Unique Offense and Offenders - Crim Law - Rape
Unique Offense and Offenders - Crim Law - Rape
Unique Offense and Offenders - Crim Law - Rape
The case happened in a gay bar at a southern Luzon city when two
reporters of a radio station in said city, Jethro and Bernard, together with
Bernard’s relative, went to said bar following reports that it was showing
nude gay dancers. After the three had seated themselves at a table and
ordered beer, a scantily clad gay dancer appeared on stage and began to
perform a strip act. As he removed his clothes, Jethro brought out his
camera and took pictures.
At that point, Paul the floor manager with security guard Waldo approached
Jethro and demanded to know why he took a picture. Jethro replied that it
was his job. So Waldo pushed Jethro toward the table as he warned the
latter that he would kill him. When Jethro saw that Waldo was about to pull
out his gun, he ran out of the joint followed by his companions.
The three then went to the police station to report the matter. Upon arrival,
they saw three policemen, including SP02 Roman Manalili drinking beer in
front of the station, and they asked Jethro and his companions to join them.
Jethro declined and went to the desk officer, Sgt. Villaluz to report the
incident.
In a while, Paul and Waldo arrived on a motorcycle and were met by SP02
Manalili who talked with them in a corner for around 15 minutes. Afterwards
Manalili pushed Jethro to the wall, pulled out his firearm, cocked it and
pressed it on Jethro’s face while at the same time uttering foul and
threatening words.
Captain Labrador, the station commander called Manalili to his office, while
a policeman took Bernard to the hospital where he died from the injuries in
the presence of the radio station manager Manny Manambit who went
there.
But the trial court and subsequently, the Court of Appeals, found Roman
guilty of homicide and sentenced him to imprisonment of 10 years to 14
years, eight months and one day. The courts relied more on the
prosecution evidence particularly the detailed account of Jethro than on
Manalili’s defense because of the post mortem report and the tape
recording which confirm Jethro’s detailed testimony on how Bernard
sustained the head injuries.
Manalili still questioned the decision and contended that Jethro was a
biased witness as he had a grudge against him and that the tape recording
was inadmissible as it violates the Anti-Wire Tapping Act.
But the Supreme Court (SC) still ruled that he is guilty. The SC said that the
testimony of a witness who has an interest in the case is not enough
reason to show that his testimony is unreliable. Trial courts which have the
opportunity to observe the facial expressions, gestures, and tones of voice
of a witness testifying are competent to determine whether his/her
testimony should be given credence. In this case SPO2 Manalili has not
shown that the Trial Court erred in giving weight to the testimony of Jethro
especially because the voice recording supported his detailed testimony.
The post mortem findings of the medico-legal officer who autopsied
Bernard showed that the cause his death was cerebral concussion and
shock which coincide with Jethro’s account of what really happened.
The voice recording personally made by Jethro which he authenticated and
played during the trial also disproves Manalili’s version and confirms that
he was really the one who inflicted the fatal blows on Bernard. This
recording is admissible as evidence because the Anti Wire Tapping Act
prohibits only the recording of private communications. In this case the
heated exchange between Manalili and Bernard occurred in a police station
which is a public place and thus it is not a private communication.
But considering that Manalili did not intend to commit so grave a wrong as
that committed and there was sufficient provocation from Bernard, his
penalty imposed should be reduced to eight years minimum up to 14 years
and eight months maximum with death indemnity of P50,000.(Navarro vs.
Court of Appeals and People, G.R. 121087, August 26, 1999)