eileens exposed private parts by
fixing her T-shirt and underwear and by placing a sackcloth over her lower body. The group then escorted the
van with Eileens body in it, to the UP Los Baos police station where student milled around and identified the
cadaver to be Eileen indeed. Later on, the van carrying Eileen, as well as Allans body, was brought to the
Calauan municipal hall. There, Centeno saw a prisoner named Arnold cleaning the van.
Meanwhile, Malabanan, Ama and Medialdea, on June 29, went to the site (Bgy. Imok) where Allans
body was found, started asking residents about the incident and were able to retrieve an empty armalite shell.
Malabanan thereafter handed the empty shell to Major Cao at the police station. The three (3) men and one
SPO3 Rizaldy Belen, sometime in the afternoon of the same day, visited the Mayor at his house in Bay,
Laguna. Medialdea informed the Mayor of the presence of people from the CIS, NBI and press in the locality.
The Mayor flared up and blamed them for not using their heads. But he later on assured them that he could
fix the problem in less the amount of a brand new car.
The following day, June 30, Medialdea, upon the Mayors directive, handed a pair of white walking
shorts to Major Cao. When Malabanan asked Medialdea whose pair of shorts was that, the latter replied that
it was the short of Eileen which the Mayor wanted to be delivered to Major Cao.
That same day of June 30, Centeno went to see the Mayor at his house in Calauan about his worries over
reports that the driver of the ambulance involved in the rape-slay was being hunted down. The Mayor gave
Centeno P2,000.00 and advised him to keep silent or better yet, to go into hiding. Centeno did hide himself
until CIS agents accosted him at the Divisoria market on August 10, 1993. As to Malabanan, he, Medialdea
and Ama were brought to the PNP Sta. Cruz Command to shed light on the cleaning of the Tamaraw van.
Coming now to the defense, each of the appellants had an alibi to tell and sought to put the blame on Kit
Alqueza, the son of a feared general (Dictador Alqueza) who earned the monicker Barako from the local
residents.
The Mayor claimed that he was at the residence of his mistress Elvira in Bay, Laguna in the morning of
June 28, 1993. They left for Makati City at about 1:00 oclock in the afternoon thereafter proceeded to San
Pablo City at around 4:00 p.m., left that city at 7:30 p.m. and then returned to Elviras house in Bay at around
10:00 p.m. He and Elvira retired at around 12:30 in the morning. He woke up at 5:00 a.m. Jogging was his
favorite form of exercise, but foul whether prevented him from running that morning. His three (3) children
with Elvira greeted him at around 6:30 a.m. before heading for school. He took his breakfast and lunch at
Elviras house.
Medialdea, Ama and Malabanan arrived between 1:00 p.m. and 2:00 p.m. and informed the Mayor of the
rape-slay in which Kit Alqueza was the prime suspect. This made the Mayor very angry, for which he ordered
a thorough investigation of the incident to avoid any whitewash. "I will not hesitate to have the perpetrators
of this crime killed (by electric chair), whether a generals son in involved or not, son of a bitch!, he blurted.
The Mayor then advised appellants not to worry if they were really innocent and that the primordial concern
is that a full investigation be conducted.
The Mayor then went to his residence in Calauan. At around 4:00 p.m. of that same day (June 29), he
sent his driver Mario Puyales to Barangays Masiit and Balayhangin to inquire from the residents about the
crime. Puyales returned at around 7:00 p.m. and informed the Mayor that a card gambler was able to retrieve
a pair of white shorts lying near the national highway in Barangay Balayhangin. Puyales was sent back to that
barangay to advise the residents thereof to keep the shorts at their fence near the highway as it may later on
aid the on-going investigation.
In the morning of June 30, 1993, the Mayor, with some companions, jogged towards the direction of
Barangay Mabacan and at the same time inquired from residents whether they noticed anything unusual on
the night of June 28, 1993. A certain Mang Torio told the Mayor that he found a pair of maong pants lying at
the side of the road but left if there. After inspecting the dirty maong pants, the Mayor instructed Mang Torio
to keep the pants as the former will send someone back to pick it up.
Eventually, the Mayor got hold of the pairs of white shorts and maong pants. The shorts was clean, with
complete beltloops and without any tear. He then ordered his driver Puyales to send the articles to Medialdea
for safekeeping. But during the trial, the Mayor, when shown the shorts and pants, claimed that they are quite
different from the articles he got hold of previously. The maong pants shown to him by Mang Torio was of a
darker shade of blue. As to the white shorts, it was the same pair he gave to Medialdea, but now it is torn and
has some missing beltloops.

