Republic of the Philippines

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF PALAWAN

AND PUERTO PRINCESA CITY
Fourth Judicial Region
Branch ___
Puerto Princesa City

HON. A - Presiding Judge

HON. B - Provincial Prosecutor
HON. C - Clerk of Court

COURT CALENDAR FOR SEPTEMBER 14, 2018

FRIDAY AT 6:00 P.M.

1. Arraignment and Pre-trial

A. Process and flow

B. Suspension of arraignment

Care of: AREJA

2. Pre-trial

Pre trial conference

Clerk: all rise, the (judge) is here. Silence is hereby enjoined.

Judge: all the case called for the pre trial conference this afternoon.
Clerk: for the pre trial conf, the criminal case no. 1435 people vs. Mang kukupit
Judge: appearances
Prosecutor: for the govt
Defense: for the accused
Judge: are the accuse both in the court
Public: yes your honor, here he is.
Judge: how about the private complainant
Private: the private complainant is a corporation
Judge: are you armed with the board of resolution?
Prosecutor: yes your honor.
Judge: kindly attach to the expediente of this case. Before anything else, may I remind the
parties that there is a preliminary conference conducted before my clerk of court with minutes
are taken.
I understand that you have been furnished with this minutes I would like you to go over with this
minutes and inform the court if you confirm with the contents of this minutes.
Prosecutor: yes your honor
Defense: yes your honor, the accused confirmed.
Judge: lets proceed to the.pre trial proper
All all you know, the pretrial is held for certain matters when under rule 118 may be discussed.
A. Plea bargaining
B. Stipulation of facts
C. Marking for identification of evidence of parties
D. Waiver of objection to admiasibility of evidence
E. Mosification of the order if the accused admits the charge but interposes a lawful defense the
it is very possible that reverse trial mode may be adopted.
F. Other matters that will promote fair and expeditious trial of criminal and civil aspects of the
case.

Judge: Does first as to the plea bargaining, are the accused plead guilty to a lesser offense?
Defense: Your honor, as conferred with my client, he informed me that he is willing to plea guilty
to a lesser offense of light coercion as defined and penalizes in the 1st.paragraph of article 287
of RPC

Judge: what do you say with this proposal defense peosecutor?

Prosecutor: i am sorry your honor. But the private complainant.is of the position that the crime
of violation of ra 6539 or anti carnapping law has been consummated by the accused who has
full control and possession of the motoe vehicle.
Judge: so, we are not able to arrive at the plea bargaining at this point.
Defense: yes your honor
Judge: then may I suggest that the parties undergo the settling of ths civil aspect of this case
because it is possible if we do this, eventually, lead to a possible plea of guilt to a lesser offense
or dismissal of fhis case. If the parties are amenable, may I request the parties to the chamber to
informally discuss this in a conference session suspended
Clerk: all rise.

At the informal conf.

Judge: the court is task to exert extra efforts to see to it the parties are able to settle the civil
aspect of this case. For this reason, i would like go assure you the conference that we want to
have this afternoon is going to be an informal one. Meaning, any statements or.comments that
you make here this afternoon will not be used as evidence against you in the trial.
In the case of the presiding judge, comments and suggestions are utilized to persuade you to a
settlement of this case.will not be misconstrued as prejudgement if this case. May I know your
client's claims, prosecutor.
Prosecutor: the complainant wants the car your honor
Judge: but has it been recovered?
Is it not a mere arrangement with the police authorities for the release of the vehicle?
Prosecutor: yes your honor but the complainat who has been denied with the use of it for the
compensation. Addiyionally, the expenses, registration and atty's fees been incurred and
reimbursed your honor.
Judge: and how much are we talking about?
Prosecutor: well your honor, for thr deprivation of the use, compensation of 1500 per day and
attorneys' fees and litigation fees of 200k your honor.

Judge: what do you say defense counsel?

Defense: no, we cannot admit to it because there is ni crime has been committed.
Judge: it appears now, one of the issue of this case is ownership. And its legal issue which can
only be reversed in the course of trial. I think that the.possibility of settling this case is practically
need at this point. May I invitr you to return to the court room to settle this case.
Defense and prosecutor: yes your honor.
Judge: ok adjourned

Return
Judge: in view of the inability of the parties to settle the civil aspect of this case, let us proceed
now to the stipulation of the facts

Following are the allegations in the information the taking of the car was alleged to have been
done on _________.
Is there an issue with respect to the identity of the car?

