G.R. No. L-30610 October 22, 1971
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. JUAN BARTOLAY, SOFRONIO BARTOLAY, CARLOS PEJO, FELICISIMO BARTOLAY, and JESUS BARTOLAY, defendants-appellants.

FACTS

The case arose from a violent incident on October 5, 1963, in Cametobetohan, Monreal, Masbate, following a baptismal party at Juan Bartolay’s house. After lunch, the celebration involved heavy drinking of tuba. The prosecution’s lone eyewitness, Urcosino Baconawa, testified that the three Espenilla brothers (Elias, Renerio, and Galicano) arrived and joined the party. An altercation began when Carlos Pejo challenged Elias Espenilla. According to the prosecution, Pejo then stabbed Elias, after which all five Bartolay appellants, armed with clubs, and another individual with a bolo, collectively attacked and killed all three brothers.
The defense presented a conflicting version. Juan Bartolay and Carlos Pejo claimed that Elias Espenilla initiated the violence by boxing Pejo after a trivial argument over the drinking order. They testified that a general free-for-all ensued, during which the already deceased Supremo Bartolay (whose case was dismissed due to his death) was solely responsible for killing the three victims with a dagger. The appellants denied any concerted attack and presented alibis, claiming they were merely present and did not participate in the killings. The trial court convicted all appellants of three counts of murder qualified by abuse of superior strength.

ISSUE

The core issue was whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt the criminal liability of each appellant for the complex crime of murder through a conspiracy or a collective assault demonstrating abuse of superior strength.

RULING

The Supreme Court modified the trial court’s decision, acquitting most appellants and reducing the charges for others. The Court found the prosecution’s evidence insufficient to establish conspiracy or a collective attack by all appellants. The lone eyewitness account was deemed unreliable for implicating everyone in a synchronized assault, especially given the chaotic nature of the brawl. The Court emphasized that in melees, individual responsibility must be clearly proven; mere presence does not constitute criminal participation.
The Court gave credence to the defense evidence, particularly the extrajudicial confessions of Juan Bartolay and the deceased Supremo Bartolay, which consistently pointed to Supremo as the sole assailant. These statements, made independently to authorities, were considered trustworthy. Furthermore, the appellants’ alibis were strengthened by the lack of positive identification placing them as direct perpetrators. Consequently, the qualifying circumstance of abuse of superior strength could not be sustained absent proof of concerted action.
The Court held that only Juan Bartolay and Carlos Pejo could be held liable, but only for separate acts of homicide, not murder. Juan Bartolay was convicted for the death of Elias Espenilla, based on his own admission of involvement in that specific fight. Carlos Pejo was convicted for the death of Renerio Espenilla, as the evidence suggested his participation in that particular combat. Both benefited from the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender. Sofronio, Felicisimo, and Jesus Bartolay were acquitted due to lack of proof of their individual guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The indemnity to the victims’ heirs was increased to P12,000.00 each.