Based on his own investigation, the Mayor came to know that Kit Alqueza is a feared and dangerous
student of the university, being a member of an elite fraternity in the campus and a generals son at that. The
Mayor later informed Congressman Tingzon of Kits probable involvement in the crime. Congressman
Tingzon, in turn, disclosed that Kit, his nephew-in-law (the congressmans wife is the sister of Gen. Alquezas
wife), was hiding in his house and that the legislator will call Gen. Alqueza in Davao City to discuss the
matter.
The Mayor also testified that he closely coordinated with Major Cao in investigating the case. This
included frequent evening conferences with Malabanan, medialdea and Ama who were members of Major
Caos investigation team.
Subsequently, the Mayor was requested to facilitate the surrender of Luis and Boy Corcolon to Camp
Crame since the CIS suspected them of being involved in the crime together with Kit. The Corcolon brothers,
accompanied by the Mayor, peacefully surrendered to CIS operatives in the afternoon of July 12, 1993.
On August 10, 1993, the Mayor received an anonymous phone call advising him that he would better
leave the country because he was to be arrested in three (3) days time. He refused to heed the advice because
he had nothing to do with the crime. And so he was apprehended on August 13, 1993 at his Calauan
residence and brought to Camp Vicente Lim where he was presented to the media. There he saw Centeno and
Malabanan who did not greet him. General Salimbangon ordered the two (2) witnesses to implicate the
Mayor. The general then ordered that the Mayor be handcuffed as he is the rapist. You son of a bitch,
Salibangon. You framed me up, the Mayor cursed.
The Mayor denied having given Centeno advice and P2,000.00 pocket money on June 30, 1993. It was
only in the courtroom that he saw Centeno, although he knows the latter. The Mayor also denied Malabanans
testimony implicating him in the crime. In fact, Malabanan wrote him letters asking for his help. The trial
court noted, however, that the letter adverted to by the Mayor were all addressed to Judge Baldo.
Appellant Medialdea was Calauan policeman until his summary dismissal on September 10, 1993. He
claimed that he, being a member of a crack team formed by Major Cao and composed of Malabanan, Luis
and Ama, was preoccupied the whole day of June 28, 1993 conducting police operations on board an
ambulance in different barangays of the town in search of Tisoy. The fruitless operations ended at about 9:00
p.m. of June 28. Driving the ambulance, he got home at around 10:30 p.m. where he saw his wife playing
mahjong with some friends. Medialdea joined the players for about an hour, then he slept until 5:00 a.m. of
the next day (June 29).
The crack team met again in the morning of June 29, 1993 to continue the manhunt for Tisoy. At around
7:15 a.m. in Barangay Imok, they saw Tisoy speed by in a motorcycle. Medialdea and Luis fired shots in the
air but Tisoy managed to escape. Centeno was not present when this event transpired because he was
instructed to go to the municipal hall with the ambulance.
Upon hearing news over the radio that a dead body was found at Sitio Paputok, Km. 74, Barangay
Mabacan, Medialdea radioed Centeno to fetch the group at the fishpond of one Gani. As soon as Centeno
arrived at around 8:00 a.m., they proceeded to Km. 74 where they saw Eileens body inside the van parked in
the sugarcane field. Major Cao and several policemen were already there. Medialdea had to pull down
Eileens T-shirt and roll up her underwear to spare her from numerous kibitzers staring at her naked body. He
recovered several scattered items inside the van like cigarette packs, a paddle, spike shoes, and 5 bottles of
beer. The van was then driven by a certain Gener to the UP Los Baos escorted by the ambulance and Major
Caos police car.
Thereafter, at around 9:30 a.m., Medialdea, on Major Caos directive, went to the Gomez residence and
asked for Allan. The maid told him that Allan has not come home since the night before and that she last saw
him at around 6:30 p.m. with one Jet Tejada. As there was no other person inside the house except the maid,
Medialdea, with her permission, searched for Allan inside but to no avail. Before leaving, he instructed the
maid to tell Allan that he better make good his hiding because Allan is a suspect in the crime. At the Tejada
residence, Jet was neither there. So Medialdea proceeded to the boarding house of Eileen and instructed the
landlady to inform calmly Eileens parents on what had happened to their daughter.
Medialdea then returned to the UP Los Baos security force where he told Major Cao that Allan had
escaped. Before leaving UP campus to bring Eileens body to Calauan, Major Cao ordered Medialdea to still
look for Allan. When his efforts to find Allan inside the campus proved futile, Medialdea sought the aid of
Barangay Captain Cesar Ruiz who brought him to the barangay hall where Jet Tejada was. Tejada strongly
objected to Medialdeas insinuation of his and Allans participation in the crime, saying that they can never do
anything as dastardly as that.
Afterwards, a certain Allan, a barangay tanod, volunteered that he knew Allan. This Allan opines that if
Allan was dead then Kit had a hand on it since Allan had earned Kits ire when the former began dating the
latters girlfriend named Rose. Medialdea informed Major Cao that Allan perhaps has gone to Manila with his
father. The Major replied that Allan is here, but is likewise dead.
Ama then informed Major Cao that they have a suspect named Kit who had an axe to grind against
Allan. Then someone in the crowd uttered Ako iyon. Kit approached and told Ama that he and Allan had
patched up their differences three (3) months ago. Medialdea noticed a drop of blood on the middle of Kits
right thigh. Kit explained that the blood oozed after punching a wall with his right knuckle.
At the municipal hall, Ama handed an empty armalite shell recovered from the site where Allans body
was found. Thereafter, Arnold (the prisoner who was cleaning the van) was seen carrying the rubber matting