Defense: no your honor

Prosec: we admit to the identity of the car.
Judge: in the minutes, this identity of the accused have been admitted
Is there any issue to the place where the car is parked?
Defe: no your honor, but only with qualification that it was the corporation's security guard whi
gave the key to him
Judge: prosecutor, admit it?
Prosec: no your honor.
Judge: i want to know if the parties wanted to propose any facts
Prosec: yes your honor. The car was registered under the name of ths corporation.
Judge: do the accused admit that the car has a value of 1.5M?
Defense: yes your honor
Judge: where is the car now?
Prosec: in the custody of the car has been with the makati police station. And at this point may
we request your honor to issue a order tk return the car to my client.
Judge: what do you say to this defense counsel?
Prosec: the custody of the vehicle has been with the makati police station and at this point may
we request your honor to issue an order to return the vehicle to.my client
Judge: what.do you say to this defense consel?
Defwnse: your hinor, i believe that the motor vehicle's possession with my client and not with
the corporation.
Judge: i will rule into this interlocutory matter nke. Considering that is not yet tine, the motor
vehicle is registered in the name of the corporatuin then I will order the return of the motor
vehicle to the corporation. However, they shall be responsible for the safekeeping of the MV
until the end of this trial.
Are there any proposal for stipulations?
Prosec: no your honor.
Defense: i would like to interpose that the accused did not carnaped the MV hence there is no
crime. As per accused, he is the lawful owner of the MV by virtue of the assignment made by the
corporation in consideration for the cash advances he made in favor of the corporation. Thus,
there is an intent to gain against the accused cannot be attributed to him.
Judge: does the complaint admit that the accused gave it P3.5M as cash advance in favor of the
corporation
Prosecutor: admitted
Judge: so, as partial settlement of the cash advances more or less P3.5M , thr assignment of MV
in favor of the accused.
Judge: how do you intend this cash advances made, defense counsel?
Defense: by the checks issued by the accused your honor.
Judge: who received this checks in favor of the.corp?
Judge: do you have witness?
Defense: yes, your honor the witness will be testifying also with the time and placr where
the checkd was issued, witness 1
Judge: as to the assignment, how do you prove that?
Defense: yes your honor, it was witnessed by witness 2 your honor
Judge: do you have written arrangements
Defense: no your honor but we have written communications that was an agreement as to thr
arrangement of the case in consideration of the CA.
Judge: are this communications in your possession your counsel
Defense: yes your honor. i already presented the letters your honor but the prosecutor did not
want ti admit it your honor.
Judge: is it true prosecutor that you dont want admit it?
Prosec: yes your honor but there was a change in the mgt of the corporation and the offers
involved in the letters are not aware of those.
Judge: as to the evidences presented by the prosecution. Do you intend to admit it, defense
counsel as part of your preliminary investigation?
Defense; yes. May we request that it be marked as exhibit for the defense.
Judge: ok. Have it marked as an exhibit for the defense. (Pause)
Judge: in the civil claims, what is the private complainant wish for this case?
Prosec: for thr damage that the private cimplainant sustained from thd time of taking for 1,500
per day
Judge: do you have any comment, defense counsel?
Defense: we are not admitting for the liability, your honor.
Judge: prosecutor, where do you get the rate?
Prosec: from the car rental your honor
Judge: what do you say defense counsel?
Defense: we do admit it your honor, we believe that the rate us much lower but we are
admitting the liability.
Judge: do you have any stipulation facts
Prosec and defense: none your honor
Judge: lets proceed to the loyal issue of the case that is whether the accused is liable
Prosec and def: we agree your honor
Judge: okay. May I suggest to proceed with the reverse trial
Defense: the witness your honor will present their testimony and comments pertaining to case
we will be presenting 3 witnesses.
Witness 1
Witness 2
Witness 3

Judge: okay parties are required to have their testimonies be placed in affidavit within 10 days
from today. It shall serve as direct examination of this case. From the time that the approving
party received their copies of the affidavit, they have 5
 Judge: you are required then to submit the affidacit of witness. and make sure that the opposing
counsel shall receive a copy thereof so that within 5. days the may object to inadmissible portion
of the case. After objections have ruled upon the witness mag take the stand for the furnish the
prosecution of thr affidavit after which cross examination shall proceed so the hearing of
witness, will be on ____.
After which the prosecution shall be ordered immediately from the formal offer of evidence and
the defense shall be given the opportunity or comment or object of the same. Are.you amenable
for this, defense and prosecution?

Id like to inform you that conclusion of prosecution' evidence defense is required of whether.or
not of presentinf rebuttal evidence.of the case.
I will be scheduling that on _____. Likewise if you are interested.to present rebuttal evidence, I
will be.scheduling that on_____.

3. Trial

A. Trial in absentia

Court: Call the case

Clerk: People of the Philippines vs. Allan Ocampo and Shane Zumarraga
Criminal Case No. 2344 for: Violation of PD 532 Anti-piracy and anti-highway robbery
law of 1974
Court: Appearances of the Prosecution
Prosecution: Atty. Elvi Ramos
Court: Appearances of the Defense
Defense: Atty. Estephanie Marcelo

Court: Is the prosecution ready?

Prosecution: Yes, YH.
Court: Is the defense ready?
Defense: Yes, YH.
Prosec: Your Honor, before we proceed for today’s proceeding, we respectfully manifest per
information of the provincial warden that the accused Allan Ocampo and Shane Zumarraga had
escaped from their confinement last Monday, August 28, hence, we respectfully move your
honor that a warrant of arrest be issued by this honorable court against the accused and that a
trial in absentia be made considering that the accused were already arraigned prior to their
escaped.
Court: Trial may proceed. Are you ready?
Prosec: Yes, YH.
Court: We may now hear the opening statement of the prosecution.
Prosec: Thank you YH. Accused Allan Ocampo and Shane Zumarraga rode a Cherry jeepney,
armed with a hand gun and a bladed weapon, with intent to gain and taking the passengers by
suprise, did then and there, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously took away all the personal
properties of the passengers and occupants therewith. That we may prove the accused are
guilty beyond reasonable doubt and the reason we ask you Your Honor—- the verdict of guilty.
Court: The defense would like to give an opening statement?
Defense: The accused Allan Ocampo and Shane Zumarraga, they were being accused of
Highway robbery and hold up, where in fact they do not have any intent to gain. The incident
only transpired because of the threat of PO2 Joey Rabanal. The reason we ask you YH—-the
verdict of not guilty.
Court: For the prosecution, you may now call your first witness.
Prosec: May we call Mr. John Areja to stand in the witness stand.
Court Interpreter: Raise your right hand. Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and
nothing but the truth?
Witness: Yes. I do.
Prosec: May I proceed YH?
Court: Proceed.
Prosec: Thank you YH. Please state your personal circumstances.
Witness: I am John Areja. 25 years old, bus driver and a resident of Barangay San Pedro,
Puerto Princesa City.
Prosec: With regard to criminal case no. 2344, did you execute an affidavit?
Witness: Yes.
Prosec: Showing to you an affidavit, what is the relation of this affidavit to you?
Witness: My affidavit.
Prosec: Above the name affiant, John Areja. Whose name is this?
Witness: My name.
Prosec: Above the name John Areja, whose signature is this?
Witness: My signature.
Prosec: We pray that the signature of Mr. John Areja will be mark as Exhibit A.
Court: Mark it.
Prosec: Do you affirm and confirm the authenticity of this affidavit?
Witness: Yes.
Prosec: What is the nature of your work?
Witness: I am a jeepney driver.
Prosec: Where were you on July 20, 2018?
Witness: I was driving on my last trip.
Prosec: While on your last trip, what happened next, if theres any?
Witness: Around 10pm, two passengers standing along Mendoza Park flagged down my
jeepney. Right after passing by Ka Inato at Barangay San Manuel, those two persons declared
hold up.
Prosec: Will you tell us what happened next.
Witness: I was so shocked but I managed to calm myself down. One of the men pointed his gun
towards me.
Prosec: Is Mr. Ocampo one of the men who entered the jeepney the night of July 20, declared
hold up and pointed his gun towards you?
Defense: Objection! The question is leading.
Court: Sustain. Rephrase the question.
Prosec: Is the two men during arraignment were the same men who entered the jeepney,
declared hold up and took away your money and other things of value?
Witness: Yes.
Prosecution: After they declared hold up, what did they do?
Witness: They asked me and all passengers to hand them over all our money and valuables.
After taking the money and other things of value, they both left but gun still pointing at us.
Prosec: No further questions, Your Honor.
Judge: Considering that the accused escaped from jail, the right to cross examine is deemed
waived. The case is set for another trial on ___________ for presentation of another witnesses.

