PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS. ANSELMO
BERONDO JR. G.R. No. 177827, March 30, 2009
Criminal Case Digest / Digested Case
Murder to Homicide
Murder to Homicide
Facts:
At around 11:30 p.m. of February 13, 1999, after joining the Miss Gay
competition at New Danao, Sinaysayan, Kitaotao, Bukidnon, Herbert Nietes, Jr.
walked home to Puntian, Quezon, Bukidnon. While on the way, he suddenly heard a
gunshot from nearby. Feeling afraid, he ran towards the grassy area by the
roadside to hide. After about five minutes, he saw BERONDO, Julie Tubigon, and
Jesus Sudario, each holding a knife, walk towards the road and take turns in
stabbing a person who was already slumped on the ground. He recognized the
three as they are his townmates. Thereafter, he ran away from the area and went
to Bato-Bato, Sinaysayan, Kitaotao, Bukidnon, where he spent the night. The
next day, he learned that the person stabbed was GENARO LAGUNA. He later
testified that he did not reveal what he had witnessed to anyone because he was
afraid of getting involved.
Two years after the incident, Nietes and Tero (another witness) admitted to Dolores, Laguna’s widow, that they had witnessed the crime.
Trial proceeded only against accused-appellant BERONDO for murder, because the two other accused remained at-large, where he was convicted. The CA affirmed conviction, but ruled that BERONDO was liable only for homicide.
ISSUES:
1. Does the belated reporting of Nietes of what he witnessed defeat his credibility as a witness?
2. Was the CA correct in holding that BERONDO was liable only for homicide?
HELD:
1. No. Delay in revealing the identity of the perpetrators of a crime does not necessarily impair the credibility of a witness, especially where sufficient explanation is given.No standard form of behavior can be expected from people who had witnessed a strange or frightful experience. Jurisprudence recognizes that witnesses are naturally reluctant to volunteer information about a criminal case or are unwilling to be involved in criminal investigations because of varied reasons. Some fear for their lives and that of their family; while others shy away when those involved in the crime are their relatives or townmates. And where there is delay, it is more important to consider the reason for the delay, which must be sufficient or well-grounded, and not the length of delay.
Despite the delay in reporting the identities of the malefactors, Nietes testified in a categorical, straightforward, and spontaneous manner, and remained consistent even under grueling cross-examination. Such bears the marks of a credible witness.