of the Tamaraw van to hang it over the municipal fence to dry. Ama could not help but curse Arnold and
ordered the latter to bring it back. Ama explained to Major Cao that they could be dragged to the case just
like what happened to the policeman in the Paraaque massacre who burned a mosquito net and was thereafter
sacked.
Medialdea also testified that it was Major Cao who ordered the cleaning of the van to diffuse the stench
caused by the blood stains therein.
Then on July 6, 1993, Medialdea, together with Ama and Malabanan, went to the PNP Sta. Cruz
Command to answer queries about the cleaning of the van. They were then brought to Canlubang where they
executed their respective sworn statements. Medialdea also recalled that Major Cao instructed them not to say
anything about the cleaning of the van. Afterwards, they were brought back to the PNP Sta. Cruz and
detained therein pending the filing of formal charges against them.
Major Cao visited Medialdea the next day, July 7. The major advised him that they should just point to
Malabanan as the one who cleaned the van. Medialdea did not heed his advice for he pitied Malabanan and
besides, it was Major Cao who really ordered its cleaning. The major then reiterated the reason why he
caused its cleaning (the unbearable stench of blood).
Days later, on July 16, 1993, Medialdea and Ama, together with Malabanan, were brought to the
Department of Justice where Fiscal Abesamis asked them to sign a waiver of their detention. On July 24,
1993, the three (3) men were led back to PNP Canlubang where Colonels Gualberto and Tiangco began
investigating then on July 27, 1993. During the investigation, Medialdea was being enticed by Col. Gualberto
to cooperate with the government by testifying against the Mayor, as there is an order from the higher
echelon to bring the Mayor down. He refused, saying that the Mayor is completely innocent because he is
pro-poor and the Mayor even walks the church aisle on his knees. Col. Gualberto threatened that he will be
dragged all the more to the case if he will not cooperate. Medialdea begged for mercy and suggested that they
should investigate Kit instead. The colonel said that messing up with Kit is like ramming into a wall.
Medialdea was then asked to sign a statement that contained inaccurate answers. The inaccuracies were
supplied by Col. Gualberto.
Medialdea also professed his ignorance before Col. Tiangco. This colonel was less diplomatic. He
splashed coffee on Medialdeas face, cursed him and whipped his face. So was Malabanan. The investigators
would hit then when they try to reason. Back to his cell, Medialdea heard Col. Tiangco order somebody to
have him killed in the evening.
On August 13, 1993, one Colonel Versoza advised Medialdea to follow Malabanan in testifying against
the Mayor. They will be placed under the Witness Protection Program where they would be entitled to
allowances, free housing facilities and the chance to go abroad with their families where they can live
peacefully, Col. Versoza assured them. Medialdea refused once again. Malabanan therafter informed him that
he and Centeno had already given false statements for they can no longer stand the torture inflicted on them.
But Medialdea stood pat with his refusal, for he cannot testify falsely against his companions just to free
himself. It is still better to live than to die a martyr, Malabanan answered.
We now to go appellant Luis Corcolons story which painted the Kit Alqueza angle in greater detail. In
the morning of June 25, 1993, three (3) men went to Luis residence in Barangay Mabacan. They told Luis
that their boss, Edgardo Lavadia alias Uod, wanted to see him the next day. Lavadia is a very generous friend
of Luis for so many years who, as a professional forger of checks, is being protected by General Alqueza.
Luis arrived at Lavadias house at around 2:00 p.m. of June 26. There he saw Kit and Lavadias men.
Lavadia requested him to abduct and kill Allan because the latter has done something wrong to Kit. Luis
asked what Allans fault was and then suggested that if its just a small squabble, they better forgive Allan.
Lavadia insisted, but Luis appeared hesitant since it might put him in big trouble. Lavadia tempered his
request by asking Luis to merely help in getting rid of the body. Luis agreed. He and Lavadia were to meet
again on June 28, 1993 in the Bay cockpit. After this, Luis left.
Luis was also a member of the team formed by Major Cao to hunt down Tisoy. At around 8:30 in the
morning of June 28, 1993, he was fetched by Medialdea, Ama, Malabanan and proceeded to Barangay Imok
on board the ambulance driven by Centeno to apprehend Tisoy. At around 1:00 p.m., Luis left the group and
went to Bay cockpit to meet Lavadia, as agreed upon the previous day. When he arrived at the cockpit, only
Lavadias men were there. Luis then asked one of the men to tell Lavadia that he is backing out of the
agreement. He first attended the derby being held at the cockpit before returning to Barangay Imok at around
5:00 p.m. and re-joined the team. They left Barangay Imok at around 7:30 p.m. and proceeded to Barangay
Wawa, San Pablo City where they stayed for about two (2) hours waiting for Tisoy. Sensing that Tisoy would
not be passing by, the team headed back for Calauan. Luis was driven home first and reached his house at
around 9:30 p.m. A certain Ernesto Bustillo was waiting for him to borrow his passenger jeepney. Thereafter,
Luis slept at around 10:30 p.m.
At around 4:45 a.m. of the next day (June 29) while Luis was preparing the breakfast of his children, a
Tamaraw van, driven by Kit, stopped in front of his house honking its horn continuously. Four (4)
motorcycle-riding men, each wearing bonnet masks and maong jackets, escorted the van. Kit sought his help
in burying at once the dead female body inside the van. Luis inspected the van and saw a naked corpse of a
woman. He refused Kits summons after which Luis immediately returned to his house, turned off the lights
and closed door for fear that Kits escorts would shoot him. The convoy then headed towards the direction of
Sitio Paputok, Km. 74.