Judge: Raymer Oclarit

Pros: Elvi Ramos
Defense: Estephanie Marcelo
Warden: Xerxes Sebido
Witness: John Areja

B. Offering of evidence/ Expert witness

Criminal Case No. 32597 – People vs Leones and Valones

For: Robbery with Homicide

Cast:

Judge: Oclarit
City Prosecutor: Ramos
Doctor: Pactanac
Accused: Grospe and Zumarraga
Counsel of the accused:
1. Del Rosario for Grospe; and
2. Valones for Zumarraga

Flow/contents:

Calling of case number

Calling of the witness
Credentials of the doctor (experience, profession, cases)
Direct examination of the doctor
Offering of EVIDENCE

Documents needed (during the presentation):

Autopsy report
Photographs
Knife
Certificate of post-mortem examination

Note: a scratch of paper would suffice for props

Legend: Judge
Clerk
Prosecutor
Witness
Atty A
Atty B

Judge: Call the case.

Clerk: Criminal Case No. 32597, entitled People of the Philippines vs Leones, et. al for Robbery with
Homicide. Appearances.

Prosecutor: For the government, Your Honor.

Atty. A: Same appearance for the accused Grospe, ready, Your Honor.

Atty. B: Same appearance as counsel for accused, Zumarraga, ready, Your Honor.

Prosec: May we call the witness stand the Medico Legal Officer of the NBI, Dr. Pactanac, Your
Honor.

Judge: Please take the witness stand, put him under oath.
Clerk: Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth before this Court?

Witness: Yes, I do, ma’am.

Interpreter: Please state your name, age, occupation and other personal circumstances.

Witness: Micah Ruth Pactanac, 36 years old, single, Medio Legal Officer of the NBI, c/o Medico-
Legal Office, Puerto Princesa City, Palawan.

JUDGE: Your Witness, Ms. Fiscal

PROSECUTOR: We are offering the testimony of this witness to prove that she is a Medico-Legal
Officer of the NBI; that on January 26, 2018, she performed an autopsy of the cadaver of a James
Torralba; and that he found the victim died due to stab wounds.

DIRECT EXAMINATION OF WITNESS DOCTOR CONDUCTED BY PROSECUTOR

PROSECUTOR: At this juncture, Your Honor, may we know from the defense counsels if they admit
the qualification of the doctor as an expert witness?

(note: accordingly daw, in presenting an expert witness, the trial prosec must ask the defense if it
admits of the qualification of the witness, the purpose is to expedite the proceedings)

ATTY A: Considering the gravity of the offense, Your Honor, I regret not to admit the qualification
of the doctor, Your Honor.

ATTY B: Same manifestation, Your Honor.

PROSECUTOR: May I now proceed, your honor?

JUDGE: Please do.

PROSECUTOR: Ms. Witness, you said that you are a medico-legal officer of the NBI, since when,
doctor?

WITNESS: I have been a medico-legal officer of the NBI since 2015, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: Continuosly up to the present?

WITNESS: Yes, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: Where did you study your medical course, Doctor?

WITNESS: I took my four-year course in medicine at the University of Santo Tomas in Manila,
ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: In what year did you graduate from your medical course?

WITNESS: I graduated in 2011, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: Did you take a government licensure examination for your profession?

WITNESS: Yes, I did, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: When was that?

WITNESS: In 2013, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: Did you pass the same doctor?

WITNESS: Yes, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: After passing the licensure exam, what did you do?

WITNESS: I went into private practice for one yeat, ma;ma.

PROSECUTOR: When?

WITNESS: From 2013 to 2014, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: What government examination did you take?

WITNESS: The physician licensure examination, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: Did you pass the same?

WITNESS: Yes ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: In what year did you pass doctor?

WITNESS: In 2013, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: You told us doctor that after passing the physician licensure examination, you went
into private practice for a year, is it correct?

WITNESS: Yes, maam.

PROSECUTOR: In what office?

WITNESS: It was a private general clinic, maam.

PROSECUTOR: And will you tell us about your private practive from 2013 – 2014?

WITNESS: I attended to patients with various diseases, such as respiratory diseases, and infection
ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: Aside from your private practice doctor, did you teach medicine in college?

WITNESS: No, maam.

PROSECUTOR: After 2014, after your private practice, what did you do?

WITNESS: I joined the NBI, maam.

PROSECUTOR: When you joined the NBI in 2014, what was your position there?

WITNESS: I was a medico-legal officer, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: As medico-legal officer, what were your duties and functions?

WITNESS: As medico-legal, I conducted autopsy of dead bodies to determine the different causes
of death of the victims of medico-legal cases, I examined victims of sexual abuse, victims of
physical injuries, I exhumed cadaver, I made a report of my examination, and I also testified in
court, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: Will you please clarify doctor, what do you mean by cases which are medico-Iegal?

