PEOPLE v.

VERZOLA
December 21, 1977 | Antonio, J. | Burden of Proof -Rule 131, Sec. 1 - Criminal Cases

PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE: People of the Philippines

DEFENDANT-APPELLANT: Ricardo Verzola and Josefina Molina
SUMMARY: Verzola clubbed Bernardo Molina, Josefina's husband, to death. Josefina helped Verzola bring Bernardo's
bloodstained body down the stairs of her house. Verzola then went to the police and reported that Bernardo died in an accident. In
Verzola's extra-judicial confession, he admitted to clubbing Bernardo. Josefina said she witnessed the crime. Later, Verzola said he
killed Bernardo in self-defense. Josefina said she didn't witness the crime but she saw Bernardo trying to be revived by Verzola.
Both Josefina and Verzola claimed that they weren't aware of the contents of their extra-judicial confession and that they were made
to sign them by the police without being able to read the contents of their confession. CFI said they were both guilty of murder,
Verzola as the principal and Josefina as the accessory. SC ruled Verzola was the only one guilty and acquitted Josefina, stating that
Verzola DID NOT present proof that he was justified in killing Bernardo with clear, satisfactory, and convincing evidence.
DOCTRINE: Once an accused has admitted the killing of a human being, the burden is on him to establish the existence of nay
circumstance which may justify the killing or at least attenuate the offense committed. To establish his exculpation, or the
justification for the act, he must prove such affirmative allegation by clear, satisfactory, and convincing evidence: He must rely on
the strength of his own weakness and not on the weakness of that for the prosecution, for even if the prosecution was weak, it could
not be disbelieved after the accused himself had admitted the killing. In this case, it is evident that no such proof was adduced by
Verzola.

FACTS: clubbed Bernardo several times.