At about 6:30 a.m., Luis, Centeno, Medialdea and Malabanan met and continued their surveillance of
Tisoy at Barangay Imok. They saw Tisoy pass by at around 7:10 a.m. but were not able to apprehend him.
The group thereafter went to Ganis fishpond at about 8:30 a.m. then proceeded to Km. 74 to verify reports of
a females death. There they saw the Tamaraw van with a dead woman inside. Luis recognized the vehicle as
that driven by Kit hours earlier, but he kept silent. The group then brought the van to the UP Los Baos
campus.
In the morning if June 30, 1993, Luis met the Mayor. The latter instructed him to investigate on who
dumped Eileens body at Km. 74. Luis obliged and said that he will make a report within a week. He,
however, did not tell the Mayor about Kits involvement in the crime.
On July 7, 1993, CIS agents of Canlubang raided his house during his absence thereat. The agents, his
wife said, planted a gun inside. The next day, Luis read in the papers that a P100,000.00 reward has been
offered for his and brother Boys capture. He rushed to the Mayor who advised him to remain quiet.
In the afternoon of July 12, 1993, Luis went to Boys house upon being summoned by the Mayor who
was with General Quizon and Colonel Hilario. He and Boy were brought to Camp Crame for interview. After
the interview, the CIS took their sworn statements. The answers therein, Luis said, were furnished by the
agents. He signed the statement out to fear without the assistance of a lawyer of his own choice. For several
days, he was investigated by PACC agents. Then on or July 20, 1993, he and Boy were transferred to CIS
Canlubang and were interrogated by Col. Tiangco who repeatedly manhandled and cursed him. Luis insisted
on his innocence and suggested that it is Kit who they should investigate. After the interview, Luis was
tortured by way of water treatment, denied of food and was not allowed to receive visitors. In the afternoon
of June 28, 1993, Luis was brought before the PACC where he was again manhandled during the 2-hour
interrogation. He answered yes to all the questions hurled at him because he was already dizzy. He was also
informed that Lavadia had already executed a statement saying that the latter paid him.
On August 1, 1993 at the PACC-TFH office, General Quizon was forcing him to testify against the
Mayor. He was also interviewed by media afterwhich, he was brought back to his cell where he met Lavadia.
He cursed and strangled Lavadia. Luis suggested that they should now tell the truth about Kits involvement,
but Lavadia advised him to remain silent because reprisal from General Alqueza would be far worse. Luis
was detained at the PACC until the start of the trial. He also filed a complaint for torture before the
Commission on Human Rights.
Boy Corcolon testified that he never left house on the night of June 28, 1993. He woke up at around 7:00
a.m. of the next day and proceeded to the Calauan police station on his motorcycle upon being informed of
the discovery of a dead female in sitio Paputok, Km. 74. After going to the municipal building where he saw
Ama, Major Cao and Judge Baldo, Boy followed Major Cao and his men in going to Km. 74. There he saw
the naked body of the dead woman inside the van. Boy thereafter followed the van to the UP compound.
Moments later, the van was brought to Calauan municipal hall compound. He did not stay in the municipal
hall, but went straight home instead.
The CIS agents raided his house on July 7, 1993. The next day, Boy read in the papers that he and his
brother Luis were being haunted down by the authorities and a P100,000.00 bounty is at stake for their
capture. He rushed to the house of the Mayor to inform the latter of the raid. The Mayor advised him to
remain calm and to avoid being visible.
In the afternoon of July 12, 1993, he and Luis were fetched by General Quizon and Colonel Hilario at
Luis residence and thereafter brought to Camp Crame. At the camp, press people interviewed them after
which they were led to a room for taking of their respective sworn statements. Boy claimed that he was
forced to give his statement after being kicked, slapped and cursed by the investigators. He tried to correct
portions of his statement but the investigating officer did not allow him. Boy and Luis were detained at the
camp until charges have been filed against them, for their refusal to cooperate with the CIS.
On July 20, 1993, the two (2) brother were brought to an uninhabited place near a hill in Barangay
Paliparan where they were made to stand in front of the military group consisting of Generals Quizon and
Salimbangon, Colonel Gualberto and his men. Boy and Luis were each asked to hold an armalite rifle, and
then pictures were taken of them handing the rifles over to the generals.
The next day (June 21), they were brought to CIS Canlubang and stayed there until the start of the trial in
September, 1993. Boy claimed he was subjected to electric shock and water treatment to make him confess
his guilt.
Ama, also a member of the team involved in the Tisoy manhunt, related a similar story on the groups
sorties in different barangays on June 28, 1993. After the failed mission, Centeno dropped him off at his
residence in Barangay Masiit at about 10:00 p.m. of the same day and did not leave the house until the next
morning.
At around 6:15 a.m. of the next day (June 29), he was at Barangay Balayhangin to wait for Tisoy per
Medialdeas instruction. Minutes later, he saw Tisoy pass by on a motorcycle and thereafter reported the
matter to Medialdea. Ama learned of Eileens death at around 8:00 a.m. when he was at the Calauan police
station. Centeno thereafter picked him up and they, together with Medialdea, Malabanan and Luis proceeded
to Sitio Paputok where Eileens body was found.
From the university compound, he, Medialdea, Malabanan and a UP student named Butch went to Allans
house but the latter was not there. They also went to Jet Tejadas and Eileens boarding houses.
At Barangay Batong Malaki, Los Baos, barangay tanod Allan revealed to Medialdea that the dead Allans
enemy was Kit. Allan was fond of girls and there was a time when Kit got angry at and threatened Allan
when the latter dated Kits girlfriend Rose, the tanod narrated.
Ama and the rest of the group were able to talk to Jet Tejada who denied any involvement in the crime.
After Major Cao informed him that Allan is already dead, Ama told the major about the friction between
Allan and Kit. Then someone tapped Major Caos shoulder and identified himself as Kit who clarified that he
had patched up with Allan about three (3) months ago. Kit angrily pointed his finger at Ama, then Major Cao
pacified them. Ama asked Kit about the drops of blood on his right thigh. Kit explained that the blood came
from his right knuckle. He is our suspect Ama blurted. Major Cao, however, reprimanded him for making
such a loud comment.
*(On the cleaning of the van, Amas story is similar to Medialdeas account heretofore discussed).
Thereafter, Ama, Medialdea and Malabanan found their way to the Mayors residence in bay. Ama
revealed to the Mayor that Kit is the suspect. The Mayor said that Kit comes from a very powerful and
influential family, and that his father, General Alqueza, is a tough man. The Mayor nonetheless assured them
of his support.
On July 1, 1993, Ama accompanied some CIS personnel at the site where Allans body was found. They
found drops of blood, cigarette butts and wrappers in the area. Later in the afternoon, Ama went to
Canlubang as he was asked by Colonel Roxas to make a written report on the Kit Alqueza angle. He
completed his statement in about five (5) hours. The officer before whom he was sworn, Ama noticed, was
drunk.
On July 3, 1993, he received word that he was to undergo counter-insurgency training effective that same
day. Two (2) days after (July 5), he asked a certain Colonel Toco why he was being required to undergo
training again. The colonel promised to look into the matter. On that same day, Malabanan informed him that
Luis appeared panicky and was acting suspiciously, as the latter seemed to go back and forth to the municipal
hall and kept asking Malabanan for the names of people investigating the case. Also on that day, Ama gave
the NBI Regional Director some information about Kit and Luis which started the NBI investigation.
On July 6, 1993, Ama, together with Medialdea and Malabanan, executed his statement in CIS
Canlubang assisted by one Atty. Exconde who asked him to sign the same even before Ama can read it. At
PHQ Sta. Cruz, the Deputy Provincial Commander for Operations fumed when he declared in his statement
that he was absent during the cleaning of the van. He declared so because Major Cao instructed him to keep
silent on that matter. Subsequently (July 7), he learned of Malabanans escape.
On July 24, 1993, Ama, Malabanan and Medialdea were brought to CIS Canlubang. They ate drugged
food which gave him chest pain and made him very weak and talkative. He saw Medialdea being whipped on
the head with a newspaper by one official.
Five days later (July 29), they were brought to the PACC where Luis pointed to them before the media.
The next day (July 30), he and General Alqueza met at the Department of Justice. The general cursed him for
dragging Kit in the case and even challenged him to a fistfight outside the building.
On August 7, 1993, at General Salimbangons office, the general informed him that his summary
dismissal is on hand unless he testifies against the Mayor. When he refused, the general cursed him. Colonel
Gualberto also tried to convince him by offering promotion, house and lot, monthly allowance, or a chance to
leave the country with his family. But Ama insisted on his innocence.
On August 13, 1993, a sobbing Malabanan embraced Ama and asked for his forgiveness because the
former has already implicated him falsely in the crime. Malabanan said he could no longer bear the torture
being inflicted on him and the threats on his life and family. He was also advised by Malabanan to follow
suit, but he refused once again.
Brion is the Mayors nephew. He denied being in the company of any of the appellants on the evening of
June 28, 1993 as he stayed at their house on J. del Valle St., Calauan the whole night. In the morning of July
29, 1993, he was arrested at his father-in-laws house without any warrant. The arresting officer told him that
Colonel Navarro (PNP Director of Laguna) wanted to interview him. Brion was brought to the Calamba
police station from where he was taken to Canlubang. There, Col. Navarro cursed him for being so elusive.
Brion answered that he never went into hiding. Col. Navarro informed him that Luis Corcolon has revealed
that he was the third man to rape Eileen. Brion then heard Malabanan shouting that he is taking all the blame
for the crime if they would just spare the two students (Brion and Kawit) who are totally innocent.
Brion, together with Malabanan, Ama and Luis, was brought to the office of the then Vice-President
Estrada who asked Ama and Malabanan whether they raped Eileen. Ama belied the accusation. Malabanan,
too, professed innocence and said that in the nine (9) years he stayed in Mindanao, it is his first time to cry
this way. This convinced the vice-president of Malabanans innocence. Kawit also cried at this point. Brion
saw Luis being held up by two men towards the room as Luis appeared to be on the brink of collapse. One of
the escorts then raised Luis hand so as to point at Brion.
On July 30, 1993, Brion, Ama, Malabanan, Kawit, Luis and Boy were brought to the Department of
Justice where Fiscal Zuo asked them to sign some papers. Luis was instructed to re-affirm his sworn
statement before the PACC while Brion and Kawit were asked to sign a waiver of detention. The three (3),
however, refused. Fiscal Zuo offered them a lawyer from the Public Assistance Office (PAO) to assist them
but Brion rejected the offer.