WITNESS: Medico-Iegal cases involve stabbing and shooting incidents, and the vehicular accidents
and other cases, ma’am
PROSECUTOR:Now doctor, you said when you joined the NBI you started as a Medico-Legal Officer
I. Were you promoted?

WITNESS: Yes, maam.

PROSECUTOR: To what position doctor?

WITNESS: Medico-Legal Officer II, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: When was that?

WITNESS: I think sometime in June this year, Ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: At present doctor, what is your position?

WITNESS: As Medico-Legal Officer II, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: Doctor, from the time you first joined the NBI up to the present, were you
conducting autopsy of those cases you mentioned?

WITNESS: Yes, I have, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: Now involving cases of stabbing, could you tell us how many times more or less
have you conducted autopsy of said case?

WITNESS: I could not say exactly, but around 70 to 100, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: On January 26, 2018 doctor, do you recall if you reported to your office on that
date?
WITNESS: Yes, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: What was your tour of duty doctor? .

WITNESS: It started at 8:00 in the morning of January 26, 2018 to 8:00 in the evening of the same
day, maam.

PROSECUTOR: Do you recall having conducted an autopsy examination on that date?

WITNESS: Yes, I did, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: Will you tell us what case was it?

WITNESS: I have here documents regardmg the case that was the autopsy of James Torralba,
ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: Is there a letter request involving that autopsy?

WITNESS: Yes, there is, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: The doctor is presenting a letter request from the San Pedro Police Station dated
January 26, 2018, which we request to be marked as Exhibit L, the name of the victim James
Torralba as Exhibit L-l, and the date and time which is January 26, 2018 at about 2:30 p.m. be
marked as Exhibit L-2, the signature of SP03 Cardo Dalisay who made the request as Exhibit L-3
and the signature of the doctor be marked as Exhibit L-4, Your Honor.

JUDGE: Make the markings as requested.

PROSECUTOR: Who received this request doctor?

WITNESS: I did, maam.

PROSECUTOR: Whose name is this appearing in the document doctor?

WITNESS: That’s my signature, maam.

PROSECUTOR: The doctor is referring to Exhibit L-4, Your Honor.

PROSECUTOR: After you received this request, what did you do?

WITNESS: Upon receipt of the document I conducted autopsy of a certain James Torralba, I
received also a certificate of identification of dead body, maam.

PROSECUTOR: The doctor is presenting a document denominated Certificate of Identification of

dead body, which we request to be marked as Exhibit , the name of Penelope Asis as M-1; the
name of the victim identified as James Torralba as M-2; and the signature of Penelope Asis as M-
3.

(note: cadaver for autopsy mast be identified, It is the corpus delicti.)

JUDGE: Mark them.

PROSECUTOR: Doctor, after you received this document, the certificate of identification of dead
body marked as Exhibit M, what did you do?

WITNESS: conducted the autopsy, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: Where did you conduct your autopsy doctor?

WITNESS: I performed the autopsy at the St. Peter Chapel along Manalo St., Puerto Princesa, which
is an official morgue of the NBI, ma’am.
PROSECUTOR: What time was that when you conducted the autopsy?

WITNESS: At 7:00 p.m. on January 26, 2018, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: You said you conducted the autopsy of James Torralba on January 26, 2018 at 7:00
in the evening, now what were your findings doctor?

WITNESS: After the examination of the dead body, the findings were reduced into writing in the
document entitled Autopsy Report No. N-951437, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: The document presented by the doctor is the Autopsy Report consisting of three
pages. For purposes of identification we request that it be marked as Exhibit N, Autopsy Report
No. N-95-1437 as N-1; the name James Torralba as N-2. The date and time of the autopsy which
is July 26, 2018 at 7:00 p-m. as N-3, Your Honor.

JUDGE: Mark them.

PROSECUTOR: Doctor, you mentioned in your Autopsy Report that the victim suffered stab
wounds. Could you tell this Honorable Court how many stab wounds did the victim suffer?

(note: trial prosecutor must ask the medico-legal officer the number of wounds in the body of the
victim.)

WITNESS: There were 28 stab wounds. Of the 28 there were five that were through and through.
When I say through and through it means that they were stab wounds that had points of entry
and exit. Meaning that one wound usually found at the extremities was connected with the other,
ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: Now, you mentioned doctor about the five stab wounds that you said are through
and through, where were these stabbed wounds situated in the body of the victim, doctor?
(note: location of the wounds must also be inquired.)

WITNESS: They were located in the extremities, upper extremities, arms and forearms, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: Now, aside from the five stab wounds that were located in the arms and forearms
that were through and through, what other wounds were found in the body of the victim?

WITNESS: Principally the 28 stab wounds were located in the neck, chest and thorax and also at
the extremities, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: How many wounds doctor were located at the neck of the victim?

WITNESS: There were two (2) ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: And will you point to us the portion of the neck where these wounds were located?

WITNESS: Somewhere here, ma’am. (witness pointing to the frontal left side or her neck)

PROSECUTOR: You mentioned that there were wounds that were located on the chest of the
victim doctor, how many wounds were located on the chest?

WITNESS: In the anterior chest, eight stab wounds, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: What do you mean by anterior chest in layman’s language?

WITNESS: That would mean the front and the upper body.

PROSECUTOR: There were how many stab wounds doctor?

WITNESS: Eight (8) stab wounds, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: And will you please point to us where were these wounds located?

WITNESS: Located in the anterior part of the body. The stabbed wounds were located here, near
the middle of the bone extremities, and also here ma’am. (Witness pointing to his chest). There
were 2 stab wounds underneath the bone in the clavicle (witness pointing to the left side of the
shoulder) and there were 4 stab wounds in the area near the armpit and the left breast.

PROSECUTOR: You mentioned the wounds located near the left armpit, could you tell us how many
wounds were located in that area?

