Home of ChanRobles Virtual Law Library

PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. Nos. L-26944-45. December 5, 1980.]

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ELADIO GALVEZ and RODOLFO PALO Y CRUZ, Accused-Appellant.

SYNOPSIS


Five armed men robbed the Mercury Drugstore resulting in the death of the cashier, serious injury of a security guard and loss of P4,085.99 in cash. The robbery was staged so quickly and the robbers wore masks that they could not be identified. However, about a month and a half later, Accused-appellants Eladio Galvez and Rodolfo Palo y Cruz were arrested. While under police custody both gave their respective statements admitting their participation in the robbery. Two other persons were arrested, namely, Abelardo Pineda and Mario Mana, but both denied participation in the robbery and they refused to give any statement to the police. Galvez was indicted separately from Palo, Pineda and Mana. Both informations, however, charged the same offense — robbery with homicide and frustrated homicide. After a protracted hearing, the trial court found Galvez and Palo guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the complex crime of robbery with homicide and serious physical injuries with aggravating circumstances and sentenced them to suffer penalty of death. Mana and Pineda were acquitted.

On automatic review, the Supreme Court ruled that the guilt of the accused-appellants had not been proven beyond reasonable doubt on the following grounds: (a) the so-called extra-judicial confessions contained statements that are not voluntary, and (b) there is no other evidence upon which conviction may be founded.

Decision reversed.


SYLLABUS


1. REMEDIAL LAW; CRIMINAL PROCEDURE; REENACTMENT OF CRIME; RULE ON REJECTION OF EXTRAJUDICIAL CONFESSION ON GROUND OF COERCION APPLICABLE TO REENACTMENT OF CRIME. — Where appellants claim that they were coerced in giving their statements while the prosecution said otherwise and this version was believed by the lower court on the ground that the witnesses for the prosecution testified in their official capacities and therefore were disinterested witnesses whereas the appellants were naturally biased and interested, the lower court’s reasoning is not invulnerable for Philippine jurisprudence is replete with cases where extrajudicial confessions were rejected because the accused claimed coercion even as the prosecution asserted otherwise. What has been said can apply mutatis mutandis to the reenactment of the crime in this case.

2. ID.; APPEAL; TRADITIONAL RESPECT FOR THE FINDING OF FACTS OF TRIAL JUDGE; EXCEPTION. — While there is a traditional respect for the finding of facts of the judge who presided at the trial, such respect cannot be invoked when there are circumstances of weight and influence which have either been overlooked or misinterpreted. (People v. Padirayon, G.R. No. L-39207, September 25, 1975, 67 SCRA 135).

3. ID.; EVIDENCE; CREDIBILITY OF WITNESS; RULE THAT CONCLUSION OF TRIAL COURT CANNOT BE DISTURBED ON APPEAL; MUST YIELD TO PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE. — As a salutary proposition, this Court usually desists from disturbing the conclusions of the trial court on the credibility of witnesses, in deference to the rule that the lower court, having seen and heard the witnesses and observed their demeanor and manner of testifying, is in a better position to appreciate the evidence. But this doctrine must bow to the superior and immutable rule that the guilt of the accused must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt, because the law presumes that a defendant is innocent and this presumption must prevail unless overturned by competent and credible proof. (People v. Alto, G.R. No. L-18660-61, November 29, 1968, 26 SCRA 342.)

4. ID.; ID.; EXTRAJUDICIAL CONFESSIONS; PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE; EVERY CIRCUMSTANCE CONSISTENT WITH INNOCENCE TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT. — An intensive scrutiny of the records discloses important circumstances which seriously cast doubt on the reliability of the extra-judicial confession. The principle in point is that every circumstance consistent with innocence should be taken into account; even the strongest suspicion should not be permitted to sway judgment. (People v. Montero, G.R. No. L-33155, April 22, 1977, 76 SCRA 437.)

5. ID.; ID.; EXTRAJUDICIAL CONFESSIONS; EXTRINSIC WEAKNESS; STATEMENT CONTAINED THEREIN NOT VOLUNTARY. — The so-called extrajudicial confessions of the appellants, in relation to the evidence of the prosecution, contain extrinsic weaknesses which only confirm appellant’s assertion that most of the answers to the questions propounded to them were not their answer. The statements contained in the confessions were not their voluntary statements but the words of the investigators put in the mouths of the appellants in accordance with their preconceived theory as to the commission of the crime. (People v. Robles, G.R. No. L-30060, July 30, 1979, 92 SCRA 107.)

6. ID.; ID.; ID.; SIGN OF VOLUNTARINESS NOT APPLICABLE WHERE DETAILS WERE SUPPLIED BY POLICE INVESTIGATOR. — A sign of voluntariness of an extrajudicial confession is when it is replete with details which only the accused was in a position know. (People v. Paras, G.R. No. L-23111, March 29, 1974, 56 SCRA 248.) But where both appellants contend that except for their personal circumstances, the details of the crime were supplied by the police investigator after the latter had conducted complete investigation of the case, appellants’ contention deserves serious consideration.

7. ID.; ID.; WEIGHT AND CREDIBILITY; RECOGNITION OF ACCUSED; TAXIMETER’S LIGHT INSUFFICIENT AID FOR RECOGNITION; CASE AT BAR. — It was improbable for Elino Ramos to have recognized Rodolfo Palo because of the condition of light obtaining when the recognition was allegedly made. According to Elino Ramos, except for the taximeter’s glare, there was no light inside nor outside of the taxicab when his passengers got into his cab. Recognition with the aid of taximeter’s light was unlikely. Common sense would tell us, that, with the taximeter as the only source of light, opportunity for view and recognition is remote, unless the one recognized is sufficiently familiar to the person recognizing, which of course is not the case here.

8. ID.; ID.; WEIGHT AND SUFFICIENCY; IDENTITY OF THE ACCUSED MUST BE PROVED BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT. — The identity of the offender, like the crime itself must be proven beyond reasonable doubt. (People v. Beltran, G.R. No. L-31860, November 29, 1974, 61 SCRA 246.)

9. ID.; ALIBI; BURDEN OF PROOF IN CRIMINAL CASES. — An accused cannot be convicted on the basis of evidence which independently of his alibi is weak, uncorroborated and inconclusive. The rule that alibi must be satisfactorily proven was never intended to change the burden of proof in criminal cases; otherwise we will see the absurdity of the accused being put in a more difficult position where the prosecution’s evidence is vague and weak than where it is strong. (People v. Fraga, 109 Phil. 241, 250.)


D E C I S I O N


ABAD SANTOS, J.:


This is an automatic review, pursuant to law, of the death, penalty imposed by the Court of First Instance of Manila on Eladio M. Galvez and Rodolfo C. Palo in Criminal Cases Nos. 73067 and 73177.chanrobles.com.ph : virtual law library

The facts as narrated by the trial court are not disputed either by the appellants or by the People. We quote the opening paragraph of the decision:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"Blasts of guns greeted the early evening of September 3, 1963, in and about the premises of the Retail Department of the Mercury Drugstore at Bambang Street, Sta. Cruz, Manila, and its Wholesale Department across the street, thereby causing panic to the people thereat, several of whom instinctively lay flat on the sidewalk and on the cement floor inside the drugstore, while others ran in different directions to seek cover and avoid stray bullets. However, after the flashes and detonations had ceased and the smoke of gunfire had cleared, Mary Peña, treasurer of the aforesaid Wholesale Department, lay mortally wounded with a bullet wound on the ground floor thereof, while Alfonso Reforsado, a security guard of the drug store lay-on the sidewalk of the Wholesale Department suffering from multiple gunshot wounds from different parts of his body. Furthermore, it was discovered that P4,085.99 was lost in the cash register of Felicitas Lapuz Rivera, cashier of the Retail Department. (Exh. QQQ) Mary Peña died that same night at the North General Hospital, Exhs. D, E, F, G and I, while Alfonso Reforsado, after being driven first aid at the said hospital, was transferred on the following day to the Saint Lukes Hospital, where he underwent operations on account of which gunshot wounds, Exh. R, he was disabled totally from working for a period of about ten (10) weeks and partially, for about eight (8) months."cralaw virtua1aw library

The same decision gives the facts in greater detail as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"At about 7 o’clock on the night of September 3, 1963, while Elino Ramos was driving a Dollar taxicab with Plate No.’TX 3418 Q.C. 63’ on Governor Forbes near the corner of Laong-Laan, Sampaloc, Manila, five men, one of whom carrying a long object wrapped in a paper bag, hailed and boarded it and directed him to proceed to the corner of Bambang Street and Rizal Avenue, Sta. Cruz, Manila. Upon reaching said corner, Ramos stopped the taxi-cab, but was told to go ahead on Bambang Street until they reached the corner of Magdalena Street (after passing by the Mercury Drugstore), where he was instructed to turn left. On reaching a place near the Trozo Church, Ramos was directed to turn back to Bambang Street and, just after passing again by the aforestated Mercury Drugstore, he was ordered to stop the taxicab and he did so, even as he heard the cocking of guns by his passengers. One of his passengers seated in the front seat suddenly pulled out and got the ignition key of the taxicab, after which his five passengers forthwith alighted, warning him not to make any suspicious move. They then rushed towards the Mercury, firing shots, thereby causing pandemonium in the place. Frightened, Ramos jumped off the taxicab and sought cover at the corner of Bambang and Rizal Avenue.

"Alfonso Reforsado, a security guard of the Mercury Drugstore, who was at the time standing on the sidewalk of the Wholesale Department across the street from the drugstore, drew his .22 caliber pistol, but was unable to fire it at the malefactors, because he was then struck by several bullets from the guns of some of the culprits.

"At this juncture, Emiliano Lim, manager of the Wholesale Department, and Maria Peña, treasurer there, were going out of said Department, but then one of the five masked robbers came running from the Retail Department towards them and fired about three shots at them, Lim and Peña. Whereupon, Lim retraced his steps back to lids office in the Wholesale Department. When he came out after the commotion, he saw Mary Peña lying flat on the floor near his office mortally wounded in the chest, as heretofore adverted to.

"Felicitas Lapuz Rivera, cashier in the Retail Department of the Mercury Drugstore, having heard the shots and apprised that robbers had entered the drugstore, tried to close her cash register, however, an armed man ordered her to move away and he down in another compartment thereof, which she had to do.

"In the meantime, Ricarte Saludares, another security guard of the Mercury Drugstore on detail in the Veterinary Department, was met by two of the masked, armed intruders and relieved, under threat, of his pistol. Thereafter, Saludares, taking advantage of the commotion, crawled out of the drugstore, repaired to a nearby store and there summoned the mobile patrol by telephone. Soon, the scene of the incident swarmed with police authorities, but the malefactors had decamped in the same taxicab, then already abandoned by Ramos. One of the robbers drove it.

"The police authorities forthwith conducted an investigation and ocular inspection of the premises and found thereat the following:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

A woman’s purse on the sidewalk near a Meralco post in front of the Retail Department — Exhibit F;

Two .30 cal. empty carbine shells in front of house 1584 Bambang, Exhibits AA and BB;

One .45 cal. empty pistol shell also in front of house 1584 Bambang, Exhibit CC;

Two .38 cal. empty pistol shells in front of the Retail Dept., Exhibits DD and EE;

One .30 cal. empty carbine shell at the doorway beside an electric post, Exhibit FF;

One .38 cal. empty pistol shell near the doorway of the Retail Department, Veterinary Section, Exhibit GG;

One .30 cal. empty carbine shell under the front counter of the Retail Dept., Exhibit HH;

One bullet jacket fragment near Exhibit HH, Exhibit 11;

One bullet fragment in front of a sofa near the counter were found Exhibits HH and 11, Exhibit JJ;

One .30 cal. empty carbine shell under an overturned roundtable on the lobby of the Retail Dept., Exhibit KK;

One deformed carbine spent bullet the Veterinary Dept., Exhibit LL;

Two .30 cal empty carbine shells near the counter but more towards the inside of the Retail Dept., Exhibits MM and NN;

One .30 cal. empty carbine shell on top of the counter of the Retail Dept., Exhibit OO;

Two .30 cal empty carbine shell in front of the first table on the eastern side of the Retail Dept., Exhibits PP and QQ;

Two .30 cal. empty carbine shells in front of the first table on the west side of the Retail Dept., Exhibits RR and SS;

Two .30 cal. empty carbine shells near the drug cabinet beside the aforesaid table, Exhibits TT and UU;

One .45 cal. empty pistol shell near the corner of a drug cabinet in the middle of the room of the Retail Dept., Exhibit VV;

One .38 caliber empty carbine shell inside the counter of the Retail Dept., Exhibit WW;

One .30 cal. empty carbine shells on the cement floor beside the cash register of the Retail Dept., on the east side, Exhibit XX; One .30 cal. empty carbine shell beside the cash register, also on the floor, Exhibit YY;

Six .30 cal. empty carbine shell at the back of the cash register, Exhibits ZZ, AAA, BBB, CCC and EEE;

One .30 cal. empty carbine shell inside the drawer of a drug cabinet beside the cash register, Exhibit FFF;

One .30 cal. empty carbine magazine on top of the drug counter, beside the cash register, Exhibit GGG; and

One .30 cal. empty carbine shell in front of house 1584 Bambang, Exhibit HHH.

as well as checks, money bills and coins of different denominations strewn on the floor near Felecitas Rivera’s cash register which the robbers must have dropped while ransacking the cash register and failed to scoop up in their hurry to escape.chanrobles.com.ph : virtual law library

"Subsequently, fourteen (14) assorted spent bullets and fragments of bullets, Exhibits III through III-13, one empty .45 cal. pistol shell, Exhibit JJJ, five (5) .30 cal. empty carbine cartridges, Exhibit KKK, three .38 cal. empty shells, Exhibit LLL, two .30 cal. empty carbine shells, Exhibit MMM, four .30 cal. carbine spent bullets, Exhibits OOO through OOO-3 were also found at the scene of the crime.

