[ G.R. Nos. L-1846-48. January 18, 1949 ] 82 Phil. 563
[ G.R. Nos. L-1846-48. January 18, 1949 ]
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE, VS. PEDRO REYES (ALIAS BASIBAS) ET AL., DEFENDANTS, VICENTE GATCHALIAN (ALIAS MAGALLANES) AND SEVERINO AUSTRIA (ALIAS BIG BOY), APPELLANTS. D E C I S I O N
BENGZON, J.:
This is an appeal from a judgment of the Court of First Instance of Pampanga sentencing herein appellants to reclusion perpetua and indemnity for the murders of Benjamin Nery and Alfredo Laguitan and to a term of imprisonment and indemnity for the injuries they had inflicted upon Francisco Orsino.
These two appellants, together with Pedro Reyes, Eusebio Perez, Gervasio Due and Marcelo Due, were charged in two separate cases with the violent death of Benjamin Nery and Alfredo Laguitan. In another, they were accused of having caused physical injuries to Francisco Orsino. A joint trial was ordered. At the beginning thereof the fiscal filed a motion for the dismissal of the case against Eusebio Perez for insufficiency of evidence. This was granted. He also asked that the accused Pedro Reyes be discharged so that the latter may be used as prosecution witness. This was also granted.
Evidence for both sides was later submitted in open court; and after a careful consideration of the same the Honorable Antonio G. Lucero, Judge, found the accused Maxim ino Austria alias Severino Austria alias Big Boy and Vicente Gatchalian alias Magallanes guilty of the offenses set forth in the different informations. His Honor therefore sentenced them as follows:
“* * * the court hereby finds the accused Maximino Austria alias Severino Austria alias Big Boy and Vicente Gatchalian alias Magallanes guilty, beyond reasonable doubt, of the crimes charged in the information and sentences them as follows: (a) in criminal case No. 867, to reclusion perpetua, with the accessories of the law, to indemnify jointly and severally the heirs of Pvt. Benjamin Nery in the sum of P2,000, without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency, and to pay the costs; (b) in criminal case No. 367-A, to reclusion perpetua, with the accessories of the law, to indemnify jointly and severally the heirs of Pvt. Alfredo Laguitan in the sum of P2,000 without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency, and to pay the costs; and (c) in criminal case No. 367-B, to an indeterminate penalty of six (6) years of prision correccional, as the minimum, to twelve (12) years and one (1) day of reclusion temporal, as the maximum, to indemnify jointly and severally Pvt. Francisco Orsino in the sum of P1,000, without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency and to pay the costs. In these three cases the accused are entitled to be credited with one-half of their preventive imprisonment.”
Gervasio Due alias Oliveros and Marcelo Due alias Pipit have not been arrested nor tried.
The transcript of the testimony taken before the Pampanga judge and the documentary evidence in connection therewith are all before us, and the Court, after examining the same, has voted to affirm the verdict of guilt of appellants Austria and Gatchalian, because from the evidence it appears beyond reasonable doubt that: In the night of Good Friday of 1946 (April 19) while religious celebrations were in full swing in the barrio of Cacutud, Arayat, Pampanga and the “pabasa” was being performed (reading and singing of the story of the Crucifixion) the herein appellants assisted by Marcelo Due alias Pipit, Gervasio Due alias Oliveros and one Peping, all armed with pistols, approached three members of the military police, Philippine Army, i. e. privates Benjamin Nery, Alfredo Laguitan and Francisco Orsino—hereafter to be designated MP’s for short—who were peaceably seated, entirely unarmed, in a store watching the affair. At the point of their guns they drove the latter to the road leading to Magalan and at a short distance (about ten meters from the “pabasa” or “cenaculo”) shot them from the back and left them lying on the ground.
The attackers were Huks, and the motive of the killing was obviously the enmity existing between that outlaw organization and the forces of peace and order.
Nery and Laguitan died as a result of the shooting. Private Orsino suffered serious injuries. His leg, shot and fractured, needs about six months to heal.
Pedro Reyes turned state evidence, but he did not confirm every statement he had previously made at the fiscal’s investigation. He testified, however, that at about seven o’clock that night he saw, among the people gathered at the “pabasa,” “Pipit” (Marcelo Due) Piping, Gervasio Due alias Oliveros, Vicente Gatchalian and Maximino Austria alias Big Boy; that Pipit and Piping (Felipe Sese) called him and told him that Oliveros wanted to talk with him; that talking with Oliveros he was invited by the latter to speak to the MP’s (the members of the military police, Nery, Laguitan and Orsino); that he refused; that thereafter he heard several detonations; that he ran to the rice field and there he met Oliveros (Gervasio Due) and Gatchalian talking, the former declaring he was sure the MP he had shot will die and Gatchalian making the same assurance as to the MP he (Gatchalian) had shot in turn. Reyes had previously told the authorities in his affidavit Exhibit A, in addition to what he related in court, that Oliveros, Magallanes and Big Boy had approached the three MP’s and lined them up on the road, after which shots were heard. Enough, however, may be gathered from his testimony in open court to identify Gatchalian as one of the assailants, the conversation he overheard in the rice field being admissibile as an admission and as part of the res gestae. (U. S. vs. Remigio, 37 Phil., 599; People vs. Nakpil, 52 Phil., 985; People vs. Durante, 53 Phil., 363.)
Francisco Orsino, one of the victims, narrated the incident substantially as above described, but could not identify the aggressors except the defendant Severino Austria whom he pointed out as his treacherous assailant.
Lieutenants Fidel Martinez and Secundino Quintans declared under oath that Vicente Gatchalian admitted before the latter, while under investigation, that he had shot one of the MPs who died later. Gatchalian even showed how he had fired at the MP from the back, posing for a picture (Exhibit H).
Lieutenant Quintans likewise asserted that Severino Austria had voluntarily signed the confession Exhibit E wherein said Austria made the following statements:
“Q. What did you do on that same night?—A. While we were at the back of the ‘Cenaculo’, OLIVEROS ordered PEPIT and FELIPE SESE to see if there are any MP soldiers in the vicinity of the ‘Cenaculo’. PEPIT and FELIPE SESE did as ordered and came with the information that there are three MP soldiers in one of the stores near the ‘Cenaculo’.
“Q. What did you do when you were informed thus?—A. BASIBAS, MAGALLANES, BATUIN, OLIVEROS, and I went to the place where the MP soldiers were and I myself talked with one of the said soldiers, and I asked him to stand and come with me where we could talk together, but he refused, so I drew my pistol and forced him to come with me. Oliveros held one of the soldiers, Magallanes held the other and forced them to come with us.
“Q. Why and where were you taking the MP soldiers?—A. To talk with them in front of the house of SEGUNDO GUEVARRA.
“Q. What happened when you took the soldiers?—A. While we were walking about 10 meters from the ‘Cenaculo’, the soldier who was with me tried to grab the pistol that I was holding with my right hand. Suddenly I heard about 4 shots from behind, so I also fired at the soldier who was with me.”
The picture of Austria reenacting the crime is Exhibit G.
We are thus satisfied from the foregoing of the guilty participation of the appellants in this gruesome business. Their defense of alibi is weak and untenable. The Solicitor General’s brief substantially proves conspiracy between them and their other co-accused who are still at large. There are three offenses: two murders and one serious physical injuries, for which all the accused must do penance irrespective of the actual deeds of each.
Wherefore, the penalty imposed on the appellants being in accordance with law, it is hereby affirmed, with costs.
Moran, C.J., Paras, Feria, Pablo, Briones, Tuason, and Montemayor, JJ., concur.