WITNESS: Left armpit, there were 3, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: Now, would you tell us how deep wounds on the left armpit?

WITNESS: 7 to 10 cm, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: Did that wcunds penetrate any vital part of the body of the victim?

(Note: for /murder or frustrated homicide/murder cases, the trial prosecutor must inquire whether
the injury inflicted is fatal)

PROSECUTOR: What part of the vital organ did the wounds penetrate doctor?

WITNESS: The wounds that were in the left side of the chest involved the left lung and also the
heart, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: What do you mean by "involved in the left lung and heart”, what do you mean by
that?
WITNESS: When l say involved the lung and heart, I meant that the wounds had penetrated those
cavities or perpetrated the sub-tissue of the lungs and may cause bleeding will cause the death.

PROSECUTOR: Do you consider the wounds you mentioned, the wounds on the shoulder and left
armpit fatal wounds doctor?

WITNESS: Yes, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: How immediate would be the death of the victim with the injuries he sustained?

WITNESS: That would depend on the stab wounds he sustained. The victim may not survive
without medical attendance. If it involved the heart. within five to 10 minutes only, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: Now doctor you told us the wounds on the left chest, how about on the right chest,
were there wounds inflicted?

WITNESS: There was one stab wound on the right side of the chest.

PROSECUTOR: And did that wound penetrate any vital organ of .the body doctor?

WITNESS: Yes, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: What vital organ, doctor?

WITNESS: It involved the right lung, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: Do you consider the wound on the right chest as fatal to the victim?

WITNESS: Yes, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: you mentioned a while ago that there were wounds locased at the back of the
victim, how many wounds were found at die back?

WITNESS: 8 ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: And of the eight wounds, which of these penetrate the vital organ?

WITNESS: There were two (2) that involved the vital structure of the body ot the victim ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: What wounds were those, doctor?

WITNESS: In my diagram these two stab wounds were located here. (Witness pointing to the back
of the body in the diagram of the human anatomy.)

PROSECUTOR: Now in connection with the autopsy report that you presented, will you tell us what
number are those in your autopsy report?

WITNESS: They are entries Nos. 10, 13 and 12, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: Now aside from those wounds located on the aims, the anterior part of the body
and at the back, what other wounds did you find, doctor?

WITNESS: I found contusions and abrasions on the forehand right somewhere, here ma’am.
(witness pointing to the forehead of the human sketch)

PROSECUTOR: What else doctor?

WITNESS: And I also found an incise wound, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: Where was it?

WITNESS: They were located at the left arm, middle third finger that would be somewhere in the
posterior aspect at the back, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: What else doctor?

WITNESS: And there was anotner two incise wounds measuring about 3.2 centimeters, the other
about 21 centimeters on the left hand of the victim. There was also a 7.3 centimeters incise wound
in the palm and also at the left hand, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: Did you find what was the cause of death of James Torralba?

(note: cause of death must also be inquired.)

WITNESS: Yes, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: Will you tell us the doctor?

WITNESS: They were stab wounds, ma’am. If I may add, the fatal stab wounds in my autopsy report
are stabbed wounds Nos. 3,4, 6 to 10,12,13 and 8, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: Where were these wounds located doctor?

WITNESS: Stabbed wounds Nos. 3, 4, 6,7. 8 and 9 were at the left side of the chest. Stabbed wound
No. 10 was at the right side. Stabbed wounds Nos. 12 and 13 were at the left side of the back and
stabbed wounds No. 18 was at the right side of the back, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: May we ask that the word cause of death appearing in Exhibit N be marked as
Exhibit N-4; and the signature over the name M. Pactanac be marked as N-5 and the signature of
the doctor in tha autopsy report as N-6; and also the signature found on page 3 ot the autopsy
report of M. Pactanac be marked as N-7, Your Honor.
JUDGE: Mark them.

PROSECUTOR: Doctor, whose signature is this over the name , Micah Ruth Pactanac, MD?

WITNESS It is mine, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: And whose signature is this appearing on page 3 also above the name Micah Ruth
Pactanac, MD?

WITNESS: It is also mine, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: There is a signature of Dr. Reyes, whose signature is this?

WITNESS It is that of Dr. Reyes, ma’am, our Medico-Legal Officer.

PROSECUTOR: How do you know that it is his signature?

WITNESS: It was signed in my presence, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: Now doctor, you told us about the wounds which you found in the body of James
Torralba, could you tell us from your experience, what kind of instrument was used by the assailant
to inflict the wounds on the victim?

(note: instrument used to inflict the wound must be inquired.)

WITNESS: Well, the instrument used could be a knife. Based on the injuries, it is a single bladed
instrument

PROSECUTOR: Now doctor, you mentioned about a single bladed instrument and by their
appearance the wounds were inflicted by a single bladed instrument, could you tell us more or
less about how long was the single bladed instrument that was used in inflicting the injuries or
wounds?

WITNESS: Based on my examination, the depth and the length of the wound measured up to 10
centimeters, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: Doctor, I am presenting to you a knife marked as Exhibit K. This is singlebladed

instrument. Could you tell us if it could be the knife used by the assailants against James Torralba?

PROSECUTOR: I would say possible, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: Why, doctor?

WITNESS: Well, it is compatible to a single bladed knife and its length I believe measured more
than 10 centlmeters and the width being approximate to the size of the wounds that were
depicted m my autopsy report, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: What was the width of the wounds doctor?

WITNESS: The widest measurement I examined was about 3.5 centimeters. ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: We would like to make it of record, Your Honor, at this juncture tb.at the width of
the knife is about 3/4 of an inch, Your Honor.

ATTY A: Agreed, Your Honor.

PROSECUTOR: Now doctor you said you prepared a sketch would you please show it to us.

WITNESS: Here, ma’am. (Witness handed to the Fiscal sketches)

PROSECUTOR: What sketches are these doctor?