"Elino Ramos, the taxicab driver, having recovered from the frightful spectacle he had witnessed, reported the incident to the police headquarters and executed his statement, Exh. Y, that same night, wherein he gave the description of the robbers."cralaw virtua1aw library

The robbery was staged so quickly and the robbers wore masks, or had their faces covered with handkerchiefs or some pieces of cloth that they could not be identified. However, with the aid of formers, the identity and the whereabouts of Eladio M. Galvez as one of those who took part in the robbery came to the knowledge of the Manila Police Department. On the night of October 14, 1963, Lt. Jesus Buenaventura and Sgt. Alfredo Lim, both of the MPD went to Baliwag, Bulacan, and there in barrio Sta. Barbara at a store, Galvez was arrested without warrant. The arrest was done with the cooperation of Lt. Augusto del Rosario of the Baliwag Police Force. When he was arrested, Galvez was said to have in his possession one carbine clip with 30 rounds of .30 caliber ammunition (Exhibits "T-1" and "T-2." ) Later, Alfonso Camacho, chief of police of Baliwag, together with Lt. del Rosario returned to the store where Galvez was arrested. Camacho asked Alfonso de la Cruz, the storeowner, if Galvez had a firearm De la Cruz said that Galvez had left a carbine which was taken by Galvez’ neighbor, Gregorio Maniego who upon being asked about the firearm (Exh. "T" with Serial No. 6914870) surrendered it to Camacho who in turn gave it to Lt. Buenaventura and Sgt. Lim.

On October 15, 1963, Eladio gave a statement to the police (Exh. "B") as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"SALAYSAY NI ELADIO CALVES Y MARBAS NA KINUHA SA OPICINA NG ’CRIMES VS. PROPERTY DIVISION (ROBBERY) DB. MPD.’ NI DET. SGT. F. JUECO SA HARAP NI SGT. A. LIM AT DET. N. CRUZ NGAYON IKA 9:30 NG UMAGA, OCTUBRE 15, 1963 AT ISINA MAKINILLA NG NASA HULI.

TANONG: Nais mo bang magbigay ng isang malaya at kusang loob na salaysay at tutugunin mo ng buong katotohanan ang lahat ng itatanong sa iyo tungkol sa imbestigasiong ito na hindi ka tinakot, sinaktan o pinangakuan ng ano mang bagay at dapat mong malaman na ang salaysay mong ito kung sakali ay aming gagamiting katibayan laban sa iyo sa harap ng alin mang Hukuman dito sa Filipinas?

SAGOT: Opo.

(02) T: Sabihin mo sa amin ang tunay mong pangalan na pati ng iyong ginagamit na palayao at iba’t ibang bagay ng iyong pagkatao.

S: ELADIO GALVEZ Y MARBAS, 27 taong gulang, tsuper, may asawa, tubo sa Baliuag at kasalukuyang naninirahan sa daang Aldama, Baliuag, Bulacan. Ang aking palayao ay "Eladio."

(03) T: Bukod sa ibinigay mong pangalan (Eladio Galvez y Marbas) ano pang ibang pangalan ang iyong ginagamit?

S: ELADIO GALVEZ Y MONTEMAYOR po.

(04) T: Ano ang pangalan ng iyong may bahay?

S: Norma dela Cruz po.

(05) T: Ilan ang iyong naging anak kay Norma dela Cruz?

S: Tatlo (3) po. Sila po ay pawang mga lalake: Renato, idad 5 taon; Rolando, 3 taon ang idad at Romeo, 2 buan lamang ang idad.

(06) T: Saan naroroon ngayon ang familia mong ito?

S: Sila po ay nasa Baliuag, Bulacan.

(07) T: Ano ang pangalan ng iyong Ama at Ina?

S: Felix Galvez at Roselia Marbas po. Sila po ay pawang mga buhay pa at ngayon ay nasa Baliuag, Bulacan po.

(08) T: Ilan kayong magkakapatid?

S: Siyam (9) po; pito (7) ang lalake at dalawa ang babae na buhay po kaming lahat.

(09) T: Sino ang pinaka-matanda sa inyong siyam?

S: Ako po.

(10) T: Sino ang pinakabata sa inyong siyam?

S: Felix, Jr. po.

(11) T: Bago ka nag tsuper, ano muna ang iyong ikinabubuhay?

S: Ako po ay naging conductor ng pangpasajerong jeepney.

(12) T: Anong grado sa eskuela ang iyong tinapos?

S: Ako po ay tapos lamang ng ika anim (6th) grado ng Pulilan Elementary School, sa Bulacan.

(13) T: Samakatuwid marunong kang bumasa, umintindi at sumulat ng wikang tagalog.

S: Opo.

(14) T: Ano ang nalalaman mong dahilan at bakit ikaw ay naririto ngayon sa tangapan ng mga Secreta ng Lunsod ng Maynila?

S: Ako ay hinuli kagabing mag-aalas 10:00 ng tatlong (3) Police na kasama ng isang Tiniente ng Baliuag Police Department na si Lt. Agusto samantalang ako ay nasa tindahan ni Mang Ponching sa daang P. Damaso, Baliuag, Bulacan, samantalang ipinagbibili ko ang "Carbine" na dala ko sa isang lalake na aking nakita doon sa tindahan ni Mang Ponching, na ang pangalan ng nasabing lalake ay hindi ko kilala, kaya ang nasabing "Carbine" ay nakuha din ng mga Police.

(15) T: Ipinakikita namin sa iyo ang isang "Carbine" na hawakang bakal na nababali at isang "clip" ng balang calibre 30 na ang laman ay tatlumpu, (30) (Sgt. Jueco showing one caliber 30 paratrooper, Carbine with steel handle and one clip of ammunition of 30 pieces, with serial number 6914870) ano ang masasabi mo sa mga bagay na ito?

S: Iyan nga po ang "Carbine", "clip" at mga balang nakuha sa akin ng ako ay mahuli ng mga Police sa tindahan ni Mang Ponching kagabing mga alas 10:00.

(16) T: Ipinakikita uli namin sa iyo itong anim (6) na piraso ng bala na calibre 45 na nakuha din sa iyo sa bulsa de relo ng suot mong pantalon, ano ang masasabi mo sa mga bagay na ito?

S: Ang mga balang nga pong iyan ay dala ko sapagkat si Police Candong Catubusan ng Baliuag Police Department ay nanghihingi sa akin ng bala kaya nga po iyan ay ibibigay ko sa kanya.

(17) T: Bakit naman si Patrolman Catubusan ay nanghihingi sa iyo ng bala calibre 45?

S: Sapagkat siya po ay aking kaibigan at nalalaman niyang "buy-sell" ako ng baril doon sa Baliuag Bulacan.

(18) T: Ano pa ang nangyari matapos kang hulihin ng mga Police doon sa tindahan ni Mang Ponching?

S: Ako po ay dinala na dito sa Maynila na kasama si Lt. Agusto ng Baliuag Police Department.

(19)T: Ano ang dahilan at ikaw ay dinala dito sa opicina ng mga Secreta ng Lungsod ng Maynila at ikaw ay sinisiyasat?

S: Dahilan nga po sa naganap na pangloloob sa "Mercury Drug Store" dito sa daang Bambang, Sta. Cruz, Maynila.

(20) T: Natatandaan mo ba kung kailan nangyari ang sinasabi mong pangloloob?

S: Opo, Noon pong humigit sa alas 7:00 ng gabi, ika 3 ng Septiembre 1963.

(21) T: Bago naganap ang nasabing panloloob, sino-sino ang nagplano niyan?

S: Ang nagplano po niyan, sa pagka-alam ko, si Mario Mana, Marcelo Manahan po lamang.

(22) T: Sa iyong pagka-alam saan naman pinagusapan at kailan na lolooban ninyo ang "Mercury Drug Store" sa daang Bambang, Sta. Cruz, Maynila?

S: Hindi ko po alam kung kailan at kung saan pinagusapan ni Mario at Marcelo na lolooban ninyo ang nasabing "Drug Store."

(23) T: Kailan, saan lugar at sino ang nag-akit sa iyo na sumama ka sa pangloloob na ito?

S: Noong bandang alas 12:00 ng tanghali, Septiembre 3, 1963, ay dumating na naglalakad sina MARIO MANA, MARCELO MANAHAN, FRANCISCO SEBASTIAN, at GERMAN KATIIS, at ako’y kinausap sa may tapat ng aming bahay sa Aldama street, Baliuag, Bulacan. Sinabi sa akin ni Marcelo Manahan, na sadya ko ng nakilala noon pa pong kami ay magkasama sa "Puring Transportation", na ako ay sumama sa kanila dahil may lakad.

(24) T: Inusisa mo kay Marcelo Manahan kung ano ang lakad ninyo, kung kailan at saan?

S: Ang sabi nila ay basta sumama ako at kami ay may lakad at noon nga pong bandang ala 1:00 ng hapon, ng arao ding iyon, kami nga pong lima (5) ay sumakay sa isang San Rafael Bus, na patungong Maynila at dala ko ang aking 45 calibre automatico, at si Francisco Sebastian ay siyang may dala ng sako na may lamang dalawang "Carbine." Si German Katiis po na man ang dala ay "Super 38" at si Marcelo Manahan ay siyang may dala ng isang maikling baril.

(25) T: Samantalang kayong lima (5) ay lulan ng San Rafael Bus, ano ang inyong napagusapan?

S: Sinabi ho sa akin ng aking mga kasama na lolooban namin ang "Mercury Drug Store" sa may Bambang, dito nga sa Maynila.

(26)T: Ng kayong lima (5) ay dumating ng Maynila, saan kayo bumaba ng Bus?

S: Sa may tapat ho ng Manila Motor Works sa may Aurora Boulevard, dito sa Maynila ng humigit kumulang sa alas 3:00 ng hapon, ng araw na iyon.

(27) T: Ng kayo bang lima (5) ay bumaba ng Bus, dala ba ninyo ang inyong mga baril?

S: Opo.

(28) T: Saan kayong lima (5) nagtuloy matapos kayong makababa ng Bus?

S: Naglakad-lakad po kaming lima (5) at pagdating namin sa "north approach" ng tulay ng Dimasalang, at nagpagabi kami hangang mag-aalas 6:00 ng hapon, ng arao na iyon. Hindi pa rin kami umalis at inabot pa kami ng hangang pasado alas 6:30 ng hapon. Ilang minuto po ang nakalipas, si Mario Mana ay tumawag ng isang Dollar Taxi Cab at kaming lima (5) ay sumakay; sa tabi ng tsuper at si Mario Mana at si Marcelo Manahan, at kaming tatlo (3), ako, ay umupo sa gawing likuran ng tsuper ng taxi katabi ko si Francisco Sebastian at sa likuran (passenger seat). Sinabi ni Mario sa tsuper ng taxi na dalhin kami sa may daang Bambang, canto ng Rizal Avenue, dito sa Maynila.

(29) T: Samantalang kayong lima (5) ay nasaloob ng Dollar taxi cab na patungo ng daang Bambang, ano ang nangyari?

S: Binuksan ho ni Francisco Sebastian, ang dala naming sako at kinuha ang isang ’Carbine’ at ibinigay kay Mario Mana at iyong isang Carbine ay siyang hawak ni Francisco Sebastian.

(30) T: Ng sumapit Kayo ng Bambang, ano pa ang nangyari:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

S: Pagdating namin sa tapat ng Mercury Store", kaming tatlong (3) nakaupo sa likod ay inutusan namin ang tsuper ng taxi na ipihit ang taxi na paharap sa canto ng Avenida Rizal at Bambang at sa tapat na tapat ng Mercury Drug Store sa gawing kanan, ay pinahinto ni Mario Mana ang taxi at sa pagbaba niya ng taxi ay kinuha niya ang susi ng taxi.

(31) T: Ano pa ang sumunod na nangyari matapos mahinto ang taxi sa tapat na tapat ng Mercury Drug Store" ?

S: Biglang bumaba ng taxi si Marcelo Manahan, sumunod si Mario Mana na kasunod din si German Katiis at biglang nagpaputok silang tatlo (3) sa loob ng "Mercury Drug." Ako at si Francisco ang huling bumaba ng taxi at kami ay tumayo sa labas sa may bangketa ng "Mercury Drug" bilang siyang bantay at kami ay nagpaputok din ng dala naming baril.

(32) T: Sino ang pumasok ng "Mercury Drug" at nanutok sa mga cajera sa loob ng nasabing Drug Store.

S: Sina Marcelo Manahan, Mario Mana at German Katiis po, samantalang ako at si Francisco Sebastian ay nagbabantay sa labas at tinutukan ni Francisco Sebastian ng "Carbine" ang naroroong Watchman at kinuha ang 45 calibre baril ng Watchman.

(33) T: Ano pa ang nangyari?

S: Hindi pa ho natatagalan, si Marcelo Manahan, Mario Mana at German Katias ay lumabas na bitbit ni Marcelo Manahan ang isang bag, kulay abuhin, katamtaman ang laki. Samantalang lumalabas sina Marcelo, Mario at German mula sa "Drug Store" ay nagpapaputok din sila paharap doon sa katapat na isa pang "Drug Store" sa kabilang ibayo ng Bambang. Kami ring dalawa ni Francisco ay nagpaputok din na paharap sa kabilang ibayo ng Bambang.

(33) T: Sa inyong pagpapaputok na lima (5) may nakita ka bang tinamaang isang watchman at isang babae?

S: Wala po akong napansin.

(34) T: May nakita ka ba na mang nabuwal na isang watchmam at isang babae?

S: Wala rin po.

(35) T: Kanino napunta ang baril na nakuha ni Francisco don sa Watchman?

S: Si Francisco po ay may pagiingat ngayon.

(46) T: Ng kayo ay pa-alis na sa nilooban ninyong "Mercury Drug", ano ang sinakyan ninyo?

S: Iyon din pong Dollar Taxi Cab na aming ginamit nong una.

(47)T: Sa paglulan ninyo sa nasabing Dollar Taxi Cab, inabot pa ba ninyo ang tsuper nang naturang Taxi?

S: Wala na po ang tsuper kaya ako na nga po ang nagmanejo ng nasabing Taxi Cab at katabi ko si Mario at sina Francisco, Marcelo at German ay sa may likuran ng Taxi nagsiupo.

(48) T: Saan kayong lima (5) nagtuloy na lulan ng nasabing Taxi Cab?

S: Pinatakbo ko ho ng matulin ang taxi at tinalunton namin ang Bambang, iniliko ko ang taxi ng kaliwa daang Felix Huertas, Sta. Cruz, Maynila; toloy hangang sumapit kami ng daang Antipolo at iniliko ko ang taxi ng kanan hangang sumapit kami ng R.R. Crossing at nagpatuloy kami ng Aurora Boulevard, tuloy kami ng Grace Park, at tuloy hangang Plaridel, Bulacan.

(49) T: Pagsapit ninyo ng Plaridel na lulan ng Dollar Taxi, ano pa ang nangyari?

