G.R. No. L-24002. January 21, 1974.
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. FRANCISCO DIAZ and GERARDO DIAZ, defendants-appellants.

FACTS

On September 4, 1963, appellant Francisco Diaz embraced and molested fourteen-year-old Remegia Carasos in a camote farm. Remegia’s cousin, Anita Pacaira, struck Francisco with a bolo, causing him injuries. The girls reported the incident to their grandfather, Quintin Tadia, who then sought to file a formal complaint with the barrio lieutenant. The next morning, September 5, Tadia, unarmed and accompanied by his two granddaughters, was on his way to the town proper to lodge the complaint.
While the group was ascending a hill, appellants Francisco and Gerardo Diaz appeared at the crest. Gerardo, armed with a shotgun, immediately fired at Tadia from about four meters, hitting him in the neck and causing him to fall. As Tadia lay prostrate, Gerardo instructed Francisco to “stab that fellow.” Francisco then proceeded to repeatedly stab the helpless victim with a bolo. The two eyewitness granddaughters saw the entire assault. Tadia died from multiple gunshot and stab wounds.

ISSUE

The main issues are: (1) whether Francisco Diaz’s plea of self-defense is credible; (2) whether Gerardo Diaz’s defense of alibi is tenable; and (3) whether the killing was qualified by treachery and/or evident premeditation to constitute murder.

RULING

The Supreme Court rejected the defenses and affirmed the conviction for murder, qualified by treachery. The plea of self-defense by Francisco Diaz fails because he admitted the killing but failed to prove the essential elements of unlawful aggression, reasonable necessity of the means employed, and lack of sufficient provocation. The attack on the unarmed, elderly victim who was ambushed while on a lawful errand negates any claim of self-defense. Gerardo Diaz’s alibi is likewise unavailing, as he was positively identified by the eyewitnesses at the scene. Their testimonies were found credible, consistent, and corroborated by physical evidence.
The Court ruled that treachery (alevosia) was present. The attack was sudden and unexpected, executed in a manner that ensured the victim had no opportunity to defend himself. The brothers waylaid Tadia on a hill, with Gerardo immediately firing the first shot without warning. The subsequent stabbing of the fallen and defenseless victim by Francisco confirmed the deliberate adoption of means to ensure execution without risk to the assailants. This qualifies the crime as murder. Evident premeditation was also established for Francisco, as he had more than half a day to reflect after the molestation incident but instead conspired to ambush the victim to prevent the filing of charges. For Gerardo, premeditation was not appreciated, as he participated primarily to aid his brother.
The penalty is reclusion perpetua for both appellants. The indemnity to the heirs of Quintin Tadia was increased to P12,000. The Court modified the trial court’s judgment accordingly.