WITNESS: These are what we used to list down the injuries during our autopsy. That's the sketch
of the human body and the head of a person, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: The doctor is presenting two (2) sketches. The first one is a sketch of the head of a
person and the second is a sketch of the human body, consisting of the front, left side and the
right side, Your Honor. We request that the first sketch of the human head be marked as Exhibit
O and the second sketch of the human body as Exhibit P, Your Honor.

JUDGE: Mark them.

PROSECUTOR: Who prepared these sketches?

WITNESS: I did, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: Do you have your signature in these sketches doctor?

WITNESS: I believe they were under the words Medico-legal Officer, ma’am

PROSECUTOR: We request that the signature of the doctor be marked as Exhibit P-1, Your Honor.

JUDGE: Mark it.

PROSECUTOR: Doctor, is this the sketch of the cadaver of James Torralba?

WITNESS: Yes ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: What other documents do you have with you doctor?

WITNESS: I have here the certificate of post mortem examination, a document I issued after
conducting the autopsy, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: We request that the post-mortem examination be marked as Exhibit Q, Your Honor.

JUDGE: Mark it.

PROSECUTOR: The name of James Torralba in the said post mortem examination be marked as Q-
l and the signature of the doctor as Q-2, Your Honor.

JUDGE: Mark them.

PROSECUTOR: Whose signature is this appearing above the name R. BaJuyot?

WITNESS: It is mine, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: Do you have photographs of the cadaver of James Torralba?

WITNESS: Yes, ma’am, I have.

PROSECUTOR: Please show them.

WITNESS: Here, ma’am. (Witness showing two photographs of James Torralba)

PROSECUTOR: We request that the photographs be marked as Exhibits R and R-1 respectively,
Your Honor.

JUDGE: Mark them.

PROSECUTOR: Do you have the death certificate of James Torralba, doctor?

WITNESS: Yes, ma’am, I have it here, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: The witness, your honor, handed to this representation the death certificate of
James Torralba, which we request to be marked as Exhibit S; the name of James Torralba in the
death certificate as S-1, your honor.

JUDGE: Mark them.

PROSECUTOR: Now, the person doctor, James Torralba whose name is mentioned in the autopsy
report and in the death certificate, are they the same James Torralba whose wounds you examined
during the autopsy?

WITNESS: Based or my documents the person in the pictures was the one referred to in the
idertification of the dead body, but I do not know the victim personally, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: Who identified the deceased?

WITNESS: The girlfriend had identified the cadaver, Your Honor, as per the certification of the dead
body.

PROSECUTOR: Doctor, at the time you examined the victim, James Torralba at 7:00 p.m. of January
26,2018, do you know the time when he died?

WITNESS: There is no medical basis to prove the exact time of the death. However this ranged less
than a day, ma’am.

PROSECUTOR: Can vou determine more or less the number of assailants who attacked the victim,
James Torralba?

WITNESS: Well, again I have no medical basis to know the number of the assailants, but we know
that when there one more assailants there are more injuries. At this juncture, Your Honor, we
request that the defense examine the photocopy of Exhibits O and P and compare them if they
are faithful reproduction of the original because we will be submitting the photocopy, Your Honor.

ATTY A: Yes, we admit that the photocopy of Medico-Legal Report No. N-95-1437 is a faithful
reprcduction of the original. Your Honor, and also the photocopy of Exhibit O.

JUDGE: How about Atty. Valones?

ATTY B: The same observation, your honor, for both exhibits.

PROSECUTOR: I am through with my witness, your Honor.

JUDGE: Cross Atty. Del Rosario.

ATTY A: With the court’s permission.

JUDGE: Proceed please.

CROSS-EXAMINATION OF WITNESS CONDUCTED BY ATTY. A, COUNSEL FOR GROSPE

ATTY A: Ms. Witness, I am showing to you page 3 of the Autopsy Report, am I correct that Nos. 20
to 28 were the wounds sustained in the arm and forearms, is that correct?

WITNESS Yes, ma’am.

ATTY A: And do you consider the wounds as defense wound?

PROSECUTOR: Objection, it is vague. Your Honor.

JUDGE: Do you understand the question?

PROSECUTOR: I believe, I do. Your Honor.

JUDGE: So, it is not vague. Please answer now the question.

WITNESS: It maybe considered as defense wounds.

JUDGE: What do you mean by defense wounds?

WITNESS: I believe that defense wounds are wounds that were inflicted on the body of the victim
while he was repelling and warding off the attack of the assailants, Your Honor.

ATTY A: And considering that there were nine (9) stabbed wounds, does it show that the fight
between the assailant and the victim had lasted for 10 minutes?

PROSECUTOR: Objection. It is misleading, Your Honor.

ATTY A: He mentioned nine (9) stab defense wounds, Your Honor.

JUDGE: Alright, reform.

ATTY A: Ow, considering the nine (9) defense wounds sustained by the victim and the total number
of wounds sustained were 28, how long could the attack or fight could have lasted?

PROSECUTOR: Already answered. Your Honor.

ATTY A: Not yet, your honor.

JUDGE: Overruled.
WITNESS: Well, I believe it did not take long and eventually he would die, ma’am.

ATTY A: Now, I am showing to you again Exhibit N, I am calling your attenion to wounds Nos. 3, 4
which you mentioned to be the fatal wounds, do you also consider wounds Nos. 22 to 26 fatal?

WITNESS: Not fatal, ma’am.

ATTY A: The wounds sustained in Nos. 22,23,24,25 up to 26, can you tell us the required force to
inflict these injuries?

PROSECUTOR: Objection, it is vague. Your Honor.

JUDGE: Do you understand the question Mr. Witness?

WITNESS: I believe I do, Your Honor. Well, the relative amount of force was sufficient to overcome
the resistance of the tissues involved and to penetrate the vital organs.

ATTY A: Can you quantify the force required to inflict such injuries?

PROSECUTOR: Objection, it is vague, Your Honor.

JUDGE: Do you understand the question?