S: Doon po sa tapat ng gasolinahan sa kabayanan ng Plaridel, ay umibis sina Marcelo Manahan, Francisco Sebastian at German Katiis na iniwanan ni Mario ang "Carbine" kay Francisco at kaming dalawa ni Mario ay nagpatuloy na lulan ng nasabing Dollar Taxi hangang sapitin namin ang Pulilan.

(50) T: Nasaan ang bag na may lamang kuarta na inyong nakuha sa "Mercury Drug" ?

S: Dala po ni Marcelo Manahan ang bag na may lamang kuarta ng siya ay bumaba sa Plaridel.

(51) T: Ng dumating kayong dalawa ni Mario sa Pulilan, saan kayong dalawa nagtungo?

S: Ng sapitin namin ang R.R. Crossing ng Pulilan, lumiko kami ng kaliwa patungong Barrio Pungo, paglagpas ng kanto ng Barrio Pungo, iniwanan namin ang Dollar Taxi sa tapat ng puno ng Bayabas at kami ay naglakad patungong Calumpit Highway at sinapit namin ang tulay ng Calumpit.

(52) T: Pagsapit ninyo sa tulay ng Calumpit, ano ang ginawa ninyong dalawa ni Mario Mana?

S: Sumakay po kami ng La Mallorca Bus ng bandang alas 9:00 ng gabi, ng araw din iyon, na patungong Maynila, at pagdating sa Barrio Tabang, Guiguinto, Bulacan, bumaba kaming dalawa ni Mario at nakisakay kami sa isang track na pangkargamento hangang dumating kami ng Barrio ng Bulwalto, San Miguel, Bulacan.

(54) T: Ano ang ginawa ninyong dalawa ni Mario sa Barrio ng Bulwalto?

S: Nagpunta ho kami sa bahay ni Marcelo Manahan.

(55) T: Anong oras kayo dumating sa bahay ni Marcelo, at sino-sino ang inyong dinatnan don?

S: Dumating ho kami ng bandang alas 10:00 ng gabi ng arao din iyon. Nakita ho namin don sina Marcelo Manahan at German Katiis.

(56) T: Saan na roroon si Francisco Sebastian?

S: Hindi po namin inabutan don.

(57) T: Ano ang dahilan at kayong apat (4) nina German Katiis, Marcelo Manahan, Mario Mana at ikaw ay nagkita-kita sa bahay ni Marcelo?

S: Upang partihin po ang kuartang aming nakuha sa "Mercury Drug Store."

(58) T: Sa iyong nalalaman, magkano naman ang kabuuan halaga ng kuartang nakuha ninyo sa "Mercury Drug Store" ?

S: Sa pagka-alam ko po ay apat (P4,000.00) na libong piso po.

(59) T: Sa inyong limang magkakasama, magkano ang tinangap na kaparti ng bawat isa?

S: P800.00 po ang ibinigay sa akin ni German Katiis at ang sabi ay iyon ang aking kahati sa lahat ng kuartang aming nakuha sa "Mercury Drug Store."

(60) T: Iyong apat (4) na kasama mo, magkano ang tinangap ng bawat isa?

S: Hindi ko po alam kung magkano ang bawat isa.

(61) T: Bakit sa harap ng inyong partihan ng kuarta sa bahay ni Marcelo ay wala si Francisco Sebastian?

S: Basta hindi ko na nga po inabutan siya sa bahay ni Marcelo.

(62) T: Ano ang masasabi mo kung bakit hindi mo dinatnan si Francisco Sebastian sa bahay ni Marcelo?

S: Dahil nga po siya (Francisco Sebastian) ay may sugat sa kanan hita, siya ay nagpapagamot kung kaya wala siya sa harapang iyon.

(63) T: Hindi ba ang totoo ay kung kaya mo ibinaba silang tatlo (Francisco Sebastian, German Katiis at Marcelo Manahan) upang magpagamot si Francisco Sebastian ng kaniyang tinamong sugat?

S: Hindi ko po alam.

(64) T: Ano na man ang dahilan at nagkamayron ng sugat si Francisco Sebastian?

S: Basta ng kami po ay nasa loob ng taxi ng aking minamanejo na patungo kami ng Plaridel ay napuna ko na duguan ang kanan niyang hita.

(65) T: Ano ba ang sugat ni Francisco Sebastian, dahil ba sa tama ng punlo?

S: Hindi ko po malaman kung tama ng punlo ang kaniyang sugat o dahil sa ibang pangyayari.

(66) T: Sa inyong nalalaman, kailan mo napuna na may sugat sa kanang hita si Francisco Sebastian, bago ba kayo tumungo sa Mercury Drug" o matapos ninyong maganap ang pangloloob sa nasabing "Drug Store" ?

S: Nakita po ang sugat ni Francisco Sebastian sa kanang hita matapos naming looban ang nasabing "Drug Store."cralaw virtua1aw library

(67) T: Hindi mo ba tinanong ang iyong mga kasama kung bakit wala si Francisco Sebastian sa harapang iyon?

S: Hindi ko po tinanong sila, basta matapos kong matanggap ang aking kahati (P800.00), iniwanan ko na sila at ako ay nagtuloy ng aming bahay na sumakay ako sa E. Jose Transportation.

(68) T: Liwanagin mo nga sa amin kung ano-anong sandata na pumuputok ang inyong ginamit ng looban ninyo ang "Mercury Drug Store" ?

S: Ako po ang may ari ng 45 cal. automatic na aking daladala; si German Katiis ang may dala ng Super 38; isang Carbine ay dala ni Francisco Sebastian at si Marcelo Manahan ay may dalang isang maiksing baril na hindi ko alam kung anong calibre.

(69) T: Nasa-an ngayon iyong ginamit mong calibre 45?

S: Dalawang arao (2) matapos naming looban ang "Mercury Drug Store", nagkita kami ni German Katiis sa daang Hill Carlos sa Baliuag, Bulacan, ng bandang hapon, at pinalit niya iyong "Carbine" na pag-aari ni Mario Mana sa aking calibre 45 automatic.

(70) T: Ang sinasabi mong "Carbine Paratrooper" na ipinalit sa iyong 45 Cal. automatic ni German Katiis, ay iyon din ang "Carbine" na nakuha sa iyo ng ikaw ay hulihin kagabi don sa tindahan ni mang Ponching sa Baliuag, Bulacan?

S: Opo.

(71) T: Samakatuwid ang "Carbine" na nakuha sa iyo ng ikaw ay hulihin sa may tindahan ni mang Ponching ay siya ring ginamit sa pangloloob sa "Mercury Drug Store" noong 3 ng Septiembre 1963?

S: Opo.

(72) T: Bukod sa iyo, itong apat (4) mong kasama, na sina, FRANCISCO SEBASTIAN, GERMAN KATIIS, MARCELO MANAHAN at MARIO MANA, na nakasama mo sa pagloloob sa "Mercury Drug Store" dito sa Maynila, noong 3 ng Septiembre 1963, sabihin mo sa amin kung ano-ano ang kanilang mga suot na damit, at palatandaan, kagaya ng kulay, laki, taas at iba pa?

S: Si Francisco Sebastian po ay naka suot ng Polo na may kulay, de color na pantalon; and taas po niya ay siguro ay mga 5’ 5" ; may kapayatan po: kasing itim ko po. Si German Katiis po, naka suot ng polo shirt; may kataasan ho siya kay sa kay Francisco Sebastian; maliit po ang pangangatawan; may ka itiman kay sa akin Si Marcelo Manahan ay hindi ko na po matandaan ang suot niyang damit; siya ho ay may kataasan kay sa akin; may kaputian siya sa akin. Si Mario Mana, siya ho ay may suot na jacket, kulay abuhin, kasingtaas ko ho at may kalaparan sa akin ang katawan. Ako na man ay may suot na T-Shirt na kulay verde at de color na pantalon. Ang sapatos ko ay de goma "Eduardson" kulay puti.

(73) T: Ayon sa mga nakasaksi sa nasabing pangloloob ninyo sa "Mercury Drug Store", noong 3 ng Septiembre 1963, sino-sino ang may takip ng panyo ang mukha?

S: Kami pong dalawa ni Francisco Sebastian ay walang takip ang aming mga mukha, subalit hindi ko matandaan ang aking mga kasama kung sila ay may takip ang mga mukha.

(74) T: Saan nakatira itong iyong mga kasama?

S: Si Francisco Sebastian ay nakatira sa Bulwalto na kasama nina German Katiis at Marcelo Manahan. Si Mario na man sa aking pagkakaalam ay naninirahan sa San Isidro, Nueva Ecija.

(75) T: Matapos ninyong looban ang "Mercury Drug Store" dito sa Maynila, nalaman mo bang may tinaman kayo ng baril at napatay ang isang babae na nagngangalang Mary Peña doon sa loob ng "Mercury Drug Wholesale Department" at malubhang nasugatan ang isang tanod na si Alfonso Reforso y Avilla?

S: Opo. Nalaman ko po dahil nabasa ko sa diario kinabukasan (Bagong Buhay) pahayagang tagalog.

(76) T: Matapos mong malaman mo ang kalubhaan ng inyong ginanap sa pangloloob sa "Mercury Drug Store", ano ang iyong nadama sa iyong sarili.

S: Matapos kong malaman na may namatay at may nasugatan, ako po ay hindi makatulog at laging balisa ang aking katawan at laging balot ng kahintakutan ang aking sarili.

(77) T: Kailan kayong huling-huling nagkikita ng limang (5) magkakasama?

S: Matapos makapagpalitan kami ni German ng "Carbine" at ng aking calibre 45, hindi na kami nagkikitang lima, hanggang sa ako ay nahuli na nga.

(78) T: Nabatid namin sa iyo na P800.00 ang iyong nakaparti sa kuartang inyong nakuha sa "Mercury Drug Store", na sa iyo pa ba ang sinasabi mong halaga?

S: Nagastos ko po sa pakikisama, sa inuman, sayawan, at sa babae. At ang totoo po ay mahirap pa ako kay dilang mahirap ni pati po ng aking familia ay hindi naka-kain sa kuartang iyan.

(79) T: Kung sakaling makita mo muli ang apat (4) mong kasama sa pangloloob sa "Mercury Drug Store", sila ba ay iyong makikilala ng walang duda?

S: Opo. Talaga na mang kilala ko sila.

(80) T: Sinabi mo sa iyong salaysay na ang nagplano ng panloloob na ito sa "Mercury Drug Store" ay si Marcelo Manahan at Mario Mana, sa abot ng iyong ka-alaman, sino, kung may roon man, kayong kasabwat sa isa sa mga empleado o namamasukan sa nasabing tindahan ng mga gamot?

S: Wala po akong nalalaman.

(81) T: May kilala ka bang taga Bulacan. Lalong laluna sa bandang Plaridel na namamasukan sa "Mercury Drug Store" dito sa Maynila?

S: Wala po akong alam.

(82) T: Ikaw ba ay may kakilala na namamasukan sa nasabing tindahan ng mga gamot (Mercury Drug Store)?

S: Wala po akong kaibigan na nagtatrabajo don.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

(83) T: Bukod sa pangyayaring ito (Pangloloob sa "Mercury Drug Store") sa anong ibang pagkakasala na ikaw ay nasiyasat na ng Police?

S: Ito po lamang ang kaunaunahan kong kasalanan.

(84) T: Ano pa ang ibig mong idagdag sa salaysay mong ito?

S: Wala na po.

(85) T: Ang salaysay mong ito na binubuo sa pitong (7) sipi, ito ay aming ipababasa sa iyo at basahin mo ng masinsinan ayon sa iyong kaalaman. Kung matapos mong basahin ito, ng wala kang pagtutol sa mga nilalaman, ang salaysay mo bang ito, ay iyong lalagdaan bilang patotoo na ang lahat mong sinabi dito ay pawang totoo at walang iba kung di pawang katotohanan lamang?

S: Opo. Akin pong lalagdaan ang salaysay kong iyan matapos kong mabasa.

WAKAS

(SGD) ELADIO GALVEZ Y MARBAS

MGA SAKSI:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

1. (SGD) (not legible)

2. (SGD) (not legible)

3. (SGD) (not legible).

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me this 15th day of October 1963 in the City of Manila, Philippines.

(SGD) AVELINO CONCEPCION

Asst. Fiscal

Note: 10/15/63

6:40 P.M.

This Statement was signed and subscribed before the undersigned after he informed the Fiscal that he did it voluntarily and without any force or intimidation.

(SGD) AVELINO CONCEPCION

Asst. Fiscal"

In an information dated October 16, 1963, Eladio was accused of robbery with homicide and frustrated homicide in Criminal Case No. 73067 of the Court of First Instance of Manila. Mario Mana, Marcelo Manahan, Francisco Sebastian and German Katiis who were mentioned by Eladio as his companions were not charged.

On October 19, 1963, Eladio gave another statement (Exh. "A") as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"KARAGDAGANG SALAYSAY ni ELADIO GALVEZ Y MARVAZ, na kinuha dito sa oficina ng ROBBERY DIVISION, DBP-MPD, ni Det. Sgt. F. Jueco sa harap ni Sgt. A. Lim, ngayong magiika alas tres (3:00) ng hapon Octubre 19, 1963.

1. Tanong: Nais mo bang magbigay ng isang karagdagang salaysay at tugunin ng buong katotohanan ang lahat ng aming itatanong sa iyo?

S: Opo.

02. T: Ipinaalam namin sa iyo na sa dahilang pang sariling kagustuhan upang magbigay liwanag bagay na ukol sa una mong salaysay na ibinigay mo sa aming tanggapan nuong alas nueve y media (9:30) ng umaga Octubre 15, 1963, ay minarapat mong isiwalat ngayon ang tunay at buong katotohanan na pangyayari. Handa ka na ba?

S: Opo.

03. T: Sinong talaga ang nagutak ng pangloloob sa Mercury Drug Store nuong Septiembre a tres ng taong ito?

S: Si MARIO MANA po.

04. T: Samakatuwid ang ibig mong sabihin ay maykatotohanan ang unang ibinunyag mo duon sa una mong salaysay na nagutak ay si MARIO MANA ngunit ang kanyang kasama ay hindi si MARCELO MANAHAN kung hindi si RODING o RODOLFO PALO?

S: Opo.

