G.R. No. 121193 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. AMBITONIO PALMA GIL, ACCUSED-. D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, consistent with all the foregoing findings, this Court finds the accused Ambitonio Palma Gil y Colong, 52 years of age, married to Rita, a fisherman by occupation and resident of Tagpopongan, Babak, Samal Island, Davao, guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of murder, penalized under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, as charged in the information, and is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua, with all the accessory penalty provided by law, and to indemnify the widow, Serafia Martin, and Heirs (sic) of Valerio the amount of fifty thousand (P50,000.00) Pesos (sic), as indemnity for such death, Twenty Thousand (P20, 000.00) Pesos (sic), as and for moral damages, and Ten Thousand (P10,000.00) Pesos (sic), as and for exemplary damages, and Five Thousand (P5,000.00) Pesos (sic), for burial and necessary expenses in connection hereto, and to pay the costs. In his appeal, accused assigns the following errors committed by the trial court: "I "THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN GIVING FULL WEIGHT AND CREDENCE TO THE INCONSISTENT AND CONFLICTING TESTIMONIES OF THE PROSECUTION WITNESSES. "II "THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN CONVICTING ACCUSED-APPELLANT OF THE CRIME OF MURDER DESPITE FAILURE OF THE PROSECUTION TO PROVE HIS GUILT BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT. "III "ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT ACCUSED-APPELLANT IS GUILTY, THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN CONVICTING HIM OF MURDER INSTEAD OF HOMICIDE." [16] In support of his first and second assigned errors, the appellant stresses the inconsistent testimonies of Bonifacio and Jorry Martizanos to prove that they failed to positively identify him as the killer. Appellant also contends that they lied because of their relationship with the victim - Bonifacio is married to the sister of Valeriano's wife while Valeriano is Jorry's uncle. [17] He further claims that if the Martizanos were at the scene of the crime their natural reaction should have been to help the victim defend himself against the assailant. In his third assignment of error, appellant contends that assuming he is guilty, he should be convicted for homicide and not for murder for treachery was not established by the prosecution. He claims that the stab wound at the back sustained by the victim was not proved by a proper medical certificate. Dr. Leonila Ferrer who issued the death certificate admitted that she did not see the victim's body. [18] On the other hand, the Office of the Solicitor General explains that the alleged inconsistencies in the testimonies of the Martizanos cover minor details. What is telling, according to the Solicitor General, is the weakness of the alibi of the appellant. Appellant himself admitted that Tagpopong Beach is only 2,000 meters away from the scene of the crime and the distance could be negotiated by banca within 1 1/2 hours if one is going against the current of the sea and only 30 minutes, if one is going with the current. The appellant also admitted that in the early morning of June