G.R. No. L-5867
THE UNITED STATES, plaintiff, vs. THE MANOBO LIWAKAS, defendant.
October 17, 1910

FACTS:
Liwakas, a Moro of the Manobo tribe, entered the house of Mamacao and Santanan (husband and wife) at night while they were asleep. He assaulted them with a bolo, inflicting eight wounds on Mamacao’s head and one on Santanan’s neck, killing them instantly.

The motive for the killings stemmed from a dispute over Santanan’s minor daughter, Camaning. Liwakas claimed he had “bought” Camaning from her father (Santanan’s former husband) as his wife, paying a “sablat.” Santanan, who had separated from her former husband and was living with Mamacao, later took Camaning back. Liwakas demanded the return of his payment from Mamacao, who refused, stating he would only return it if his lance told him to. Feeling aggrieved and advised to “take the law into his own hands,” Liwakas sharpened his bolo and committed the murders.

After the killings, Liwakas abducted Camaning, took her into a wood, and raped her twice.

The Court of First Instance of the Moro Province convicted Liwakas of double murder, abduction, and rape, sentencing him to the death penalty, and ordered the case forwarded to the Supreme Court for review.

ISSUE:
1. Was the accused correctly found guilty of double murder, considering the circumstances?
2. Should the crimes of abduction and rape, though proven by testimony, be included in the judgment when they were not alleged in the complaint?
3. Should “vindication of a grave offense” be considered a mitigating circumstance in this case?

RULING:
The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment finding Liwakas guilty of double murder and imposing the death penalty, with modifications regarding the other charges.

1. Double Murder: The Court found Liwakas guilty of double murder, not homicide. The killings were perpetrated with both treachery (the victims were sound asleep, making defense impossible) and evident premeditation (Liwakas sharpened his bolo in the afternoon, indicating a deliberate plan to kill). Both of these circumstances qualify the crime as murder. Additionally, the aggravating circumstances of nocturnity, dwelling (killing in the victims’ own home), and scaling (entering through a window not intended for entrance) were present. While the special mitigating circumstance under Article 11 of the Penal Code (regarding the culprit’s race, ferocious and savage habits, and lack of education) was considered, it was found to be entirely offset by only one of the numerous aggravating circumstances, leaving several others in force. This mandated the imposition of the death penalty in its maximum degree.
2. Abduction and Rape: The Court held that while the eyewitness testified to the abduction and rape of Camaning, these acts were not alleged in the complaint. Therefore, they could not be considered in the judgment of this particular cause. Consequently, the P500 indemnity awarded to Camaning for abduction and rape was suppressed.
3. Vindication of Grave Offense: The Court rejected the defense’s argument that the crimes were committed in vindication of a grave offense. Even admitting the facts alleged by the accused and considering the savage customs of his race, resorting to self-help was not justified as there was a constituted authority available for seeking justice.

The judgment of the lower court was affirmed, sentencing Liwakas to death for the double murder, to be executed in a public place. The indemnity of P500 for Camaning was suppressed.