05. T: Sa salaysay ni RODOLFO PALO, na ibinigay nuong ala una ng tanghali Octubre 17, 1963, ay ang utak o nagbalak na isagawa ang panunutok sa Mercury Drug Store ay si MARIO MANA ikaw (ELADIO GALVEZ) ay kaharap si RODOLFO PALO at diumano ay pinagusapan ninyo ang mga bagay na iyon sa isang restaurant sa Valenzuela, Bulacan, nuong alas cinco (5:00) ng hapon Septiembre a tres (3) 1963. Alin ba ang tutuo, ang isinalaysay ni RODOLFO PALO o ang sinabi mo ngayon?

S: Ito pong salaysay ko ngayon na si MARIO MANA ang siyang tunay na utak.

06. T: Papaano mo nalaman na siya ang utak samantalang sang-ayon sa iyo ay hindi ka kasama sa pagpaplano?

S: Mangyari po eh siya ang nagyaya sa amin at siya rin ang naguutos sa aming gagawin.

07. T: Sang-ayon sa una mong salaysay ay ang mga kasama mo sa pang-loloob sa Mercury Drug Store ay si MARIO MANA, si MARCELO MANAHAN si FRANCISCO SEBASTIAN, si HERMAN KATIIS at saka ikaw. Sang-ayon naman sa salaysay ni RODOLFO PALO ay ang magkakasama ay ikaw, si MARIO MANA, si FRANCISCO SEBASTIAN, si ABELARDO PINEDA at RODOLFO PALO, alin ang tutuo sa dalawa? iyong isinalaysay mo o iyong sinabi ni RODOLFO PALO?

S: Ang una kupong salaysay at ang salaysay ni RODOLFO PALO nuong una ay parejo hindi tutuo ukol sa tunay na magkakasama, ngunit ang tutuo po ay tunay na magkakasama ay ako po (ELADIO GALVEZ),si MARIO MANA, si RODOLFO PALO, si FRANCISCO SEBASTIAN, at si HERMAN KATIIS.

08. T: Ano ang dahilan at ang una mong salaysay ay sinabi mong kasama mo si MARCELO MANAHAN at ngayon naman ay si RODOLFO PALO ang siya mong tunay na kasama na sinabi mong iyan ang tutuo?

S: Ang tutuo po ay talagang si RODOLFO PALO ang aking kasama nuon at pinatutunayan po naman niya sa kanyang salaysay.

09. T: Ito bang iyong mga nakasama sa pangloloob ay pawang mga kilala muna?

S: Opo.

10. T: Gaanong katagal muna silang kilala at saan kayo nagkakilala?

S: Si RODOLFO PALO sapol pa nuon bata pa kami at talaga siyang tagaruon sa amin, si MARIO MANA po ay ipinakilala sa akin ni MARCELO MANAHAN na mayruon nang isang taon at siya’y ang pagkakaalam ko ay San Isidro, N. Ecija, at iyong iba po ay nasabi kuna sa unang salaysay ko.

11. T: Si ABELARDO PINEDA ay nakikilala mo ba?

S: Opo.

12. T: Ano naman ang pagkakakilala mo sa kanya?

S: Kami po ay nagkakilala nuong sumama siya sa kapatid kong si LUIS na kasama niyang nagmamaneho sa Philippine Rabbit nuong maganak sa binyag ang kapatid kong si Luis sa Baliwag, mga anim na buan na ngayon.

13. T: Ano ang pagkakakilala mo sa kay ABELARDO PINEDA?

S: Siya po ay electrician sa Phil. Rabbit, at taga Concepcion, Tarlac.

14. T: Ano ang dahilan at isinasangkot si ABELARDO PINEDA ni RODOLFO PALO?

S: Wala po akong alam na dahilan.

15. T: Hindi ba ang tutuo ay kasama ni ABELARDO PINEDA sa inyong pangloloob sa Mercury Drug Store at sa mga gawaing masama?

S: Hindi po tutuo iyan, masama po naman kung idawit ko siya kong hindi po tutuo na kasama ko siya.

16. T: Bakit naman si MARCELO MANAHAN ay idinawit mo sa una mong salaysay?

S: Mangyari po eh ang aking pagkakaintindi sa inyo, nuong una ay kung kaibigan ko at nakakasama si MARCELO MANAHAN at ang tunay at talagang kaibigan ko siya, ngunit dito sa aming pangloloob sa Mercury Drug Store, ay hindi ko siya nakasama.

17. T: Sa inyong paglakad ng pang-loloob sa Mercury Drug Store, ano ang mga sandata ninyong ginamit at sino-sino ang may hawak ng sandata?

S: Si FRANCISCO SEBASTIAN po ay may hawak na paratrooper carbine na naconfisca ninyo sa akin si MARIO MANA po ang siyang may hawak na isang carbine na putol po ang manggo na automatico. Si HERMAN KATIIS po naman ang may hawak na .45 caliber Auto. pistol. Si RODOLFO PALO po naman ay siyang may hawak na Super 38 automatic at ako naman ay siyang maydalang .45 cal. auto. pistol.

18. T: Sang-ayon kay RODOLFO PALO ay mayruon pa kayong dalang dalawang granada, sino-sino naman ang may dala nuon?

S: Ang isa pong granada ay ibinigay sa akin ni MARIO MANA at ang isa ay nasa kanya.

19. T: Ano bang klaseng granada iyong sinasabi mo?

S: Ayon po sa pagkakilala ko ay granada iyon pero walang guilit-guilit. Iyon po ay kay MARIO MANA, ngunit ng matapos ang aming lakad ay ibinigay sa akin ni MARIO at iyong ay aking isinurender kay Teniente Buenaventura.

20. T: Sino ba sa inyo ang siyang tumutok duon sa watchman na nakatayo duon sa harapan ng Mercury Drug Store na bukod duon sa watchman na nakatayo at tinamaan ng putok sa kabila?

S. Si KIKO po (referring to FRANCISCO SEBASTIAN) siya po ang tumutok ng carbine at ako ang kumuha ng baril .45 cal.

21. T: Nasaan ngayon ang .45 calibreng baril ng watchman na kinuha mo?

S: Naki FRANCISCO SEBASTIAN po.

22. T: Tutuo nga ba ayon kay RODOLFO PALO, na kayo’y hindi magkasabay nagtungo sa inyong tipanan na magkita sa kanto ng Gov. Forbes na malapit sa Dimasalang?

S: Ang tutuo po ay magkakasabay po kaming lahat.

23. T: Alin ba ang tama sa sinabi mo sa una mong salaysay na kayo’y nagpagabi duon sa malapit sa tulay ng Dimasalang, duon kayo sumakay sa Dollar Taxi o iyong sinasabi ni RODOLFO PALO na kayo’y duon lumulan ng Dollar Taxi sa kanto ng Laong-Laan malapit sa Rotonda?

S. Ang tutuo po ay doon kami lumulan ng Dollar Taxi sa may puno ng kahoy sa kanto ng Gov. Forbes at Laong-Laan.

24. T: Sino ang pumasok sa inyong limang magkakasama sa loob ng Mercury Drug Store na kinakunan ninyo ng kuarta?

S. Sina HERMAN KATIIS, si MARIO MANA po at saka ako. Si FRANCISCO SEBASTIAN at RQDOLFO PALO po ay sa kabilang bangketa sa tapat ng Mercury Drug.

25. T. Ang ibig mo bang sabihin ay si FRANCISCO SEBASTIAN at RODOLFO PALO ay nasa kabilang bangketa sa tapat ng Mercury Drug Store?

S: Hindi po, si RODOLFO PALO lamang po ang nasa kabilang bangketa, at si FRANCISCO SEBASTIAN ay nasa bangketa ng Mercury Drug na amin nilooban.

26. T: Ilan sa inyong mga kasama ang tinamaan ng punglo at nasugatan?

S: Dalawa po sila. Si FRANCISCO SEBASTIAN po ay may tama sa kanang itaas ng hita, at si RODOLFO PALO ay may tama sa kaliwang braso ibaba ng siko.

27. T: Kung ganuon ay hindi tutuo ang sinabi mo sa una mong salaysay na si FRANCISCO SEBASTIAN Iamang ang may tama?

S: Opo.

28. T: Saan ba kayo naghiwahiwalay mula sa pagtakas ninyo mula sa pook ng pinangyarihan?

S: Duon po sa may Sto. Cristo, Pulilan, Bulacan na malapit sa crossing ng tren, duon ko silang tatlo ibinaba.

29. T: Tutuo bang ang kasama mong nagligpit ng Dollar Taxi cab na inyong sinakyan ay hindi si MARIO MANA kung hindi si ABELARDO PINEDA? ayon kay RODOLFO PALO?

S: Hindi po ang kasama kong talaga na nagiwan ng Taxi duon sa malapit sa Calumpit Road ay si MARIO MANA.

30. T: Kung ganuon sino ang mga kasama mo na naunang nagsibaba sa Sto. Cristo?

S: Sina HERMAN KATIIS po, si RODOLFO PALO at si FRANCISCO SEBASTIAN.

31. T: Sa una mong salaysay ay sinabi mong kayo’y nagtagpong muli upang hatiin ang salaping ninyong nakuha sa Mercury Drug Store sa bahay ni MARCELO MANAHAN at sang-ayon naman sa salaysay ni RODOLFO PALO ay inutusan mo siya na dalhin niya ang mga kasama niya sa kubo-kubohan ng iyong ama na si Matandang Felix, alin ang tutuo sa dalawa?

S: Iyon pong sinabi ni RODOLFO PALO.

32. T: Sa ngayon sino ang alam mong nakatama ng punglo sa Security Guard o tanod ng Mercury Drug?

S: Hanggang sa ngayon po ay hindi kupa alam.

33. T: Dito naman sa babaeng si Miss Mary Peña, hindi mo ba alam kung sino ang nakatama sa Kanya?

S: Nuong pong mahuli na si RODOLFO PALO, ay napagalaman ko po na siya ang nakatama duon sa Miss Mary Peña, nuong pinaguusapan nila ni Teniente Crame, na ako’y nakaharap.

34. T: Sang-ayon sa mga pangyayari ay ikaw ang nagmanejo ng taxi mula sa pook ng pinangyarihan, ikaw rin ang nagpababa sa kanila bago mo itago ang Dollar Taxi Cab, at ikaw rin ang nagutos kay RODOLFO PALO na dalhin ang iyong mga kasamahan sa kubo ng iyong ama na si matandang Felix Galvez upang hatiin ang salaping inyong nanakaw, kung ganuon tutuo na ikaw ang utak ng nasabing pangloloob sa Mercury Drug?

S: Hindi po tutuo na ako ang utak, kung hindi si MARIO MANA.

35. T: Sangayon kay RODOLFO PALO ay pinahiram mo sa kanya ang isang super 38 automatic sa panloloob ninyo sa Mercury Drug, at pagkatapos ng nasabing pangyayari ay ipinahiram mo naman ang nasabing super 38 kay ABELARDO PINEDA pagkatapos mong palitan ang slide at barrel ng calibre 45, hindi ba tutuo ito?

S: Iyon nga po ang guinamit ni RODOLFO PALO ngunit hindi ko ipinahiram kay ABELARDO PINEDA.

36 T: Saan naruruon ngayon ang nasabing super 38 na guinamit ni RODOLFO PALO sa pangloloob?

S: Iyon nga po ang isinuko ko kay Teniente Buenaventura na nakuha sa isang Consejal na may-ari ng CRUZ SISTERS’ BAR, sa Marilao, Bulacan.

37. T: Papaanong napapunta ang nasabing baril duon sa Consejal?

S: Sang-ayon po kay RODOLFO PALO nuong hindi pa kami nahuhuli ay iyon daw pong baril na super 38 na pinalitan ko ng barrel at slide ng .45 cal. ay na confisca raw ng nasabing Consejal sa loob ng CRUZ SISTERS BAR, sa isang batang nagngangalang MANY.

38. T: Kung ganoon ay hindi tutuo ang sinasabi ni Rodolfo Palo na ang baril na super 38 na pagaari mo at pinalitan mo ng barrel ay nakumpiska sa kamay ni Abelardo Pineda?

S: Opo.

39. T: Wala ka na bang nais pang sabihin bilang karagdagan o kabawasan sa salaysay mong ito na nilalaman ng apat na pahina?

S: Wala na po.

40. T: Nais mo bang lagdaan ang salaysay mong ito matapos mong mabasa at maintindihan, sapagpapatotoo ng lahat ng sinabi mo?

S: Opo.

WAKAS NG SALAYSAY

(SGD) ELADIO GALVEZ Y MARVAZ

MGA SAKSI:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

(SGD) (not legible)

SGD(not legible)

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 21st day of October, 1963, ni the City of Manila, Philippines.

(SGD) ANTONIO ISIP

Asst. City Fiscal

DAGDAG SA KARAGDAGANG salaysay ni ELADIO GALVEZ ngayong hapon alas 4:15 Octubre 19, 1963.

41. Tanong: Sang-ayon sa tanong at sagot ng iyong salaysay sa bilang 36, ipinakikita ko sa iyo ang isang Super Automatic Colt, Serial Number-75748, na nikelado at plastic na kulay chocolate ang puluhan, sabihin mo nga kung ito rin ang baril na super 38 na binangguit mong iyong isinuko kay Teniente Buenaventura na nakumpiska sa kamay ng isang Consejal sa Marilao, Bulacan, may-ari ng CRUZ SISTERS BAR?

Sagot: Opo (witness scrutinizing one super automatic cal. 38 with SN-75748)ito rin nga po.

42. T: Sino naman ang tunay na may-ari nitong baril na ito?

S: Ako po.

T: Ito rin ba ang baril na pinahiram mo kay RODOLFO PALO at siya ring guinamit ni RODOLFO PALO sa pangloloob sa Mercury Drug Store?

S: Opo, iyan din po.

44. T: Wala ka na bang masasabi tungkol dito?

S: Wala na po.

45. T: Sang-ayon sa sagot mo sa tanong bilang 19 ay ang maydalang granada ay ikaw at si MARIO MANA, at matapos ang inyong pangloloob ay ibinigay pa sa iyo ni MARIO MANA ang isang granada na hawak niya, samakatuid ay dalawa ang granadang nasasaiyo at ang wika mo ay isinurender mo iyon kay Teniente Buenaventura, ilang granada ang isinurender mo kay Teniente?

S: Isa lang po.

46. T: Nasaan ang isa pang granada?

S: Na kay KIKO po. (FRANCISCO SEBASTIAN).