On August 6, 1993, General Quizon asked Brion to sign a confession but he refused. When a second
statement was prepared, he cried because he was allowed to read only that portion relating to his personal
circumstances before being forced to sign it without the assistance of a lawyer. Thereafter, he was brought
back to PHQ Sta. Cruz at around 5:00 p.m.
Brion related having executed a sworn statement detailing the methods of torture he underwent to force
him into implicating the Mayor, Ama, Medialdea and Malabanan, viz:
1) he would be placed in a doghouse-like cell fitted with loudspeakers;
2) his hands would be tied behind his back and he would be tied to a bench. A towel would be placed over
his mouth and nostrils, then 7-up is poured on his face;
3) his body would be whipped with guns.
No medical examination was ever conducted on him. More, his captors would padlock his cell whenever
Atty. Arias paid him a visit.
Kawit was a houseboy of the Mayor in his Calauan residence. He claimed he slept at around 9:00 p.m.
of June 28, 1993 and woke up at 6:00 a.m. the following day to water the plants.
On July 16, 1993, he was interrogated in connection with the deaths of Eileen and Allan. Later in the
day, Medialdea and some policemen fetched him at his house in Barangay Bagong Pook and brought him to
PHQ Sta. Cruz. Kawit was led into a room where Medialdea, in the presence of Centeno and Malabanan,
asked him the name of the girl who was reportedly shouting while Kawit was dragging her at CPAMMS.
Kawit answered that there were two (2) bar girls, whose names are Carla and Ninja Joyce, who were shouting
at Barangay Bagong Pook. Ama then entered the room and requested Malabanan and Medialdea not to hurt
Kawit. When Malabanan and Medialdea left the room, Kawit explained to Ama that the two (2) bar girls
complained of one Melvin Pajadan not paying them for their services.
Thereafter, Kawit was asked by one Major Uyami to make a statement. After signing the statement,
Kawit was told by investigator Cansanay that the major wanted him to include in his statement the Mayors
involvement in the Gomez-Sarmenta slaying, but Kawit refused. He was thus detained for the night. A
policeman in civilian clothes thereafter asked him to sign a paper bearing his name and the handwritten
words: Pauuwiin ka na bukas ng umaga. Kawit signed the paper, but he was not released the next day.
Before this Court, Mayor Sanchez and Medialdea filed their consolidated Appellants Brief, and so did
Ama, Brion and Kawit. Brothers Luis and Boy Corcolon, on the other hand, filed separate appeal briefs.
Briefly, the pith of the assigned errors and the focus of the appellants arguments is the issue of witnesses
Centeno and Malabanans credibility, whose open-court narrations served as principal basis for the trial courts
rendition of a guilty verdict.
So oftenly repeated by this Court is that the matter of assigning values to declarations on the witness
stand is best and most competently performed by the trial judge[4] who had the unmatched opportunity to
observe the witnesses and to assess their credibility by the various indicia available but not reflected in the
record. The demeanor of the person on the stand can draw the line between fact and fancy. The forthright
answer or the hesitant pause, the quivering voice or the angry tone, the flustered look or the sincere gaze, the
modest blush or the guilty blanch these can reveal if the witness is telling the truth or lying in his teeth.[5]
Judge Demetriou who presided over the entire trial until its very conclusion expressed her satisfaction
with the way witnesses Centeno and Malabanan survived the hot seat with flying colors, so to speak. With
respect to Centeno, the honorable Judge had this to say:
In thus passing upon the credibility of Centeno, this Court kept his alleged dubious reputation for veracity in
mind. But, after carefully reviewing the testimony of Centeno in his direct examination and gruelling (sic)
cross-examination for almost 3 months, this Court, even with a jaundiced eye, could not help but be
impressed about the myriad of details in his testimony and his frank, spontaneous and straightforward manner
of testifying. The lengthy and punishing cross-examination by seven lawyers to which he was subjected
failed to bring out any serious flaw or infirmity in his perception or recollection of events or destroy the
coherence of his narration. That Centeno merely wove such a yarn from his fertile imagination, conflict with
a multitude of details, is highly improbable considering that his highest educational attainment was sixth
grade in the elementary school.[6]
Similarly, Malabanan displayed a frank, straightforward manner of answering questions and a desire to state
all the facts within his knowledge, and his credibility was never shaken on cross-examination; there was no
indication of prevarication or evasiveness. Consequently, (his) testimony is entitled to full faith and credit, the
honorable Judge observed.[7] Her impressions of these star witnesses for the State bind this Court, for we
accord great respect if not finality, to the findings of the trial court on the credibility of witnesses.[8] They,
therefore, ought not to be disturbed.[9] And once the prosecution witnesses are afforded full faith and credit,
the defenses version necessarily stands discredited.[10]
To recall, all the appellants relied on the defense of denial/alibi, i.e., they were at their respective homes
on the night of the rape-slay. But Centeno and Malabanan confirmed the presence of all the appellants on the
night of June 28, 1993 till the early morning of the following day and detailed the exact participation of each
in the crime. Positive identification by credible witnesses of the accused as the perpetrators of the crime, as
we have consistently held, demolishes the alibi[11] - the much abused sanctuary of felons.[12] Moreover,
except for the Mayor who presented Ave Marie Tonee Jimenez Sanchez (his daughter with his mistress
Elvira) and Medialdea who presented his neighbor Anastacia Gulay, the other appellants failed to present
corroborating testimonial evidence to butress their respective alibis. The defense of alibi is inherently weak
especially when wanting in material corroboration. Categorical declarations of witnesses for the prosecution
of the details of the crime are more credible than the uncorroborated alibi interposed by the accused.[13] Ave
Maries testimony is of no help to the Mayor, since alibi becomes less plausible as a defense when it is
invoked and sought to be crafted mainly by the accused himself and his immediate relatives.[14] Anastacia
Gulays testimony is likewise worthless since the trial court found her testimony rehearsed. We will not
disturb this finding because it touches on credibility.
In fine, the defense of alibi is an issue of fact that hinges on the credibility of witnesses, and the
assessment of the trial court, unless patently and clearly inconsistent, must be accepted.[15]
In an attempt to discredit Centeno, appellants principally harp on the contradictions in four (4) Sworn
Statements executed by Centeno on August 13, 1993, August 15, 1993, August 17, 1993 and August 30,
1993. The Solicitor Generals Office summarizes appellants asseverations on this point, viz:
Appellants point out that while in his Sworn Statement dated August 13, 1993, Centeno stated that after the
victims were seized, they were brought to CPAMMS, in his Sworn Statement dated August 15, 1993, he
claimed that the two were brought to Erais Farm (p. 86-96, Sanchez and Medialdea; p. 11-12, Luis Corcolon;
p. 38, Ama, Brion and Kawit; p. 10, Rogelio Corcolon). Appellant also point out that in the August 13, 1993
Sworn Statement, Centeno merely referred to a person named Edwin (without stating his family name) and
another person he did not know who was in the place where the victims were brought. In his Sworn
Statement dated August 17, 1993, Centeno supplied the family name of Edwin as Cosico and the name of the
other person whom he did not know as Lito Angeles (pp. 96-97, Sanchez and Medialdea).
Another major contradiction pointed out is that in his August 13, 1993 Sworn Statement, Centeno mentioned
that he drove the Corcolon brothers to the house of Edgardo Uod Lavadia in Bangkal Street, Los Baos,
Laguna. Upon arriving at the house of Lavadia, Centeno saw Lavadia and Teofilo Kit Alqueza talking. Later
Lavadia handed an envelop to Luis Corcolon. In the latest Sworn Statement dated August 30, 1993, Centeno
stated that they did not go to the house of Lavadia and that during the whole day of June 26, 1993, Centeno
was with Malabanan (pp. 99-102, Sanchez and Medialdea; pp. 37-40, Ama, Brion and Kawit; p. 8, Rogelio
Corcolon).[16]
