GR L 4795; (November, 1908) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-4795
THE UNITED STATES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. MARIANO BOSTON, defendant-appellant.
November 23, 1908
FACTS:
Mariano Boston was convicted in the Court of First Instance of Pangasinan for the crime of abortion, as defined and penalized in paragraph 3 of Article 410 of the Penal Code. The evidence presented established that Boston, believing or pretending to believe that a pregnant woman’s fetus was a “fish-demon” (which he called a “balat”), gave her a potion composed of herbs. His stated purpose was to relieve her of this alleged fish-demon. Two hours after she drank the potion, the woman experienced labor pains and gave premature birth to a child, three months in advance of the full period of gestation. After the child’s birth, Boston, still believing or pretending to believe it was a fish-demon that had taken human form, destroyed it by fire with the permission and aid of the husband and brother of the infant, to prevent it from doing mischief. Boston appealed, arguing that the evidence did not conclusively establish his intent to cause the abortion, primarily because there was no evidence disclosing the character and medicinal qualities of the herb potion he administered.
ISSUE:
Was the appellant’s intent to cause abortion and the causal connection between the administered herb potion and the premature birth sufficiently established by the circumstantial evidence, despite the absence of direct evidence detailing the potion’s specific properties?
RULING:
Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court held that the presented facts constituted prima facie proof of Mariano Boston‘s intent in giving the herb potion to the mother and of the further fact that the potion was the cause of the premature birth. This was evidenced by Boston‘s act of giving the potion to “relieve” the woman of the “fish-demon,” the immediate onset of labor pains and premature birth just two hours after ingestion, and his subsequent action of burning the infant due to his belief. The defense failed to rebut this prima facie evidence. Therefore, the Court concluded that the trial court correctly found Boston guilty of the charge beyond a reasonable doubt. The sentence imposed was affirmed.