(SGD) ELADIO GALVEZ Y MARVAS"

And again on October 23, 1963, Eladio gave a third statement (Exh. "O") as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"KARAGDAGANG SALAYSAY NI ELADIO GALVEZ Y MARVAS NA KINUHA NI SGT. ALFREDO LIM SA HARAP NI DET. ARSENIO REYES SA OFICINA NG ROBBERY DIVISION, DB, MPD, NGAYON ALAS 8:40 NG UMAGA, OCTUBRE 23, 1963.

TANONG: Nakahanda ka bang magbigay ng karagdagang salaysay tungkol duon sa panloloob sa Mercury Drugstore sa calle Bambang, Sta. Cruz, noong Septiembre 7 1963 mga alas 7:00 ng gabi at sasagutin ng buong katotohanan ang aming itatanong sa iyo?

SAGOT: Opo.

1. T Nuong Octobre 19, 1963 ay kinunan ka ng salaysay ni Sgt. Florentino Jueco sa harap ni Sgt. Alfredo Lim tungkol duon sa panloloob sa Mercury Drugstore?

S Opo.

2. T Duon sa iyong salaysay ay binanggit mo na ang utak ng pangloloob sa Mercury Drugstore ay si Mario Mana, maari bang maituro mo siya kung siya ay nandito sa aming oficina?

S Opo. Ayan po siya. (Itinuro si Mario Mana y Trinidad).

3. T Ano ba ang guinawa in Mario Mana ng kayo ay dumating sa Mercury Drugstore nuong alas 7:00 ng gabi, Septiembre 3, 1963 upang mangloob?

S Siya po ay kasama naming pumasok sa loob ng botika at tumutok sa mga tao roon.

4. T Ano ba ang hawak na baril ni Mario Mana na ipinanutok niya?

S Siya po ay may hawak na carbine na automatico na putol ang manggo.

5. T Sino ba ang kasama mo na nagiwan ng dollar taxi duon sa Calumpit, Bulacan matapos maganap ang panghohold-up duon sa Mercury Drugstore?

S Si Mario Mana po ang aking kasama.

6. T Mayroon ka pa bang gustong idagdag sa iyong salaysay?

S Wala na po.

7. T Ikaw ba ay nakahandang lumagda dito sa iyong salaysay bilang patotoo sa mga sinabi mo?

S Opo.

WAKAS NG SALAYSAY

(SGD) ELADIO GALVEZ

MGA SAKSI

(SGD) (not legible)

(SGD) (not legible)"

As to Rodolfo C. Palo, he was arrested by the MPD in Sto. Cristo, Baliwag, Bulacan, on October 16, 1963 and gave a statement (Exh. "C") on October 17, 1963, as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"SALAYSAY NI RODOLFO PALO Y CRUZ, dito sa oficina ng ROBBERY DIVISION, DB-MPD, ngayong magiika ala una (1:00) ng tanghali, Octubre 17, 1963, sa mga tanong ni Sgt. F. Jueco at sa harap in Dets. P. Pante at J. Corrales.

1. Tanong: Ikaw ba ay nakalaang magbigay ng isang malayang salaysay at tumugon ng buong katotohanan sa Iahat ng aming itatanong sa iyo?

Sagot: Opo.

02. T: Kung ganuon ay mangyari lamang na ibigay mo sa amin ang iyong tunay na ngalan at ibat-ibang mga bagay na ukol sa iyong pagkatao?

S: RODOLFO PALO Y CRUZ po ang ngalan ko, Roding po ang palayao sa akin, 24 taong gulang, may asawa po ako, tubo ako sa San Miguel, Bulacan, dati akong driver sa PBC pero ngayon po eh stand-by ako at nakatira ako sa J.M. Basa, Sto. Cristo, Baliwag, Bulacan.

03. T: Kasal ka ba sa asawa mo?

S: Opo, kasal po ako sa Simbahan sa Baliwag, Bulacan.

04. T: Ilan na ang mga anak mo, buhay at patay?

S: Apat pong lahat pero namatay po ang isa.

05. T: Ano ang ngalan ng asawa mo?

S: Felicisima Dalisay po.

06. T: Ano ang ngalan ng tatay at nanay mo?

S: Alejandro Palo po ang tatay ko pero patay na po, ang nanay ko po Marcelina dela Cruz, at buhay pa po.

07. T: Hanggang anong grado ang inabot mo sa paaralan?

S: Anim lang po at hindi ko pa po natapos ang anim.

08. T: Sino ang pinakabatang anak mo?

S: Ang bunso ko po ay Napoleon Palo, at isang taon na po siya nuong Septiembre.

09. T: Sino naman ang pinakamatanda sa mga anak mo?

S: Sa buhay po ay si Rodolfo Palo Junior po.

10. T: Sino pa ang isang anak mo na buhay?

S: Si Merlita Palo po, tatlong taon na po siya.

11. T: Saan paaralan ka nag-aral?

S: Sa Baliwag, Bulacan po.

12. T: Ikaw ba ay marunong bumasa, sumulat at umintindi ng wikang tagalog?

S: Opo, at maski na po inglis ay nakakaintindi rin po ako.

13. T: Bakit ka naririto sa aming oficina?

S Dahilan nga po sa nakawan sa Mercury Drug Store. Sinabihan ku po ang bayao kong si Baltazar Dalisay napuntahan si Ex-Sgt. Simplicio Tiongson ng Caloocan police na kaibigan kong matalik na taga Sto. Cristo, Bulacan, upang ako’y isuko sa may kapangyarihan.

14. T: Kailan ka naman naisuko at kanino?

S: Paguitan po ng alas seis at alas siete ng gabi noong Martes, Octubre a quince, ay dumating si Sgt. Simplicio Tiongson na kasama ang aking bayao na si Baltazar Dalisay at dinala na ako duon sa bahay ng isang police ng Precinto seis ng Maynila. Sila na po ang siyang nagdala sa akin sa presinto seis at duon ako kinuha ng mga secreta na taga rito.

15. T: Ano ang dahilan at ikaw sumuko sa alagad ng batas?

S: Dahilan nga po sa ako kasama sa panghuhuldup sa Mercury Drug Store noong a tres ng Septiembre, lagpas ng alas siete ng gabi, nitong taong ito, sa daang Bambang, Maynila.

16. T: Sino-sino ang kasama mo sa panghuhuldup sa Mercury Drug Store sa daang Bambang, Maynila?

S: Sila Eladio Galvez ng Sta. Barbara, Baliwag, Bulacan, calle Aldama; si Mario Mana ng Bulwalto, San Miguel, Bulacan, si Francisco Sebastian ng Bulwalto, San Miguel, Bulacan, si Abelardo Pineda ng Concepcion, Tarlac, at ako po.

17. T: Sino ang utak o nagbalak ng isagawa ninyo ang nasabing panunutok sa Mercury Drug Store noong mga oras, araw na iyong binanggit?

S: Si Eladio Galvez, Mario Mana at ako ang nagplano niyan, pinagusapan namin kong alin ang dapat naming huldupin.

18. T: Saan ninyo pinagusupan ang nasabing plano na inyong lolooban ang Mercury Drug Store?

S: Doon po sa isang restaurant sa Valenzuela, Bulacan.

19. T: Kailan kayo nagusap sa nasabing restaurant upang looban ang Mercury Drug Store?

S: Napagusapan po namin iyan ng alas sinco ng hapon, Septiembre a 3, 1963, araw ng Martes.

20. T: Ang ibig mong sabihin hindi ninyo pinagusapan ang nasabing panghoholdup bago sumapit ang araw ng Martes, Septiembre a 3, 1963?

S: Bago dumating ang araw ng Martes, Sept. 3, 1963, ng araw ng Lingo, Sept. 1, 1963, ay talaga ang balak namin ay lolooban namin ang Manila Jockey Club, ngunit hindi natuloy dahil sa kasungitan ng panahon at ang aking participacion ay ako ang magmamaneho lamang ng jeep na gagamitin sa pagtakas.

21. T: Anong oras naman kayong magkakasama tumungo pagpuntang Maynila upang isagawa ninyo ang inyong planong looban ang Manila Jockey Club?

S: Ng dumating po kami dito sa Maynila ay bandang alas seis ng hapon, inabot po kami ng alas ocho ng gabi sa pagiintay ng taxi at hindi na nga natuloy ang aming balak sa Manila Jockey Club. Umuwi na po kami sa Baliwag nuong gabing iyon.

22. T: Mabalik tayo ngayong duon sa sinabi mong plano ninyong looban ang Mercury Drug Store, anong oras kayo nagsilakad na patungong Maynila, ng araw ng Martes, a 3 ng Septiembre?

S: Pagkatapos po ng aming paguusap namin nila MARIO MANA, si ELADIO GALVEZ at ako po sa loob ng nasabing restaurant sa Valenzuela, Bulacan, ay inutusan ako ni ELADIO GALVEZ na puntahan kuna si ABELARDO PINEDA abas DAGOL sa Malabon, Rizal. Pagdating kupo roon at nakita kuna si ABELARDO ay dumating din si FRANCISCO SEBASTIAN na bilin din ni ELADIO GALVEZ at kami’y nagtungo sa Gov. Forbes at Laong Laan at duon namin inintay sina MARIO MANA at ELADIO GALVEZ.

23. T: Anong horas naman kayo nagkitakita duon sa kanto ng Gov. Forbes at Laong-Laan?

S: Nuon makaibis kaming tatlo sa Philippine Rabbit na aming sinakian mula sa Garage ng Phil. Rabbit at kami’y naghihintay sa kanto ng Forbes at Laon-Laan sa tapat ng bahay 1590 Laong Laan, ay hindi pa kami natatagalan ay dumating na sila MARIO MANA at Eladio Galvez na naglalakad.

24. T: Sa inyong paglakad, sino-sino at ano-ano ang mga sandatang inyong mga dala?

S: Nuon pong kami’y umalis sa garage ng Philippine Rabbit, kaming tatlo ni FRANCISCO SEBASTIAN at ABELARDO PINEDA ay napansin kong maydala na si ABELARDO PINEDA ng isang mahabang balutan na Manila paper na may lamang carbine at iyong isang balutan na may laman carbine ay ipinabitbit sa akin. Si FRANCISCO SEBASTIAN naman po ay siyang may dalang balutan ng bala ng carbine at dalawang granada na nasa bulsa niya. Ng dumating po naman sina MARIO MANA at ELADIO GALVEZ duon sa kanto ng Gov. Forbes at Laong-Laan ay napuna kong may nakasukbit sa kauyang baywang (ELADIO GALVEZ) ang kanyang sariling baril na Super 38 automatico, at si MARIO MANA ay isang pistolang de .45.

25. T: Ng kayong lima na magkakasama ay magkita na sa kanto ng Laong-Laan at Gov. Forbes, ano na ang nangyari?

S: Pagkalipas po ng mga vente minutos mula noong magkitakita kami sa kanto ng Forbes at Laon-Laan, ay inabot sa akin ni Eladio Galvez ang kanyang Super 38 at si Eladio Galvez at Mario Mana ay magkahiwalay na tumawag ng taxi. Hindi pa po natatagalan nakatawag si Eladio Galvez ng Dollar Taxi, at lumulan kaming lahat sa loob ng taxi na si Mario Mana ay naupo sa tabi ng choper sa unahan, at ako naman katabi niya sa unahan sa gawing pintuan, at sa likuran naman po ay nakaupo si Eladio Galvez sa may gawing likuran ng choper, si Francisco Sebastian ay sa gitna, sa gawing kanan niya ay si Abelardo Pineda.

26. T: Pagkasakay ninyo sa Dollar Taxi saan kayo nagtungo?

S: Samantalang umaandar ang aming sinakyan na Dollar Taxi, si Eladio Galvez na nakaupo sa likuran ng choper ay minamandohan ang choper kung saan kami dapat dumaan patungong Mercury Drug Store. At kamiy dumaan sa Laon-Laang patungong south at kumanan kami sa daang Alvarez, kumaliwa kami sa Oroquieta, at kumanan kami sa Bambang, paglampas namin sa tapat ng Mercury Drug Store ay kumaliwa kami sa Magdalena, at pagdating sa kanto ng Mayhaligue at Magdalena ay sinabihan ang choper na huminto muna ang taxi, at di pa ho natatagalan ay inutusan niya ang choper na palakarin uli ang taxi patungong south sa Magdalena, at pagdating sa kanto ng Estado at Magdalena inutusan ni Eladio na ibalik ang taxi na patungong Bambang mula sa daang Magdalena, ng malapit na kaming dumating sa tapat ng Mercury Drug Store sinabi ni Eladio Galvez, "PARE IHINTO MO RIYAN SA TAPAT NG MERCURY DRUG STORE AT HOHOLDUPIN NAMIN IYAN" ang sabi naman ng choper, "HINDI BALE HUAG LANG NINYONG PAPALAKOLIN", sa pagaakala niya na nagbibiro lamang kami. Ng makalampas kami ng kaunti sa Mercury Drug Store at ng matapat kami sa No. 1584 Bambang na paharap ang taxi sa Rizal Avenue ay bigla kaming nagbabaan lahat.

27. T: Ano pa ang nagyari ng bumaba kayo sa taxi?

S: Bago kami bumaba lahat si Mario ay binalaan ang choper na huwag syang kikilos ng masama at hindi siya maano sabay paghalbot ng susi ng taxi sa ignition key, at ng kami nakababa na ayon sa utos ni Eladio, kaming dalawa ni Francisco Sebastian ay kumabila ng calle upang tutukan ang watchman doon sa bodega ng Mercury Drug Store, ang ginawa ko nga po ay tinutukan ko ang watchman at nakita ko pumasok na nagpapa-putok sina Mario Mana, Abelardo Pineda at Eladio Galvez at si Francisco Sebastian kasunod nila doon sa loob ng Mercury Drug Store. At nakita ko rin ho na bago ako makatawid sa kabilang tabi ng kalsada na tinutukan ni Eladio Galvez ng isaug putol ang mango na carbine iyong watchman sa may pintuan ng Mercury Drug at kinuha ang baril .45 calibre automatico noong guardia, at ako naman tinutukan ko ang watchman sa may harapan ng bodega ng Mercury Drug Store. Ayaw pong magtaas ng kamay ang guardia, kaya’t tumakbo ako sabay paputok ng aking baril na paharap sa bodega ng Mercury Drug (Whole-sale) at pagdating ko run sa harapan ng Mercury Drug Store (Retail store) ay nakita kong may sugat ako sa kaliwang ibabang braso. Si Francisco Sebastian ay nakita kong pinaputokan ng kanyang paratrooper carbine iyong watchman duon sa kabilang bodega (Whole-Sale store) at nakita kong gumagapang iyong watchman at sabay naman ay lumalabas sina ELADIO GALVEZ, si ABELARD0 PINEDA na dala ang isang supot na kuarta, na lona na kulay abuhin at kasabay niya si MARIO MANA, at ng makalabas na silang lahat ang ginawa ni MARIO MANA ay muling pinaputukan ang loob ng Mercury Drug Store na kanilang nilabasan. Nagsakayan kaming lahat sa taxing aming binabaan, ngunit wala na ang chuper. Ang nagmanejo po ng taxi ay si ELADIO GALVEZ.