The trial judge found Centenos explanation on these inconsistencies satisfactory, justifying such finding
with pertinent jurisprudence. The Court, therefore, affirms and adopts her disquisition on the matter, viz:
With respect to the portion of his sworn statement dated August 13, 1993 which implicated Kit Alqueza,
Centeno explained that it was dictated by a CIS agent named Rommel. He feared Rommel because the latter
threatened him that he would be hurt if he did not cooperate. Even when his family was already under the
custody of the CIS on August 15, 1993, he did not ask for the deletion of the said portion because he was still
under the CIS custody. It was only on August 30, 1993 when he was placed under the Witness Protection
Program that he found the courage to execute another sworn statement for the specific purpose of deleting the
reference to Kit Alqueza. Although he was placed under the Witness Protection Program on August 17, 1993,
there was a delay in his retraction of Kit Alquezas involvement due to his inability to reach Fiscal Arellano.
Centenos explanation is quite believable because he had already implicated the accused Sanchez in his sworn
statement of August 13, 1993. Thus, the portion implicating Kit Alqueza does not jibe with the main story of
Centeno that Eileen Sarmenta was abducted by Medialdea, Ama, the Corcolon brothers, Brion and Kawit to
be given as a gift to their boss, Mayor Sanchez.
As to his sworn statement of August 15, 1993 where he stated that the victims were taken to Erais Farm
instead of CPAMMS as originally indicated in his August 13, 1993 sworn statement, Centeno explained that
when he gave his first statement he was still hoping that Mayor Sanchez would help him. Furthermore, he
feared the power and influence of the Mayor. Thus, according to him, he gave the wrong place to mislead his
investigators. It was only on August 15, 1993 when the accused Sanchez was already in prison that Centeno
decided to correct his previous statements.
This Court is inclined to accept the explanation of Centeno that his earlier attempt to mislead the
investigators by saying that the victims were taken to CPAMMS was out of fear of the Mayor. Our Supreme
Court has recognized that the inherent fear of reprisal by witnesses who refuse initially to disclose what they
know about a crime is quite understandable, especially when the accused is a man of power and influence in
the community (People v. Catao, 107 Phil. 861 [1960]).
In a recent case, People v. Pascua (206 SCRA 628 [1992]), the Supreme Court observed that Fear for ones
life explains the failure on the part of a witness to immediately notify the authorities of what exactly
transpired. And, [o]nce such fear is overcome by a more compelling need to narrate the truth, the Supreme
Court went on to say, then the witness must be welcomed by the courts to help dispense justice.
Consequently, this Court will not reject the testimony of Centeno on the basis of inconsistencies in his sworn
statements taken by police authorities which have been sufficiently explained. What is more important is that
Centeno testified on the witness stand in a categorical, straightforward, spontaneous and frank manner and
remained consistent on cross-examination. This Court, therefore, finds Centeno a credible witness.[17]
To further fortify this observation, we advert to that all-too familiar rule that discrepancies between sworn
statements and testimonies made at the witness stand do not necessarily discredit the witnesses.[18] Sworn
statements/affidavits are generally subordinated in importance to open court declarations because the former
are often executed when an affiants mental faculties are not in such a state as to afford him a fair opportunity
of narrating in full the incident which has transpired.[19] Testimonies given during trials are mush more exact
and elaborate.[20] Thus, testimonial evidence carries more weight than sworn statements/affidavits.
Appellants would also quibble on the following portions of Centenos testimony, to wit:
1) he could not give exactly where the appellants went after sexually abusing Eileen;]
2) he was unsure whether it was Eileens left or right foot that hit the chair of the van when she was
struggling;
3) he was unsure of their speed while on their way to the UP compound;
4) he could not give the exact distance between the ambulance he was driving and the van;
5) he said he could see the protruding end of the roof of a kubo when he parked the ambulance in front of
the Big J restaurant. Appellants claim that from where Centeno was allegedly standing, there was no way he
could see the roof of that kubo;
6) he was able to recall what appellants were wearing on that night of June 28, 1993;
7) he saw Kawit hit Allan at his diaphragm with the butt of an armalite, but the medico-legal finding of Dr.
Escueta revealed no injury in the abdominal region of Allan;
8) his testimony that the appellants raped Eileen inside the van which was very limited space, while
appellants could have chosen a far more comfortable or remote place to do the crime. With respect to the
Mayor, it was very unbelievable for him to commit rape inside his room filled with religious adornments and in
the process risk his reputation as mayor and an established man in the community;
9) his testimony to the effect that appellants rolled their pants down to their knees and then climbed the van
to rape Eileen. Appellants would consider such testimony impossible, claiming that the narrow circumference of
the waistline will impede and obstruct the upward movement of the legs.
10) his admission that he can lie for money, or out fear.
It may be conceded that these inconsistencies marred Centenos testimony, but they refer to trivial details
which do not, in actuality, touch upon the whys and wherefores of the crime committed.[21] Equally settled is
the rule that inconsistencies in the testimony of witnesses when referring only to minor details and collateral
matters do not affect either the substance of their declaration, their veracity, or the weight of their testimony.
Although there may be inconsistencies on minor details, the same do not impair the credibility of the
witnesses where there is consistency in relating the principal occurrence and positive identification of the
assailants,[22] as in this case. Slight contradictions in fact even serve to strengthen the sincerity of a witness
and prove that his testimony is not rehearsed.[23] They are fail-safes against memorized perjury.[24] Besides,
errorless testimonies cannot be expected especially when a witness is recounting details of a harrowing
experience.[25] Even the most truthful witnesses can make mistakes but such innocent lapses do not
necessarily affect their credibility.[26] Consequently, Centenos and Malabanans credibility still remains intact
notwithstanding these inconsistencies.
Other pieces of evidence further enhance the damaging testimonies of Centeno and Malabanan. For one,
a missing belt loop from the pair of white shorts worn by Eileen on the night of the crime was recovered from
Erais Farm by prosecution witness Major Lulita Chambers who, together with Col. Gualberto and other
officers, went there on August 19, 1993 to effect service of the search warrant issued by RTC Judge Geraldez.
Major Chambers, a forensic chemist, conducted a series of laboratory examinations and later concluded that
the retrieved beltloop matched in color, size and fiber composition with a beltloop she detached from the
white shorts of Eileen which she (Major Chambers) used as a standard.
Another corroborating evidence is the M16 empty bullet shell recovered at the site where Allans body
was found. The ballistic examination on the empty shell conducted by FID-PNP Chief Ballistician Vicente de
Vera revealed that the striations of the empty shell were the same as those registered by the cartridges from
M16 rifle bearing Serial No. 773159 surrendered by Luis Corcolon. Mr. De Vera also found the metallic
fragments recovered from Eileens body, after conducting microscopic examinations thereof, to bear the same
characteristics as those from a bullet fired from an M16 rifle.
The autopsy and vaginal examination conducted by prosecution witness Dr. Vladimir V. Villaseor,
medico-legal officer of the PNP-CIS, on Eileens cadaver buttresses all the more the gang-rape story of the
prosecution. Dr. Villaseors findings, in a nutshell, disclosed the presence of multiple contusions on Eileens
body, fresh shallow lacerations on her hymen, a congested cervix, a gaping labia majora and oozing whitish
fluid (tested positive for spermatozoa) from the vaginal opening. Oozing spermatozoa, Dr. Villaseor
explained, means that the amount of semen was much more than the vaginal canal could contain and that
