G.R. No. L-36154 August 29, 1980
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ROMEO CARREON Y VIRAY, RAYMUNDO CARREON Y VIRAY and FEDERICO BATOC Y CALUPAS, accused-appellants.

FACTS

The accused-appellants, Romeo Carreon, Raymundo Carreon, and Federico Batoc, were convicted by the CFI of Manila for the kidnapping with illegal detention of nine-year-old Liza Pascual and sentenced to reclusion perpetua. The prosecution established that on September 27, 1969, Liza went missing from her family’s apartment in Tondo, Manila. Her mother, Lourdes Pascual, conducted an exhaustive search, publicizing Liza’s disappearance through media. During this period, appellant Romeo Carreon approached Lourdes and ominously inquired how she would respond if a ransom of P3,000 was demanded for Liza’s return.
Liza was released on October 6, 1969. Upon her return, she narrated to her mother and authorities that she was taken by the three appellants to the Carreon residence on Antonio Rivera Street, where she was detained for nine days. The defense presented Severino Raguindin, who testified that he found Liza crying on the street and took her to his own home, keeping her there for the same period. While the appeal was pending, Romeo Carreon withdrew his appeal.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the guilt of the appellants for the crime of kidnapping with illegal detention was proven beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court found the testimony of the victim, Liza Pascual, credible and consistent, and it was strongly corroborated by her mother’s account of the search and the ransom inquiry. The legal logic centered on the assessment of witness credibility and the inherent incredibility of the defense’s narrative. The Court emphasized that the trial court’s findings on credibility are generally binding unless substantial facts were overlooked. Here, Liza’s detailed account of her detention was deemed trustworthy.
In contrast, the testimony of defense witness Raguindin was rejected as inherently unbelievable. The Court reasoned that if Raguindin had merely found a lost child, the natural and logical course of action would have been to immediately report to the police or return her to her family, not to secretly keep her in his home for nine days. His claim that Liza said she had no parents was a demonstrable falsehood intended to justify his unusual conduct. The Court concluded that Raguindin was a friend of the appellants, concocting a story to exculpate them, a plan that failed when Liza courageously identified her captors. Romeo Carreon’s withdrawal of his appeal was viewed as a further indication of guilt. Consequently, the evidence was overwhelming in establishing the appellants’ guilt beyond reasonable doubt for kidnapping with illegal detention.