28. T: Sinabi mong ang hawak mong sandata ay isang Super 38, si FRANCISCO SEBASTIAN ay isang paratrooper carbine at si ELADIO GALVEZ ay isang putol ang mango na carbine din, ano naman ang hawak na sandata nitong dalawang mga kasama mo na si ABELARDO PINEDA at MARIO MANA?

S: Si MARIO MANA po ay siyang maydalang .45 calibre automatiko at si ABELARDO PINEDA ay dalawang (2) granada.

29. T: Mula nuong ikaw ay tumakbo na patungo sa Mercury Drug Store na pinasukan ng iyong mga kasama, hindi ba ang tutuo ay ikaw ay pumasok din doon?

S: Pumasok po ako duon sa may malapit sa estante ng mga gamot at nagpaputok ako ruon ng dalawang veces.

30. T: Nuong makasakay na kayo sa taxi ano ang inyong mga lugar na inuupuan sa loob ng taxi at kayo’y papaalis na?

S: Ako po ang unang pumasok sa likod ng taxi at ako’y napaguitna sa kaliwa ko po ay si ABELARDO PINEDA, sa kanan kupo ay si FRANCISCO SEBASTIAN, ang nagmanejo po ay Sl ELADIO GALVEZ at sa kanan niya sa unahang upuan ay Si MARIO MANA po.

31. T: Sa pagtakas ninyo sa nasabing lugar na pinangyarihan, lulan ng Dollar Taxi Cab, saan kayo nagtungo?

S: Mula sa Bambang, kumaliwa kami sa Avenida Rizal, kumaliwa kami sa isang kanto sa isang calleng batuhan patungong Abad Santos at pagdating sa kanto ng Jose Abad Santos ay kumanan kami patungong Norte. Dumaan kami ng Grace Park hanggang makasapit kami sa may riles ng Polilan ay inihinto po ni ELADIO GALVEZ ang taxi at pinababa po kami nila MARIO MANA, FRANCISCO SEBASTIAN at ako po. SI ELADIO GALVEZ at si ABELARDO PINEDA po ay nagpatuloy, pero bago sila umalis ay ipinadala sa amin ang dalawang carbine at kinuha sa akin ni ELADIO GALVEZ ang kanyang Super 38 at mahirap daw po ang walang dala. Si ABELARDO PINEDA naman po ay kinuha ang .45 kay MARIO MANA at iyong supot po ng kuarta ay sinunong ni MARIO MANA. Naglakad po kaming tatlo ng humigit kumulang sa anim na kilometro sa riles ng tren patungong kubo na paghinintayan namin kina ELADIO GALVEZ at ABELARDO PINEDA.

32. T: Kaninong kubo at saang lugar iyong pinuntahan ninyong tatlo na sangayon sa iyo ay duon kayo magkikitakita?

S: Iyon pong ama mi ELADIO GALVEZ na si matandang FELIX GALVEZ ay may kubokubohan sa isang malawak na lupa na sinasakahan sa Matangtubig, Pulilan, Bulacan.

33. T: Bukod sa inyong tatlo na unang nagtungo duon, nagkita ba kayo nila ELADIO GALVEZ at ABELARDO PINEDA doon?

S: Opo, maliwanag po ang umaga ng dumating sila ruon.

34. T: Ano ang nangyari ng magkitakita kayo?

S: Samantalang hindi pa dumating sila Alberto Pineda at Eladio Galvez ay minabuti naming dalawa ni Mario Mana na bilangin ang kuartang nasasupot at nabilang namin na mayroong apat na libo lamang ang aming bilang at iyong mga baria ay mayroon isang daan at limang po humiguit kumulang ay iyon po ang aming pinagpartihan lima, at ang inabot sa bawat isa sa amin doon po sa apat na libo at tig-wawalong daan, at si Eladio Galvez ay nakaparti ng bukod sa walong daang piso ay paubayang ibinigay naming apat iyong bariang isang daan at limang pong piso, at ako ang kaunaunahang umuwi sa aming bahay sa Sto. Cristo, Baliwag, Bulacan ng lakad lamang.

35. T: Ano-ano nga pala ang inyong mga kasuutan ng kayo nangloob sa Mercury Drug Store?

S: Ang suot ko itong pantalon kong suot ngayon (suspect showing his pants, West Point khaki colored gray) at ito pong sapatos na suot ko ngayon na puti, EDWARDSON, ang pangitaas ko ay iyong printed kong polo shirt na kulay lumot bulaklakan; si Francisco Sebastian na ka polo at ang pantalon ay wash and wear na kulay kafe, at siya naka de goma ring puti: si Eladio Galvez naka T-shirt na de kulay at naka jacket na kulay abuhin, ang pantalon wash anod wear na magulang ang kulay at sapatos ay balat kulay talong, Cordovan; si Mario Mana naka printed na polo shirt na kulay kafe, ang pantalon ay wash and wear na kulay kafe at ang kanyang sapatos ay de gomang puti; at si Abelardo Pineda naka polo shirt linso, hindi ko matandaan ang kulay, ang pantalon wash and wear na kulay magulang, ang sapatos balat na kulay itim.

36. T: Samantalang kayo nakasakay sa taxi sa inyong pagtakas mula sa Mercury Drug Store, ano ang napuna mo at nadinig sa pagusap-usapan ninyo sa loob ng taxi?

S: Ang una kong napuna ay nagsalita si Francisco Sebastian na may tama daw siya sa kanang braso sa gawing malapit sa siko at malakas daw ang dugo, at saka may tama daw din siya (Francisco Sebastian) sa may gawing puet at tiningnan ko si Francisco Sebastian at nakita kong panay dugo siya, ako’y tumugon din na ako rin may tama sa kaliwang braso na malapit sa siko. Ang tanong ni Eladio Galvez samantalang minamaneho ang Dollar taxi, "ANO BA MALULUBHA BA ANG MGA TAMA NINYO?" Ang sagot ko naman ang akin ay hindi masiadong malubha, ganoon din si Francisco Sebastian sabi ni Eladio, "PAPAANO IYAN HINDI NATIN MAIWANAN ANG TAXI UPANG SUMAKAY SA BUS?" Ng wala sa aming kumikibo ay denerecho na niya ang Dollar Taxi hanggang sa riles ng tren sa Pulilan, Bulacan. Ang sabi ni Eladio, "IKAW RUDING ALAM MO NAMAN ANG KUBOKUBOHAN NG AKING AMA DOON NA TAYO MAGKITAKITA UPANG HATIIN ANG SALAPI, at kaming dalawa ni Abelardo Pineda ay itatago namin ang Dollar taxi sa Angeles, Pampanga, ngunit sapagkaalam ko ng mabasa ko sa diaryo doon nila dinala ang taxi sa Calumpit, Bulacan.

37. T: Noong umagang maghiwahiwalay na kayo, ika a 4 ng Septiembre, ano ang ginawa mo?

S: Ng makasapit na po ako sa aming bahay ng umagang iyon, humigit kumulang mga alas 8:00 ng umaga, ay inabot ko ang aking asawa na si Felicisima Dalisay na umiigib ng tubig at itinanong ako kong saan ako nangaling, napuna ng asawa na may tali ng panyo ang aking kaliwang braso, at tinanong nga ako, "BAKIT SUMAMA KA NA NAMAN BA KAY ELADIO? ang tugon ko "OO", at ipinakita ko sa kanya ang sugat ko sa aking braso at sabay kong inabot ang walong daang pisong aking nakaparte. At ako po namahinga na.

38. T: Kailan kaunaunahan mong nalaman na bukod doon sa Security guard na tinamaan ng baril ay mayroon pang isang babae na tinamaan din at siyang ikinamatay sa nasabing pangyayari?

S: Noon nga pong nasa kubo kami ni matandang Felix Galvez na ama ni Eladio Galvez ay nabasa ko sa pahayagang Taliba na daladala ni Eladio Galvez na may namatay na isang babaeng kahera na ang pangalan Mary Peña.

39. T: Sino sa inyong lima na nalalaman mong nakatama sa kaherang Mary Peña na sinasabi mo?

S: Noon una po at hanggang sa ako’y sumuko ay wala akong nalalaman kong sino ang nakamatay kay Mary Peña.

40. T: Pinaaalam ko sa iyo na ayon sa masusing pagsisiyasat na ginawa ng mga medico sa bangkay ng nasirang Mary Peña ay ang tumama sa puso at naguing sanhi ng kamatayan mi Mary Peña ay isang baril na mula sa Super 38 at wala ng iba pa, ano ang masasabi mo?

S: Kung ganoon po ay ako ang nakapatay ng babae, sapagkat ako po ang may bawak ng baril na pistola kalibre 38, kong totoo man po na ang balang iyon ang nakuha sa katawan at siyang nakamatay ay ngayon ko lamang nalaman na ako ang nakamatay, ngunit ng paputokin ko ang aking baril ay pataas na paharap sa pintuan na bakal ng bodega ng Mercury Drug Store.

41. T: Saan ngayon naroroon ang baril mong iyan na Super 38?

S: Naki Eladio Galvez, sapagkat iyon pagaari ni Eladio Galvez.

42. T: Sino ang nalalaman mong nagmamayari ng dalawang carbine na ginamit sa nasabing pangloloob?

S: Iyon pong dalawang carbine na ginamit sa Mercury na ang isa ay bakal ang hawakan na de tiklop at iyong isa ay converted ang hawakan na nara ang kahoy na parang hawakan ng pistol ay ang isa pangaari ni Eladio Galvez at ang isa pagaari ni German Katiis.

43. T: Alin sa dalawa ang pagaari ni Eladio Galvez?

S: Iyon pong folding na bakal ang hawakan.

44. T: Iyon naman na dalawang granada na daladala ni Abelardo Pineda alias Dagol, sino naman ang mayari noon?

S: Si Eladio Galvez din po.

45. T: Iyong kalibre 45 na automatico na ginamit ni Mario Mana sa pangloloob ninyo sa Mercury Drug Store, sino naman ang mayari?

S: Si Eladio Galvez din ho.

46. T: Iyon namang kalibre 45 automatico na kinumpiska sa Security Guard ng Mercury Drug Store, sino naman ang nag-mamayari ngayon?

S: Si Francisco Sebastian.

47. T: Samakatuid ikaw at si Mario Mana ay walang sandatang pumuputok na iniingatan?

S: Opo. 48.

T: Iyong Super 38 na ginamit mo sa pangloloob sa Mercury Drug Store, saan nandodoon ngayon?

S: Iyon po ay pagaari ni Eladio Galvez at isinauli ko na rin sa kanya noon kamiy makatapos nangloob at maghiwawalay, at samantala po kami nasa kubo ng kanyang ama na si Felix Galvez ay nakita kong inalis niya ang slide at barrel na nickelado at pinalitan niya ng isang ring nickeladong slide at barrel na kalibre 45, at nitong mga huling araw ay pinahiram niya kay Abelardo Pineda ng puntahan namin siya sa garage ng Philippine Rabbit, at ayon nga po kay Abelardo Pineda ay nakumpiska daw sa kanya sa Cruz’ Sisters Bar na malapit sa Cozy Nook, Marilao, Bulacan noong konsehal na mayari ng Cruz’ Sisters Bar.

49. T: Iyon namang kualtang ibinigay mo sa iyong asawa na si Felicisima Dalisay, ano ano ang binili mo?

S: Iyong pong dalawang daan primero ay nagastos ko sa pakikisama sa mga kaibigan, iyon pong iba sa pagkain at damit naming maganak, at iyong iba naibile ko ng tabla upang ipagawa ang aming kusina ng bahay.

50 T: Kung sakasakaling mahuli lahat ang iyong mga kasama sa inyong pangloloob sa Mercury Drug Store, maituturo mo ba silang lahat?

S: Opo, silang apat na mga kasama ko sa Mercury Drug Store, sila ay dati kong mga kasama.

51. T: Kung totoo ang sinasabi mong Dollar taxi ang iyong sinakyan sa kanto ng Laon-Laan at Gov. Forbes, noong araw ng Martes, Sept. 3, 1963, ay maari bang makilala mo at maituro, kung natatandaan mo ang nagmamaneho ng nasabing taxi?

S: Opo.

52. T: Papaano mong maituturo ang nagmamaneho samantalang ikaw nakaupo sa unahan ng taxi na katabi ni Mario Mana sa kabila na madilim noon?

S: Tinitingnan ko siya samantalang tumatakbo ang taxi nasisilayan ko ang kanyang mukha sa liwanag ng taxi-metro, at ng tumiguil kami sa tapat ng Mercury Drug Store, lalong napagmasdan ko ang kanyang mukha sapagkat maliwanag doon.

53. T: Kung talagang makikilala mo ang nasabing choper ng Dollar taxi na inyong sinakyan, tignan mo nga dito sa aming oficina kung naririto siya?

S: Siya po, declarant pointing with his right forefinger one Elino Ramos y Sumaway).

54. T: Ito bang Eladio Galvez na binangit mo dito sa iyong salaysay na siyang utak at nagplano ng pangloloob sa Mercury Drug Store, ay ayon sa iyo ay sadya mong kakilala, maari bang ituro mo siya sa amin ngayon?

S. Opo, iyan po si Eladio Galvez na sinasabi ko na anak ni matandang Felix Galvez at pinakamatanda sa magkakapatid na sinundan ng kanyang kapatid na si Luis, na may anak sila ng asawa niyang si Maring na tatlong lalake, at naninirahan sa calle Aldama, Sta. Barbara, Baliwag, Bulacan.

55. T: Bukod dito sa iyong nasabi na sa iyong salaysay mayroon ka bang ibig idagdag o ibawas bilang isang katutuhanan?

S: Wala na po.

