G.R. No. 98061 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. CASIMIRO DE CASTRO AND ANTONIETO PLAZA, ACCUSED. CASIMIRO DE CASTRO, ACCUSED-.

Ruling

WHEREFORE, premises considered, this court finds the accused Casimiro de Castro, 24 years of age, married to Nancy Cancio, a farmer by occupation, and resident of Sta. Cruz, Marihatag, Surigao del Sur, guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Murder, as principal, penalized under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code and as charged in the information, and is therefore, hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua, with all the accessory penalties provided by law, and to indemnify the parents of said victim, Mr. and Mrs. Ignacio Aporbo, in the amount of P30,000.00 as indemnification for said death of their son, Macario Aporbo, plus P20,000.00 as and in the concept of moral damages, P10,000.00 as and for exemplary damages, and actual damages of P17,060.00 and to pay costs. With respect to accused Antonieto Plaza, let Alias Warrant of Arrest in sufficient copies issue for distribution to the different police and law-enforcement agencies of the Government for their possible execution . " [9] Appellant has come before this Court reiterating his innocence and imputing three errors to the trial court, wherein he remonstrates that it erred, firstly, in giving full credence to the conflicting, unreliable and incredible testimony of prosecution witnesses Sergio Sanchez, Jr., Yolanda Aporbo and Felipe Lopez; secondly, in finding him guilty beyond reasonable doubt; and thirdly, in finding that there was treachery in the killing of Macario Aporbo. [10] We are not convinced. Appellant avers that the court a quo erred in giving full credence to the testimonies of the three aforenamed prosecution witnesses, although there are two glaring inconsistencies in the testimonies of witnesses Yolanda Aporbo and Sergio Sanchez, Jr. Firstly, so he contends, there is a disparity in the reported number of companions of the victim at the time of the crime. According to Sergio Sanchez, Jr., there were five, including himself, while Yolanda Aporbo testified that there were eight of them." [11] We have examined the transcript of stenographic notes and we find that there were indeed minor inconsistencies in the statements of the two eyewitnesses. On the one hand, Sergio Sanchez, Jr. testified that there were at least five of them who were present at the time of the incident. [12] On the other, Yolanda Aporbo testified that there were seven of them who accompanied the victim. [13] Accordingly, appellant argues that said inconsistencies provide enough basis for the Court to doubt the credibility of said vital prosecution witness. The Court believes otherwise. Their divergence on the number of individuals who accompanied the victim does not, in any way, affect and discredit the testimony of said witnesses. That inconsistency is not without an explanation. The testimonies of Sergio and Yolanda were based on what they actually saw during the incident. Arguably, from the visual point of Sergio, who was then walking behind Macario, he only saw Yolanda Aporbo, Feli