there were several seminal ejaculations that occurred therein. He also noted that a great quantity of whitish
fluid continued to ooze from Eileens vaginal opening despite her death for several hours. Taking into account
all these findings, Dr. Villaseor ruled out the possibility of any consented sexual intercourse. In this
connection, appellants would belittle Dr. Villaseors findings by insisting as the more convincing opinion the
defenses medical expert witness, Dr. Ernesto Brion who testified to the effect that there can be no multiple
rape if there is only one laceration on Eileens hymen as testified to by Dr. Villaseor. We dismiss appellants
argument by reiterating anew that the absence of extensive abrasions or contusions on the vaginal wall does
not rule out rape because the slightest penetrations enough.[27] It is not an indispensable element for the
successful prosecution of said crime.[28] Moreover, Dr. Brion is an uncle by consanguinity and erstwhile
counsel of record of the Mayor, thus making his objectivity highly questionable.
Appellants Ama, Kawit and Brion would assail the trial courts finding that they were part of the
conspiracy to commit the rape-slay. Their concurrency of sentiment with the other appellants, however, was
evident from the time they abducted Eileen and Allan, brought the two to Erais Farm where Eileen was raped
by the Mayor and Allan beaten up black and blue, headed for a sugarcane field killing Allan along the way,
sexually abused Eileen in rapid succession and finally killed her. In not an instance did any of the three
appellants (Ama, Kawit and Brion) desist from that common design.[29] Likewise, the complicity of the
Mayor in the crime can be deduced from the following conversations he had with some of the appellants at
the Erais Farm (per Centenos testimony), viz.:
LUIS CORCOLON: Mayor, ito po yung regalo namin sa inyo. Ito po yung babae na matagal na po ninyong
kursunada.
MAYOR: Aba, and ganda talaga ng babaeng yan. Pero sino yung kasama ninyong lalake?
MEDIALDEA: Boss, kasama ho yan ng babae yung lalake. Isinama na rin ho namin para wala pong bulilyaso.
After raping Eileen, the Mayor had this short exchange with Medialdea:
MAYOR: O sige mga anak, salamat sa regalo ninyo. Salamat sa regalo ninyo sa akin. Tapos na ako, sa inyo na
iyan. Bahala na kayo diyan. Ano naman ang gagawin ninyo diyan sa lalake?
MEDIALDEA: Boss, papatayin na rin po namin ito para wala pong bulilyaso.
Finally, on appellants claim that the publicity given to this case impaired their right to a fair trial, we
need only to revisit this Courts pronouncements in People v. Teehankee, Jr. (249 SCRA 54), viz:
We cannot sustain appellants claim that he was denied the right to impartial trial due to prejudicial publicity.
It is true that the print and broadcast media gave the case at bar pervasive publicity, just like all high profile
and high stake criminal trials. Then and now, we rule that the right of an accused to a fair trial is not
incompatible to a free press. To be sure, responsible reporting enhances an accuseds right to a fair trial for, as
well pointed out, a responsible press has always been regarded as the handmaiden of effective judicial
administration, especially in the criminal field x x x. The press does not simply publish information about
trials but guards against the miscarriage of justice by subjecting the police, prosecutors, and judicial
processes to extensive public scrutiny and criticism.
Pervasive publicity is not per se prejudicial to the right of an accused to fair trial. The mere fact that the trial
of appellant was given a day-to-day, gavel-to-gavel coverages does not by itself prove that the publicity so
permeated the mind of the trial judge and impaired his impartiality. For one, it is impossible to seal the minds
of members of the bench from pre-trial and other off-court publicity of sensational criminal cases. The state
of the art of our communication system brings news as they happen straight to out breakfast tables and right
to our bedrooms. These news form part of our everyday menu of the facts and fictions of life. For another, our
idea of a fair and impartial judge is not that of a hermit who is out of touch with the world. We have not
installed the jury system whose members are overly protected from publicity lest they lose their impartiality.
Criticisms against the jury system are mounting and Mark Twains wit and wisdom put them all in better
perspective when he observed: When a gentleman of high social standing, intelligence, and probity swears
that testimony given under the same oath will outweigh with him, street talk and newspaper reports based
upon mere hearsay, he is worth a hundred jurymen who will swear to their own ignorance and stupidity x x x.
Why could not the jury law be so altered as to give men of brains and honesty an equal chance with fools and
miscreants? Our judges are learned in the law and trained to disregard off-court evidence and on-camera
performances of parties to a litigation. Their mere exposure to publications and publicity stunts does not per
se fatally infect their impartiality.
At best, appellant can only conjure possibility or prejudice on the part of the trial judge due to the barrage of
publicity that characterized the investigation and trial of the case. In Martelino, et al. v. Alejsndro, et al., we
rejected this standard of possibility of prejudice and adopted the test of actual prejudice as we ruled that to
warrant a finding of prejudicial publicity, there must be allegation and proof that the judges have been unduly
influenced, not simply that they might be, by the barrage of publicity. In the case at bar, the records do not
show that the trial judge developed actual bias against appellant as a consequence of the extensive media
coverage of the pre-trial and trial of his case. The totality of circumstances of the case does not prove that the
trial judge acquired a fixed opinion as a result of prejudicial publicity which is incapable of change even by
evidence presented during the trial. Appellant has the burden to prove this actual bias and he has not
discharged the burden.
And so we come to hear another tale of woe, of an infamous public figure and his minions indicted for
having raped and killed a young lady and a budding lad, of these victims who had led short obscure lives that
earned an equally ignominous end, and of a criminal enterprise so despicable only the unthinking beasts can
orchestrate. It was, indeed, a plot seemingly hatched in hell. And let it not be said that the full protection of
the law had been deprived appellants. Even a beast cannot deny this.
WHEREFORE, the assailed decision is hereby AFFIRMED in all respects. In addition, each of the
appellants having been found guilty of seven (7) counts of rape with homicide and considering that existing
jurisprudence pegs the amount of indemnity for the death of the victim at Fifty Thousand (P50,000.00) Pesos,
this Court hereby orders each of the appellants to pay the respective heirs of Eileen Sarmenta and Allan
Gomez the amount of Seven Hundred Thousand (P700,000.00) Pesos as additional indemnity.
SO ORDERED.
Davide, Jr., C.J., (Chairman), Melo, Kapunan, and Pardo, JJ., concur.
[1] Nor Chairman of the COMELEC.
[2] Atty. Juanito Andrade.
[3] Brief for Appellants Sanchez and Medialdea, p. 4.
[4] People v. Tacipit, 242 SCRA 241; People v. Sarabia, 266 SCRA 471.
[5] People v. Espinosa, 180 SCRA 393.
[6] RTC Decision, pp. 109-110.
[8] People v. Tayco, 235 SCRA 610.
[9] People v. Apolonia, 235 SCRA 124.
[10] People v. Calegan, 233 SCRA 537.
[11] People v. Tabaco, 270 SCRA 32; People v. Piandong, 268 SCRA 555; People v. Dinglasan, 267 SCRA 26; People v. Navales, 266
SCRA 569; People v. Ferrer, 255 SCRA 19; People v. Abrenica, 252 SCRA 54; People v. Vivar, 235 SCRA 257.
[12] People v. Plandez, 132 SCRA 70.
[13] People v. Villalobos, 209 SCRA 304.
[14] People v. Danao, 253 SCRA 146; People v. Rio, 201 SCRA 702.
[15] People v. Apa-ap, 235 SCRA 468.
[16] Consolidated Brief for the Appellee, pp. 38-39.
[18] People v. Ferrer, 255 SCRA 19; People v. Sarellana, 233 SCRA 31; People v. Quiming, 222 SCRA 371.
[19] People v. Padao, 267 SCRA 64.
[20] People v. Miranda, 235 SCRA 202.
[21] People v. Muoz, 163 SCRA 730.
[22] Sumalpong v. CA, 268 SCRA 764; People v. Sison, 189 SCRA 643.
[23] People v. Letigio, 268 SCRA 227; People v. Mendoza, 254 SCRA 61.
[24] People v. Roa, 167 SCRA 116.
[25] People v. Ibay, 233 SCRA 15.
[26] People v. Calegan, 233 SCRA 537.
[27] People v. Cervantes, 222 SCRA 365; People v. Tismo, 204 SCRA 535; People v. Cruz, 180 SCRA 765; David v. CA, 182 SCRA
675; People v. Taneo, 284 SCRA 251.
[28] People v. Julian, 270 SCRA 733; People v. Balsacao, 241 SCRA 309.
[29] People v. Peralta, 251 SCRA 6.