56. T: Bukod dito sa kinasangkutan mong pangloloob sa Mercury Drug Store ikaw ba’y nahatulan na o di kaya nakagawa na ng ibang salang kriminal dito sa Pilipinas?

S. Ako po’y hindi pa nahatulan sa anumang pagkakasala, pero bukod po dito sa kinasangkutan kong pangloloob sa Mercury Drug Store ako po’y nakasama din sa pangloloob sa Acme Super Market sa daang Padre Faura, Ermita, Manila, noong humiguit kumulang alas 6:00 ng hapon, na ang pecha hindi ko matandaan pero ito rin pong taong ito, at ang nagplano po niyan ay si Eladio Galvez din, nakasama namin si Abelardo Pineda alias Dagol.

57. T: Sa pagamin mo ng mahinahon sa kagustuhan mong maisiwalat ang katutuhanan, nalalaan ka bang magbigay ng karagdagan salaysay ukol sa nasabi mong pangloloob sa Acme Super Market?

S: Nakalaan po, kahit kailan.

58. T: Nais mo bang lagdaan ang iyong salaysay nanaglalaman ng pitong pahina, pagkatapos mong basahin at maintindihan sa wikang Tagalog, bilang pagpatotoo ng lahat ng iyong nasabi?

S: Opo.

WAKAS NG SALAYSAY

(SGD) RODOLFO PALO Y CRUZ

MGA SAKSI:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

(SGD) (Not legible)

(SGD((JOSE CORRALES)

(SGD) P.A. PANTE

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 12st day of October, 1973, ni the City of Manila, Philippines.

(SGD) AVELINO CONCEPCION

(Asst. City Fiscal)

10/21/63

9:05 A.M."cralaw virtua1aw library

In an information dated October 22, 1963, Rodolfo Palo and Abelardo Pineda were accused of robbery with homicide and frustrated homicide in Criminal Case No. 73177 of the Court of First Instance of Manila. The information was amended on October 24, 1963, to include Mario Mana.

Both Abelardo Pineda and Mario Mana denied participation in the robbery and they refused to give any statement to the police.

The common allegations in the information filed in the two criminal cases as quoted in the decision of the lower court read:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"That on or about September 3, 1963, in the City of Manila, Philippines, the said (Galvez, Palo, Pineda and Mana), conspiring and confederating . . . with another whose true name and whereabout are still unknown and helping one another, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously, by means of violence against and intimidation of persons, and with intent of gain and without the knowledge and consent of the owner thereof, take, steal and carry away cash money in different denominations, amounting to more or less P6,000.00 and one (1) .45 cal. auto. pistol SN-585392, value still unknown, belonging to the Mercury Drug Store (rep. by Mariano Cue), to the damage and prejudice of said owner in the aforesaid amount of P6,000.00, Philippine currency; that by reason of and on the occasion of the commission of the said offense, the said accused, conspiring and confederating together . . . and with another whose true name and whereabout are still unknown and helping one another, with intent to kill did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously attack, assault and use personal violence upon the persons of Mary Peña and Alfonso Reforsado y Avila by then and there firing shots at them, hitting Mary Peña on the chest, thereby inflicting upon her gunshot wounds which were the cause of her immediate death thereafter; and hitting also Alfonso Reforse y Avila on the back, thereby inflicting upon him gunshot wounds, thus performing all the acts of execution which would have produced the crime of homicide as a consequence, but nevertheless did not produce it by reason or causes independent of the will of the said accused, that is by the able and timely medical assistance rendered at the North General Hospital to said Alfonso Reforse y Avila which prevented his death.

‘That in the commission of the said crime the following aggravating circumstances are present: (1) that the crime was committed at night time purposely sought to better accomplish his end; (2) that the crime was committed with the aid of armed men or persons who insure or afford impunity; (3) that the act was committed with evident premeditation; (4) that disguise was employed; (5) advantage was taken of superior strength, or means was employed to weaken the defense; (6) that the act was committed with treachery; (7) that the crime was committed with the aid of and by means of motor vehicle, and (8) in band.

Contrary to law.’

(Amended Information, Criminal Case No. 73177; words in parenthesis supplied.)"

After a protracted trial, in a decision dated October 25, 1966, the lower court rendered the following judgment:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"FOR ALL THE FOREGOING CONSIDERATIONS, the court finds defendants Eladio Galvez y Marbas and Rodolfo Palo y Cruz guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the complex crime of robbery with homicide and serious physical injuries, with the aggravating circumstances of (1) treachery, (2) disguise, (3) nocturnity, which facilitated the commission of the offense, (4) in band, (5) abuse of superior strength, and (6) use of motor vehicle, and therefore sentences them, of necessity as ordained by the law (Art. 294, Case 1 in relation to Art. 295) to suffer the extreme penalty of death by electrocution, with the accessory penalties appurtenant thereto, to indemnify, jointly and severally, the heirs of Maria Peña in the amount of P10,000.00. Galvez is further ordered to pay the costs in Criminal Case No. 73067 and Palo to pay one third (1/3) of the costs in Crim. Case No. 73177.

"The Court further orders that pursuant to the provisions of Rule 122, Section 9 of the New Rules of Court, the records of this case be forwarded to the Clerk of the Supreme Court within twenty (20) days, but not earlier than fifteen (15) days from the promulgation hereof in the form prescribed by Section 11 of Rule 41, for its review and judgment as law and justice dictate.

"Anent defendants Mario Mana y Trinidad and Abelardo Pineda y Rodriguez the Court finds that their guilt has not been established to a moral and legal certainty. In other words, the evidence is not sufficient to set the mind of the Court at rest as to their culpability of the crime charged.

"Much as the vicious crime at bar is to be abhorred and much as it is to be desired that all the authors thereof be meted the corresponding punishment they so richly deserved, penalizing Mana and Pineda for it when they may be really innocent as they claim, will not serve the ends of justice but rather subverts it, which is worse than the crime itself.

"WHEREFORE, the Court acquits Mario Mana y Trinidad and Abelardo Pineda y Rodriguez of the crime charged, with two-third (2/3) costs de oficio in Criminal Case No. 73177.

"The court also orders the immediate release of defendants Mario Mana y Trinidad and Abelardo Pineda y Rodriguez from custody unless held on other charges.

SO ORDERED.."

Eladio Galvez and Rodolfo Palo who have different counsels filed separate briefs.

Before we discuss the assignments of errors, we wish to call attention to a circumstance in this case, important to our mind, which was not mentioned by the trial judge, the appellants and the appellee.

According to Dr. Abelardo V. Lucero, medical examiner, MPD, Maria Peña died due to "shock and profuse hemorrhage (about 2,000 cc. recovered blood) due to gunshot wound lacerating the heart and right lung." The evidence thereof is a "Recovered spent bullet reduced to almost half of its size longitudinally and sent to the C.I. Laboratory for ballistic examination and identification." (Exh. "G" postmortem findings.) The spent bullet (Exh. "G-1") was found to be "a .32 cal. Iead bullet" which "had been fired from the barrel of a firearm bearing identical rifling specifications as that of a .32 cal. revolver of the Colt’s Patent." (Exh. "PPP." ) We thus have the situation of Maria Peña who died from a gunshot wound fired from a .32 caliber Colt revolver and yet there is no evidence in the record that any of the accused had a .32 caliber Colt revolver.

The appellants, who filed separate briefs as aforesaid, have common assignments of errors, namely:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

1. The lower court erred in holding that the extrajudical statements of Eladio Galvez and Rodolfo Palo were freely and voluntarily given;

2. The lower court erred in holding that the involuntary statements were replete with details which only the appellants could have supplied;

3. The lower court erred in holding that the reenactment of the crime was voluntary;

4. The lower court erred in rejecting their alibis;

5. The lower court erred in not holding that Romeo Canary was the real participant in the robbery hold-up.

Assignment of errors 1, 2 and 3 are related so they shall be discussed jointly. And it has to be noted that they revolve on the statements of the appellants which principally implicate them in the robbery hold-up so that a successful attack on them cannot but be salutary for said appellants.

Both appellants claim that they were coerced in giving their statements while they were held incommunicado without benefit of counsel. Naturally the prosecution said otherwise and this version was believed by the lower court on the ground that the witnesses for the prosecution testified in their official capacities and therefore were disinterested witnesses whereas the appellants were naturally biased and interested. The lower court’s reasoning is of course not invulnerable for Philippine Jurisprudence is replete with cases where extrajudicial confession were rejected because the accused claimed coercion even as the prosecution asserted otherwise. What has been said can apply mutatis mutandis to the reenactment of the crime in this case.

We go to the core of the matter by examining the extrajudicial statements of the appellants. We start with the proposition that there is a traditional respect for the finding of facts of the judge who presided at the trial but such respect cannot be invoked when as is quite apparent there are circumstances of weight and influence which have either been overlooked or misinterpreted. (People v. Padirayon, G.R. No. L-39207, Sept. 25, 1975, 67 SCRA 135.)

An intensive scrutiny of the records discloses important circumstances which seriously cast doubt on the reliability of the extrajudicial confessions. The principle in point is that every circumstance consistent with innocence should be taken into account; even the strongest suspicion should not be permitted to sway judgment. (People v. Montero, G.R. No. L-33155, April 22, 1977, 76 SCRA 437.)

Exhibit "B", the first statement attributed to Eladio Galvez, and Exhibit "C", the statement attributed to Rodolfo Palo are not identical in their details. These are material details of which the alleged confessants could not have been mistaken if it was true that they were two of the culprits. Thus, Eladio appears to have implicated Mario Mana, Marcelo Manahan, Francisco Sebastian and German Katiis without mention of the names of Rodolfo Palo and Abelardo Pineda. On the other hand Rodolfo implicated Eladio Galvez, Mario Mana, Francisco Sebastian and Abelardo Pineda, without mention of the names of Marcelo Manahan and German Katiis. The other points of discrepancies are on the arms used, the place where the robbers met prior to the robbery, as to who remained outside and as to who went inside the drugstore during the robbery, and as to the place where the robbers divided the loot after the robbery. As to the arms used, it is noted, among other things that Eladio claimed to have used his own .45 cal. pistol and a handgrenade; while Rodolfo claimed that Eladio used a .30 cal. carbine owned by him (Eladio); that Eladio carried a .38 cal. pistol, also owned by Eladio; and gave it to him (Rodolfo) for his use; that after the robbery Eladio replaced the barrel and slide of his .38 cal. pistol with those of a .45 cal. pistol and lent it to Abelardo Pineda.

Eladio Galvez was made to execute a second statement, Exh. "A", wherein it was stated among other things, that the participants in the robbery were Eladio Galvez, Mario Mana, Rodolfo Palo, Francisco Sebastian and German Katiis; that Francisco Sebastian, among others was armed with a .30 cal. paratrooper carbine, the same carbine which was confiscated from Eladio (referring to Exh. "T"); and, that Rodolfo Palo used the .38 cal. pistol in the robbery. Somewhat irregularly, additional questions and answers appear after the jurat on the statement. (See supra.)

According to Sgt. Florentino Jueco who claimed himself to be a lawyer, they (the police investigators) took Eladio’s additional statement purposely to confront Eladio with certain material facts not revealed in his first statement, and to explain the inconsistencies between Eladio’s first statement, (Exh. "B") and Rodolfo’s statement (Exh. "C"). Considering that Exh. "A" was taken after the information in Criminal Case No. 73067 was filed against Eladio Galvez and right after the co-accused Rodolfo Palo had allegedly executed his statement, puzzling matter arise on this point. What, it may be asked, had the police investigators any business in taking the second statement of Eladio after the criminal case had been filed against him? And on what basis could it be said that "certain material details" had been omitted in Eladio’ s first statement?

It is noteworthy that Eladio’s first statement, Exh "B", Rodolfo’s statement, Exh. "C" and Eladio’s second statement, Exh. "A" were all taken by one and the same police officer, Sgt. Florentino Jueco. It is not farfetched to assume that Sgt. Jueco who was himself a lawyer must have been aware that the admissions in Exh. "B" and in Exh. "C" were admissible only against their respective confessants, in the absence of proof of conspiracy between Eladio and Rodolfo. He must have been aware too that because of the contradictions between Exh. "B" and Exh. "C", the statements were hardly corroborative. The police investigators then, resorted to the expediency of making Eladio execute a second statement.

A sign of voluntariness of an extrajudicial confession is when it is replete with details which only the accused was in a position to know. (People v. Paras, G.R. No. L-23111, March 29, 1974, 56 SCRA 248.) Both appellants however contend that except for their personal circumstances, the details of the crime were supplied by the police investigators after the latter had conducted complete investigation of the case. We find the appellants contention deserving of serious consideration.

The participation of the appellants in the execution of the crime, as reconstructed from their respective confessions (Exh "B", for Eladio and Exh. "C", for Rodolfo) does not conform with the evidence. In Exh. "B", it appears that Eladio Galvez and a companion, Francisco Sebastian did not have their faces covered during the robbery. However, the evidence is conclusive that the five robbers had their faces half-covered with a piece of cloth, just below the eyes, such that the drugstore employees who witnessed the robbery did not recognize anyone of the robbers. If Eladio’s purported declaration is true, then the drugstore employees could have recognized, described and identified the accused Eladio Galvez. This would have been a very vital piece of evidence, which for Eladio could one and for all, spell the difference between conviction and acquittal.

Eladio appears to have stated in Exh "B" that he and Francisco Sebastian stayed outside of the drugstore (Retail Department) while their three companions went inside, and that Francisco held up a watchman and took the latter’s .45 cal. pistol. On the same point, Rodolfo Palo appears to have declared in Exh. "C" that he and Francisco Sebastian did not enter the drugstore (Retail Department; that they crossed the street; that before he reached the other side of the street, he saw Eladio Galvez poke a carbine at a watchman at the door of the drugstore (Retail Department), and Eladio get the watchman’s .45 cal. pistol; that he (Rodolfo) poked his gun at a watchman in front of the warehouse; that because this watchman did not raise his arms, he ran back to the drugstore as he fired his gun toward the warehouse.

Those statements, however differ sharply from the established facts. As stated above, two masked men who entered the drugstore, accosted a security guard ang quickly divested him of his pistol. He was Ricarte Saludares, who at the time was standing guard near a door leading to the Veterinary Section, situated inside the drugstore. The security guard who was outside of the drugstore and standing guard in front of the Wholesale Department across the street was Alfonso Reforsado. He was armed with a .22 cal. pistol, which was not taken from him. Not one of the robbers had actually approached and accosted Alfonso. According to him one masked man ran toward his position but turned around before he (the masked man) could reached him, and went back to the pavement of the drugstore.