WITNESS: I do not, Your Honor.

JUDGE: Alright, reform.

ATTY A: Now I am calling your attention to the penetrating wounds vith a depth of 10 centimeters
particularly wounds No. 8, 9 and 12, did those wounds hit any bone structure of the body of the
victim?
WITNESS: With regard to wound 8, 9 and 12, there was no bone involvement of the said stab
wounds.
ATTY A: Did you notice if the victim had suffered bone fracture caused by bladed instrument used
by the assailant?

WITNESS: Yes, I did, ma’am.

ATTY A: What bone was fractured?

WITNESS: The exterior breast bone, ma’am.

ATTY A: Was there any bone fracture as a result of the stabbing of the victim?

WITNESS: No more, ma’am.

ATTY A: Without the bone in the body of the victim, the depth of 8 centimeters, the wound could
be deeper than that?

WITNESS: It may be deeper, ma’am.

JUDGE: That line of questioning Ms. Counsel, will that elicit answers which are material to the case
for the defense?

ATTY A: Yes, your honor.

JUDGE: How?

ATTY A: I cannot reveal it right now, your honor.

JUDGE: Go to material points.

ATTY A: Yes, your honor.

ATTY A: Now, Ms. Witness, can you tell us the strength or physique or built of the assailant?

WITNESS: There is no medical evidence to indicate it, ma’am.

ATTY A: How about that of the victim, can you tell us his height?

WITNESS: 162 cm or 5 feet and 3 inches m height.

ATTY A: How about the weight, do you get the weight?

WITNESS: No ma’am, because the weighing scale in the official morgue was out of order.

ATTY A: Now, I am calling your attention to the wounds sustained on the forehead or head. What
type of wounds were they?

WITNESS: They were confusions and abrasions ma’am.

ATTY A: Caused by what doctor?

WITNESS: Hard object or blunt object, ma’am.

ATTY A: So it could be fist is it not doctor?

WITNESS: Possible, ma’am.

ATTY A: Can you tell us the direction of the stabbed wounds sustained by the victim?

WITNESS: The direction or each stabbed wounds is indicated in my report, ma’am.

ATTY A: Could you please tell us the direction of wound No. 1?

WITNESS: Well, from front going back. Now, when I say in my report backward, the infiiction of
the wounds was from the front going to the back. It was a penetrating wound from the front to
the back, ma’am.

ATTY A: Based from the direction of the wounds sustained by the victim, can you tell whether the
assailant is taller or bigger thari the victim, doctor?

WITNESS: There is no medical evidence to that, ma’am.

ATTY A: Would you agree with me doctor that a person who is mad or angry has superhuman
strength?

PROSECUTOR: Objection. It is irrelevant to the case, your honor.

JUDGE: Overruled.

WITNESS: Well, there are some persons who do nothing when mentally depressed, but some are
violent. Now, for a normal person who losses his temper and gets angry he has, indeed a strength
which is extraordinary, ma’am.

ATTY A: In short, do you agree with me?

WITNESS: I would say that is possible, ma’am.

ATTY A: Now, based on the fact that the victim had 28 stab wounds inclusive of nine (9) defense
wounds could a person who is 5 ft. and 1 inch in height do it?

WITNESS: From the physical point of view, I would say it is possible, ma’am.

ATTY A: And when you say possible, it could not also be possible, is it correct?

WITNESS: Yes, ma’am.

ATTY A: No further question. Your Honor.

JUDGE: Any cross from Atty. Valones?

ATTY B: In behalf of accused Shane Joshua Zumarraga we respectfully adopt the cross-examination
made by Atty. Del Rosario and in addition, I would have some few cross-examination
questions.,Your Honor. May I proceed.

JUDGE: Please do.

CROSS EXAMINATION OF WITNESS CONDUCTED BY ATTY. B, COUNSEL OF ZUMARRAGA

ATTY B: You stated doctor that since there were 28 stab wounds inflicted on the victim, it is
possible that there was another weapon used in the stabbing or killing?

WITNESS: Yes, ma’am.

ATTY B: And that there could also be more than two (2) persons who inflicted the stab wounds on
the victim, is it correct?

WITNESS: Yes, ma’am.

ATTY B: Now, this James Torralba, what was your basis in putting the name James Torralba in this
death certificate doctor?

WITNESS: The basis of putting the name James Torralba was the Certificate of Identification of
Dead Body, ma’am, which was submitted to the Fiscal.

PROSECUTOR: At this juncture, Your Honor, we manifest that the doctor is referring to Exhibit F.

ATTY B: By the way, where did you receive the Certificate of Identification of the Dead Body?

WITNESS: I received it at the the St. Peter Chapel, ma’am.

ATTY B: When?

WITNESS: A few minutes before the autopsy, around 8:00 in the evening, ma’am.

ATTY B: of what date?

WITNESS: January 26,2018, ma’am.

ATTY B: Aside from the certificate of identification of the dead body which has been marked as
Exhibit M, was there anybody who identified the victim?

WITNESS: Yes ma’am.

ATTY B: Now doctor, are you in the position to tell the Honorable Court what was the position of
the victim when the 28 stab wounds were inflicted?
WITNESS: The relative position of the victim and also of that or the assailant cannot be exactly
determined but they must be near each other since the stab wounds penetrated the vital parts of
the body of the deceased, ma’am.

ATTY B: Was it possible that the victim was lying on his back?

WITNESS: That is possible, ma’am.

ATTY B: Now. aside from the 28 stab wounds, did you notice any other abrasion or cortusion or ar
injury in any part ot the body?

WITNESS: As I mentioned, there were contusions and abrasions on the forearm right side, ma’am.

ATTY B: How about on the neck?

WITNESS: None, ma’am.

ATTY B: You did not notice any strangulation?

WITNESS: None, ma’am.

ATTY B: That's all with the witness, Your Honor.

JUDGE: Any re-direct?

PROSECUTOR: No re-diiect, Your Honor.