People Vs Sanchez: 121039-45: January 25, 1999: J. Martinez: First Division

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

People Vs Sanchez: 121039-45: January 25, 1999: J. Martinez: First Division

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

People vs Sanchez : 121039-45 : January 25, 1999 : J.

Martinez : First Division 16/03/2019, 2*46 PM

[G.R. No. 121039-45. January 25, 1999]

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. MAYOR ANTONIO L.

. . . a plot seemingly hatched in hell . . .

has some missing beltloops.

Sitio Paputok, Km. 74.

but Brion rejected the offer.

respect to Centeno, the honorable Judge had this to say:

[1] Nor Chairman of the COMELEC.

[2] Atty. Juanito Andrade.

[3] Brief for Appellants Sanchez and Medialdea, p. 4.

[5] People v. Espinosa, 180 SCRA 393.

[6] RTC Decision, pp. 109-110.

[7] RTC Decision, pp. 114-115.

[8] People v. Tayco, 235 SCRA 610.

[9] People v. Apolonia, 235 SCRA 124.

[10] People v. Calegan, 233 SCRA 537.

[13] People v. Villalobos, 209 SCRA 304.

[15] People v. Apa-ap, 235 SCRA 468.

[16] Consolidated Brief for the Appellee, pp. 38-39.

[17] RTC Decision, pp. 112-114.

[19] People v. Padao, 267 SCRA 64.

[20] People v. Miranda, 235 SCRA 202.

[21] People v. Muoz, 163 SCRA 730.

[24] People v. Roa, 167 SCRA 116.

[25] People v. Ibay, 233 SCRA 15.

[26] People v. Calegan, 233 SCRA 537.

[29] People v. Peralta, 251 SCRA 6.

Вам также может понравиться