Rodolfo’s purported narration continued that he was wounded on the left arm as he ran back to the drugstore where the security guard he held up refused to raise his arms; that later, inside the taxicab during their escape, he saw Francisco Sebastian wounded on the right arm and near the buttocks. On this point, Eladio allegedly stated in Exh. "B" that Francisco was wounded, and in Exh. "A" that not only Sebastian but also Rodolfo was wounded. It should be recalled however, that the two security guards were unable to fire their respective handguns. The ballistic examination of Reforsado’s .22 cal. pistol showed that it was not used. Saludares was unable to fire his .46 cal. pistol as it was grabbed by two masked men. All the gunshots were fired by the five robbers. It does not appear that these robbers fired at one another. Besides, if Rodolfo was wounded on his left forearm, this fact could not have escaped the attention of the arresting police officers and of the trial court.

On top of it all, Rodolfo Palo allegedly admitted in Exh. "C", that since he was the one who used a .38 cal. pistol, he must have therefore, shot Miss Mary Peña. But as stated before, the bullet recovered from the body of Maria Peña was a deformed .32 cal. bullet, reduced to almost half its size. It should be stated that even the trial court stated in its decision that there was no evidence that Rodolfo shot Mary Peña.

Through Exh. "A", the prosecution would want us to believe that the .30 cal. carbine (Exh. "T"), belonged to Eladio Galvez. In this connection, Sgt. Florentino Jueco testified that he confronted Eladio with the carbine and that Eladio admitted ownership thereof in Exh. "A."

We note however the testimony of Lt. Jesus Buenaventura regarding the carbine, and the corroborating testimony of Captain Alfonso Camacho. According to Lt. Buenaventura, the .30 cal. carbine, (Exh. "T") was handed to him by Captain Camacho in the evening when Eladio Galvez was arrested. Captain Camacho stated that he recovered the carbine from a certain Gregorio Mamego, after he (Camacho) was informed by Alfonso de la Cruz, owner of the store where Eladio was arrested, that Maniego took the rifle left by Eladio in the store.

Considering that Mamego and Alfonso were not presented in court, Captain Camacho’s testimony is nothing but hearsay. However, when viewed together with the denial by the accused Eladio Galvez of the ownership of the carbine (Exh. "T"), Captain Camacho’s testimony acquires such significance, to show that no connection was ever established between Eladio Galvez and the carbine in exhibit. Sgt. Jueco’s testimony that Eladio admitted ownership of the carbine therefore, stood uncorroborated. The purported statement, Exh. "A" of Eladio cannot give credence to Sgt. Jueco’s testimony. It should be emphasized that Exh. "A" did not contain any such admission by Eladio. What it aimed to say is that the carbine was confiscated from Eladio during his arrest. But even the purported admission by Eladio that the carbine was confiscated from him, is difficult to believe, in view of the testimony of Lt. Jesus Buenaventura, that he obtained the carbine from Captain Camacho.

In Exh. "B", Eladio Galvez was said to have declared that he surrendered a clip (Exh. "T-1") of carbine ammunition (Exh. "T-2") to Lt. Jesus Buenaventura. On this point, Lt. Buenaventura testified that he confiscated the fully loaded clip from Eladio, as he found it in the latter’s backpocket. The credibility of Lt. Buenaventura’s testimony is open to doubt. The doubt is raised by the very same testimony thought to be corroborative. Lt. Augusto del Rosario of Baliuag Police corroborated Lt. Buenaventura’s testimony as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"ATTY. VILLENA:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

Q: What happened when you saw Eladio Galvez in that store?

A: Lt. Buenaventura requested me to call Eladio Galvez and Eladio Galvez came over.

Q: Were you the one who talked to Eladio Galvez?

A: It was Lt. Buenaventura.

Q: Did you hear what transpired in that conversation?

A: I just understood it was about the Mercury hold-up.

Q: After that what took place?

A: I told Lt. Buenaventura that if it is possible, we might first go to the Chief of Police.

Q: Did you hear any conversation between Eladio Galvez and Lt. Buenaventura?

A: Lt. Buenaventura found carbine ammunition in the pocket of Eladio Galvez.

Q: What carbine ammunition?

A: I just heard: Anong bala itong nasa bulsa mo?

Q: Did you see the ammunition themselves?

A: No, sir.

Q: How did it happen that Lt. Buenaventura asked that question?

A: I just heard that." (TSN), Vol. VII, pp. 17-18.)

In Exh. "C", the link between Rodolfo Palo and the .38 cal. pistol (Exh. "U") was sought to be established, in that Rodolfo allegedly admitted having used it in the robbery. However the testimonies adduced about the .38 cal. Colt pistol had nothing to do with Rodolfo Palo. Lt. Jesus Buenaventura testified that he obtained the pistol from Captain Primitivo Tamayo of Meycauyan PC detachment. Captain Tamayo testified that a certain Leoncio de la Cruz surrendered it to his headquarters. The story of Leoncio de la Cruz is as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"FISCAL BARBOSA:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

Q: Now, sometime that period, do you recall if you ever surrendered a .38 cal. super pistol to the PC?

A: Yes, sir.

Q: Now, I am showing to you Exh U, do you know this Exh U?

A: Yes, sir.

Q: What connection has this Exh. U to that .38 super pistol which you surrendered to the PC?

A: This is the same sir. (Witness referring to Exh U).

Q: Now, do you recall it after you have surrendered this to the PC two days after you saw one, a person by the name of Abelardo Pineda?

A: Yes, sir.

Q: And where did you see Abelardo Pineda?

A: He went to my house.

Q: You mean the house you had referred to a while ago at MacArthur Highway, Marilao, Bulacan?

A: Yes, sir.

Q: And did you inquire from him why he went to your house?

A: I asked him.

Q: And what was his answer to you?

A: He said he owns the revolver.

Q: Which pistol was he referring to then?

A: This one. (Witness referring to Exh U).

Q: And what did you do or what did you tell Abelardo Pineda when he ask for that Exh. U from you?

A: I told him that if he was really the owner of that pistol, he should go to the PC Headquarters and get there the pistol.

Q: And after you had told that to Abelardo what did Abelardo do, if he did anything?

A: He went away, sir." (TSN, Vol. IV, pp. 30-31.)

In connection with the conversation of the .38 cal. pistol, the second extrajudicial statement Exh. "A", attributed to Eladio Galvez confirmed Rodolfo’s declaration in Exh. "C." During the trial, Sgt. Florentino Jueco testified that, among those recovered from the accused Eladio Galvez, was a .45 cal. pistol and that said .45 cal. pistol and the .38 cal. pistol on exhibit were one and the same handgun. If the story of the converted pistol was true why did not Lt. Buenaventura who obtained the .38 cal. pistol from PC Captain Primitivo Tamayo state that the pistol he found was in fact a converted .45 cal. pistol? And, so with Captain Tamayo who said that he gave the .38 cal. pistol to Lt. Buenaventura; and Leoncio de la Cruz who found the .38 cal. pistol in the comfort room of his restaurant? Or, why did not Simeon Molina who testified on his report, Exh. "PPP" mention that the .38 cal. pistol had a barrel and slide of a .45 cal. pistol?

It would therefore, appear that the so-called extrajudicial confessions of Eladio Galvez and Rodolfo Palo contain extrinsic weaknesses, as the declarations therein contained relate to the evidence of the prosecution.

This only confirms the appellant’s assertion that most of the answers to the questions propounded to them were not their answers. The statements contained in the confessions were not their voluntary statements but the words of the investigators put in the mouth of the appellants in accordance with their preconceived theory as to the commission of the crime. (People v. Robles, G.R. No. L-30060, July 30, 1979, 92 SCRA 107.)

The question now is whether there is any evidence apart from these statements upon which the appellants’ conviction may be founded.

The records disclose none.

The ballistic report (Exh. "PPP") showing that some of the .38 cal. pistol and .30 cal. carbine slugs and cartridges recovered from the scene of the crime were fired from the .38 cal. Colt pistol (Exh. "U") and .30 cal. carbine (Exh. "T"), cannot be deemed incriminating. Its value would have to depend on the connection that must be established between the pistol and the carbine, and the appellants. As shown above, the prosecution failed to establish the necessary link.

There is no evidence that the eyewitnesses to the crime recognized and identified Eladio Galvez. The allegation that the taxi-cab driver recognized and identified Rodolfo Palo is not believable.

That it was improbable for Elino Ramos to have recognized Rodolfo Palo is shown by the condition of light obtaining when the recognition was allegedly made. According to Elino Ramos except for the taximeter’s glare, there was no light inside nor outside of the taxicab when his passengers got into his cab. Recognition with the aid of the taximeter’s light was unlikely. Common sense would tell us that, with the taximeter as the only source of light, opportunity for view and recognition is remote, unless the one recognized is sufficiently familiar to the person recognizing, which of course is not the case here.

In his testimony, Elino Ramos said, inter alia, that: "When the police introduced me to Palo as one of the holduppers I have not yet identified him as one of the holduppers but I have already given a description of a person with high cheekbones and his cheeks were hollow, and dark complexioned, more or less my height, and like my built with a small difference."cralaw virtua1aw library

Elino’ s claim however, was belied by what he had previously stated in his statement, Exh. "Y", of September 3, 1963, that:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"T: Ano ang hitsura nila, natatandaan mo ba?

S: Iyong katabi ko ay regular ang katawan, parang kulay puti ang damit, kayumanggi ang kulay ng balat, iyong nasa tabi ng pinto sa unahan ay maliit ng kaunti sa katabi ko. Iyon hong mga nasa likod ko ay hindi ko tanda ang mga hitsura, basta malalaki ho silang mga lalaki.

T: Ang mukha nila nakita mo ba?

S: Hindi po pagkat ng magbabaan sila ay nagtakip silang lahat sa mukha ng panyo.

x       x       x"

The foregoing statement was made right after the robbery, when assertions of a witness may well be characterized as spontaneous, when there was yet no time for concoction or when undue influence on the witness was still absent. Thereafter, how could Elino have given a particular description of one of his passengers when as he had categorically declared he did not see their faces, because they were half-covered with handkerchiefs?

That it was impossible for him to have recognized Rodolfo under the circumstance, in turn renders incredible the alleged subsequent identification in the police headquarters. A review of Elino Ramos’ lengthy testimony on this point shows that he was made to point at Rodolfo Palo after the latter was introduced to him by the police sergeants, as one of the robbers.

It is indeed noteworthy that Elino’s admission that he identified Rodolfo after the latter was introduced to him as one of the robbers, is not necessarily inconsistent with the testimony of Rodolfo Palo on this point:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"ATTY. SICAT:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

Q: There is mentioned here on Exh. "C" of a certain Elino Ramos y Samanway, who testified here as the alleged driver of the Dollar taxi used in the robbery, can you tell us when for the first time, you met this person?

A: I first saw him in the headquarters of the MPD.

Q: Was it before or after you were compelled to sign Exh. C?

A: I had signed already Exh. C.

Q: How were you able to meet Elino Ramos in the MPD headquarters at Isaac Peral?

A: He was taken to me by one of the detectives.

Q: What did the detective tell you or Elino Ramos, if any?

A: Sgt. Jueco asked Elino Ramos if he knew me.

Q: What did Elino Ramos answer to Sgt. Jueco?

A: Elino Ramos answered he did not know me.

Q: What did Sgt. Jueco do or say when Elino Ramos answered that he did not know you?

A: Sgt. Jueco told Elino Ramos, are you crazy, this man is one of those men who robbed the Mercury drugstore and he already admitted his participation.

Q: What did Elino Ramos say when told that?

A. Elino Ramos remarked that insamuch as he had already confessed, then he must be one of them . . ."cralaw virtua1aw library

(TSN, Vol. VII, pp. 19-20.)

The identity of the offender, like the crime itself must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. (People v. Beltran, G.R. No. L-31860, Nov. 29, 1974, 61 SCRA 246.) The prosecution failed in this respect.

We now come to the respective alibis presented by the appellants, namely: that Eladio Glavez was in his house in Barrio Rama, Baliuag, Bulacan, in the whole afternoon of September 3, 1963, because he attended to the delivery of his wife, and did not leave his wife until the next morning; and that Rodolfo Palo was in his house in Sto. Cristo, Baliuag, Bulacan, because he did some preparations for the repair of his house by moving pieces of furniture, with the help of his two brothers-in-law.

Appellant Eladio Galvez maintains that his alibi had acquired strength because of absence of positive evidence showing participation in the robberry. For Rodolfo Palo, it is because the identification made of him by Elino Ramos (the taxi-cab driver) in the police headquarters, more than one month after the robbery was untrustworthy and unreliable.

As held in the often-cited case of People v. Fraga, (109 Phil. 241, 250):jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"An accused cannot be convicted on the basis of evidence which independently of his alibi is weak, uncorroborated and inconclusive. The rule that alibi must be satisfactorily proven was never intended to change the burden of proof in criminal cases; otherwise we will see the absurdity of the accused being put in a more difficult position where the prosecution’s evidence is vague and weak than where it is strong."cralaw virtua1aw library

As a salutary proposition, this Court usually desists from disturbing the conclusions of the trial court on the credibility of witnesses, in deference to the rule that the lower court, having seen and heard the witnesses and observed their demeanor and manner of testifying, is in a better position to appreciate the evidence. But this doctrine must bow to the superior and immutable rule that the guilt of the accused must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt, because the law presumes that a defendant is innocent and this presumption must prevail unless overturned by competent and credible proof. (People v. Alto, G.R. No. L-18660-61, Nov. 29, 1968, 26 SCRA 342.)

At this point, we find it unnecessary to discuss the other assignment of error.

In this case, the guilt of the accused-appellants who have been in detention since October, 1963, has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt. We cannot set our minds at ease on a finding of guilt.

WHEREFORE, the decision appealed from is hereby reversed, with costs de oficio.

SO ORDERED.

Fernando, C.J., Teehankee, Makasiar, Concepcion, Jr., Fernandez, Guerrero and De Castro, JJ., concur.

Melencio-Herrera, J., I vote to affirm the lower Court judgment.

Separate Opinions


AQUINO, J., dissenting:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

I dissent. I vote for the affirmance of the lower court’s judgment with the modification that an indemnity for the robbery committed should be added to the judgment.

Top of Page