JUDGE: You are through now, Mr. Witness. Thank you.

PROSECUTOR: Your Honor, we are moving for continuance.

JUDGE: Upon motion of the pros for continuance of such…

C. State Witness

Care of: GROSPE

D. Motion to suspend proceeding

Legend

JUDGE: Mr. Oclarit

CLERK OF COURT: Ms. Marcelo
PROSECUTOR: Ms. Ramos
DEFENSE COUNSEL: Ms. Paredes
ACCUSED: Mr. Ocampo

JUDGE: Call the Case

CLERK OF COURT: Criminal Case No. 34353

People of the Philippines vs. Drew Olivar
For Infanticide

JUDGE: Appearance of the Prosecution and Defense.

PROSECUTOR: Your honor, I am Atty. _______ appearing as prosecutor.

DEFENSE: Your honor, I am Atty. _______ appearing as counsel for the
accused.

JUDGE: Is the accused present?

CLERK OF COURT: The accused is present.

JUDGE: Noted. This hearing is one for motion to suspend the proceedings.
Counsel for the accused, may we hear from you the contents of the
subject motion which was received by this honorable court.

DEFENSE: Yes your honor, we received a copy of the court order last
September 10 setting the arraignment of this case on September
18, 2018 at 2:00 pm. However, the accused will not be ready for the
scheduled arraignment for the reason that the accused appears to
be suffering from unsound mental condition which effectively
renders him unable to fully understand the charge against him and
to plead intelligently thereto.
Your honor, we have here the copy of motion to suspend the
proceedings which was received by this honorable court last
September 13, 2018.
The said motion to suspend proceeding is based on Section 11(a),
Rule 116, Rules of Criminal Procedure.

JUDGE: Noted.

DEFENSE: Your honor, may we respectfully request that the scheduled

arraignment be suspended in order to afford the accused his rights
and to be examined by an expert psychiatrist.

JUDGE: Okay. Upon perusal of the subject motion, this Court hereby orders
the mental examination of the accused to be conducted by an
expert psychiatrist as soon as possible and the same motion is
granted without objection.
DEFENSE: Thank you, your honor.

4. Promulgation
Care of: MARCELO

5. Bail hearing

Care of: AREJA

6. Motion to Dismiss by way of demurrer of evidence

Criminal Case No. 23445 – People vs Shrek

For: Rape

Cast:

Judge: Oclarit
City Prosecutor: Ramos
Accused: Areja
Doctor: Zumarraga
Defense Counsel: (To be assigned)

Flow/content:

 Manifest to file a motion for demurrer of evidence with leave of court

Documents needed (during the presentation):

  Motion for Leave of Court to file Demurrer to the Evidence (kahit blank bond
paper lang)

Legend: Narrator
Judge
Clerk
Prosecutor
Defense Counsel

NARRATOR: FACTUAL BACKGROUND:

On 10 December 2011, upon Fiona’s sworn statement dated 26 March 2010, Shrek
was charged before the RTC of Puerto Princesa City, with the crime of Rape defined
and penalized under Article 266-A, Section I, paragraph (a) of Republic Act No. 8353
in relation to Republic Act No. 7659.

After the presentation of the prosecution’s evidence, Shrek, with the assistance of
counsel de parte, filed a Demurrer to Evidence pursuant to Section 15 of Rule 119
of the Rules of Court.

JUDGE: Call the case.

CLERK: Criminal Case No. 23445, entitled People of the Philippines vs. Shrek, for Rape.

JUDGE: Appearance of the Prosecution and Defense.

PROSECUTOR: Your Honor, I am Atty. ________ appearing as prosecutor.

DEFENSE: Your Honor, I am Atty. ________ appearing as counsel for the accused.
JUDGE: Is the accused present?

CLERK: The accused is present.

JUDGE: Noted. This hearing is one for MOTION FOR LEAVE OF COURT to File Demurrer to
the Evidence. Counsel of the accused, may we hear from you the contents of the
subject motion which was received by this Honorable Court?

DEFENSE: Yes, your honor.

Accused, Shrek, through the undersigned counsel, unto this Honorable Court,
respectfully move for Leave of Court to allow accused to file DEMURRER TO
EVIDENCE, for the reasons therein stated, and that the same be served upon the
complainant, in accordance with law.

1. That herein accused is presently being indicted for RAPE under Criminal Case
No. 23445 filed before this Honorable Court;
2. That herein accused argued that for serious insufficiency of evidence to warrant
the holding of further trial, the charge against him must be dismissed;
3. That the testimony of the prosecution witness Dr. Zumarraga stating that the
vaginal injuries of the victim were inflicted on December 29, 2008 was
inconsistent with the charge which stated that the rape incident took place on
January 1, 2009; and
4. That exculpating evidence were the contradictory testimonies of the victim
who claimed she was raped when she was alone in her house, and Donkey who
said that the rape took place while she was aboard Shrek’s sled.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is respectfully prayed that the Honorable

Court that this Demurrer to Evidence be granted and that the criminal charge of
Rape against the accused SHREK be dismissed.

JUDGE: Any objection from the prosecution?

PROSECUTOR: I object, your Honor. The Demurrer is completely without merit.

JUDGE: And why?

PROSECUTOR: Your Honor, the prosecution has shown through clear and positive evidence that
Shrek took the plaintiff out of the house and brought her somewhere and raped
her for about two minutes.

The prosecution was able to show that all the elements for the crime charged were
present. And that positive identification of the accused was established. The
prosecution has successfully discharged its onus to show that the general
considerations for an accusation for rape were in favor of the plaintiff and against
the accused.

It is respectfully prayed that the Honorable Court overrule the Demurrer to

Evidence presented by the accused.

JUDGE: WHEREFORE, in view of all the foregoing considerations, the Demurrer to Evidence
filed by the counsel for the accused is hereby Denied and he may adduce evidence
in his defense.

7. Hearing on motion to extinguish criminal and civil liability

Care of: ZUMARRAGA