G.R. Nos. L-46960-62. January 8, 1987.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. WILFREDO ROJAS, TEODORO VILLARIN, SOLOMON TOTOY, GREGORIO TUNDAG and SINFROSO MASONG, defendants-appellants.

FACTS

On May 23, 1973, in Barrio Digon, Margosatubig, Zamboanga del Sur, three young girls were brutally killed: Zenaida Nastae (21), Canda Carluman (7), and Mona Carluman (5). Zenaida and Mona also had their ears severed. The accused, led by Wilfredo Rojas, were arrested. Found in their possession were weapons, bottles of “anting-anting” oil, and two human ears. After investigation, seven individuals were charged with triple murder. Two, Mohamod Esmael and Balbino Estrera, were later discharged to become state witnesses.
The prosecution evidence established that Rojas had been visiting Barrio Talanusa, teaching prayers and selling protective oil. On the morning of the killings, Rojas and his seven companions, armed with shotguns, a revolver, and knives, proceeded to a seaside copra kiln in Digon. They surrounded the area where the victims were. Rojas initiated a conversation before suddenly attacking. He stabbed Zenaida and Canda. He then stabbed Mona twice. The ears of Zenaida and Mona were severed. The group fled but was later identified by Dalma Carluman, a survivor who escaped, and corroborated by the state witnesses.

ISSUE

The principal issue is whether the guilt of the appellants for the crime of murder was proven beyond reasonable doubt, and whether the qualifying and aggravating circumstances were correctly appreciated.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the convictions but modified the penalties. The trial court’s factual findings, based on the credible testimonies of eyewitness Dalma Carluman and the corroborating state witnesses, were upheld. The Court found the appellants’ alibis weak and unsubstantiated. The killings were qualified as murder due to the presence of treachery. The attack was sudden and unexpected, employed to ensure the execution of the crime without risk to the assailants from any defense the young and unarmed victims could offer.
The Court also correctly appreciated the generic aggravating circumstances of evident premeditation and cruelty. The preparatory acts of prayer and anointing with oil, the arming themselves, and the journey to the location indicated premeditation. The manner of the killings—the stabbing of young children and the severing of ears—manifested cruelty intended to prolong physical suffering or add ignominy to the injuries. However, with the abolition of the death penalty under the 1987 Constitution , the Court imposed the penalty of reclusion perpetua for each count of murder. The appellants were also held solidarily liable for civil indemnity to the heirs of each victim.