G.R. No. L-15843; March 31, 1966
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. NORIL SAMPANG, JAMA-A CABANG and JALILOLA CAWANG, accused-appellants.

FACTS

In the afternoon of November 13, 1957, Helen Van Short, Percy Vicroy, Jumadil Badul, and Baby Short sold copra in Isabela, Basilan City for about P2,600.00. That evening, upon returning to the Balas Plantation, their jeep was ambushed near the plantation gate by three armed bandits. Percy Vicroy, the driver, was shot dead. Helen Van Short was pursued and slain with several bolo cuts. Baby Short was also attacked and severely wounded. The money from the copra sale, Vicroy’s wristwatch, and Baby Short’s P23.00 were taken. The jeep was ransacked. The prosecution’s case on the identity of the robbers rested principally on the testimonies of survivors Baby Short and Jumadil Badul. Jumadil testified he saw Noril Sampang approaching the jeep with a gun and bolo, and saw Jama-a Cabang and Jalilola Cawang stab Mrs. Short and Baby Short. Baby Short, an eleven-year-old boy, testified he saw Noril Sampang approaching with a bolo and firearm, and saw Jama-a Cabang and Jalilola Cawang cross in front of the jeep’s headlights and cut his mother. He also identified them to plantation helpers David Cuadra and Urok Patani shortly after the attack. The accused set up alibi as their defense, claiming they were elsewhere. The defense pointed to inconsistencies, such as Jumadil’s initial police report stating “unknown persons” were the ambushers, and Baby Short’s affidavit (Exhibit “1”) initially mentioning only Noril and stating he did not recognize the others, and that Baby Short had pointed to other persons at different times.

ISSUE

Whether or not the accused-appellants Noril Sampang, Jama-a Cabang, and Jalilola Cawang were adequately identified as the perpetrators of the robbery with homicide.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty to reclusion perpetua due to lack of sufficient votes for the death penalty. The Court found the deficiencies in the prosecution’s evidence sufficiently explained. Jumadil Badul’s initial silence and later variations in his statements were due to fear and alleged pressure from PC officers. Baby Short’s initial failure to fully identify all assailants and his subsequent pointing to others were explained by his young age, the agony of his wounds, and fear of Noril Sampang, who was present urging him to conceal the truth. Baby Short’s identification of Noril in his affidavit (Exhibit “1”) and his immediate revelations to the plantation helpers, which were part of the res gestae, were weighty evidence. The positive identification by the witnesses overcame the defense of alibi. The Court held that the trial court correctly found the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt, noting that allowances must be made for gaps in a young witness’s testimony. Aggravating circumstances of nocturnity, the infliction of multiple and unnecessary wounds, and disrespect of the female victim’s sex were present, with no mitigating circumstances.