1. Bernardo Molina, the victim, was the husband of accused
Verzola's co-appellant, Josefina Molina.
Bernardo was clubbed to death in his own house by
Verzola in the presence of Josefina.
After the murder, Bernardo's body was carried down
by Verzola and Josefina to the ground of the house.
Verzola then went to his house, changed his clothes
and threw his bloodstained weater, undershirt, and
underwear, including the piece of wood he used to
club Bernardo to death, inside his toilet.
Verzola then went to the municipal building and
reported to the police that Bernardo died in an
accident.
The police, together with the Municipal Health
Officer, the Municipal Judge, and a photographer
went to the house to conduct the investigation. They
found Bernardo's body sprawled at the foot of the
stairs, blood oozing from his mouth, nose and ears.
There were also bloodstains on the floor of the
bedroom of the house, on the mat, as well as on the
beddings of the deceased. The bloodstains left a trail
to the bamboo ladder, where some of the stains could
be found on the ladder's steps.
2. When Josefina was questioned by the police, she said the
assailant of her husband was Verzola.
She was then brought to the Office of the Chief of
Police, where she gave a written extra-judicial
statement that said that her husband raped her while
they were sleeping that night, and Verzola clubbed
Bernardo to death. Afterward, she heard the sound of
a body being dragged downstairs and hear Verzola
say he was leaving and warned her not to say
anything. When she looked out of the door, she
already saw her husband lying at the foot of the
stairs. This was a sworn statement made by Josefina
in front of Municipal Judge Valera.
3. At the time Josefina was being questioned, Verzola was
picked up by the police and brought to the municipal building
and also executed a written statement admitting that he
He admitted that he was under Bernardo and
Josefina's house and noticed Josefina was awake. He
implied they had sex under her house. Josefina said
Bernardo was planning to kill Verzola. Upon learning
this, he clubbed Bernardo while he was sleeping. He
also said Josefina had been his paramour for 10 years
and she was the only witness to the crime.
Verzola was brought to Judge Valera's residence and
informed him of his Constitutional rights. Verzola
apparently gave the statement voluntarily under oath.
Verzola guided the police to his house where, in their
presence, he retrieved from the toilet his bloodstained
clothes as well as the piece of wood he used to club
Bernardo.
4. Both Verzola and Josefina admitted that it was Verzola who
inflicted the fatal blows to Bernardo. However, Verzola, after
impugning the truth of the facts contained in his extra-judicial
confession, said he did so in self-defense.
Verzola testified again, saying that he was feeding his
2 cows in front of his house when heard Josefina's
cries for help. He heard the loud voice of a man
saying, "Vulva of your mother, I will kill you" and
when he entered the Molinas' house, he saw Josefina
crouching in a corner being treated by Bernardo.
Bernardo cursed them again and as Bernardo picked
a bolo up from the floor, Verzola struck him twice
with the piece of wood on the head. After Bernardo
fell, Verzola tried to revive him by placing his head
on his lap and shaking him while saying, "Hoy, hoy,
hoy". He explained this was the reason why he had
bloodstains on his clothes. When Josefina asked him
what happened, he said Bernardo met an accident.
They both carried Bernardo's victim down the stairs
because they wanted to bring him to the hospital.
Since it was too far and too dark, they left the body
on the ground. Verzola instructed Josefina to get help
and went home. He changed his clothes and threw his
bloostained clothes inside the toilet, went to the
police, and reported that Bernardo had an accident.
5. Josefina testified saying that Bernardo was jealous and they
fought. Bernardo boxed and strangled her and she shouted for
help, and that was when Verzola entered the room. While she
was still crouching with her face covered, she heard a thud and
saw that Verzola was shaking Bernardo's head while
Bernardo's head on his lap. Verzola was saying "Hoy, hoy,
hoy". Out of fear, she assisted Verzola in carrying Bernardo's
body at the foot of the stairs of her house. After seeing
Bernardo's wounds, she became afraid and went up the house
where her children were sleeping.
6. Both Josefina and Verzola claimed that they weren't aware
of the contents of their extra-judicial confession and that they
were made to sign them by the police without being able to
read the contents of their confession.
7. CFI found Verzola and Josefina guilty of murder, with
Verzola as the principal to suffer life imprisonment and
Molina as an accessory to suffer an indeterminate penalty of 6
years of prision correccional. Hence this appeal.
ISSUE RELEVANT TO OUR CLASS: WON Verzola is
guilty of murdering Bernardo Molina? YES.
RULING: Judgment affirmed insofar as Verzola is
concerned, but the judgment against Josefina Molina is
reversed, acquitting her.
RATIO:
1. There can be no question that once an accused has admitted
the killing of a human being, the burden is on him to establish
the existence of any circumstance which may justify the
killing or at least attenuate the offense committed. To establish
his exculpation, or the justification for the act, he must prove
such affirmative allegation by clear, satisfactory and
convincing evidence. He must rely on the strength of his own
evidence and not on the weakness of that for the prosecution,
for even if that were weak, it could not be disbelieved after the
accused himself had admitted the killing. IN THIS CASE: It
is evident that no such proof was adduced by Verzola.
Verzola's conduct immediately after he committed
the crime is incompatible with the reaction of one
who killed another in legitimate self-defense.
Although he claims that he brought the victim down
the stairs in order to bring him to the hospital, yet
when he was able to get a jeep he did not utilize it for
that purpose but instead used it to go to town.
Although Verzola was present at the scene of the
crime when the police were investigating the case, he
kept quiet about the incident.
It was only from Josefina Molina that the police
learned for the first time that Verzola was the
assailant of Bernardo. Even then, Josefina had to
request the police authorities to bring her to the
poblacion so that she could talk more freely about the
killing.
For his part, Verzola attempted to conceal his
participation in the crime by hiding inside his toilet
his bloodstained clothes and the weapon that he used
in clubbing the deceased. These actions reveal a
behavior which is incompatible with the reaction of
one who acted in legitimate self-defense.
More significant, however, are the undisputed
physical facts of the case, such as nature, character
and location of the wounds sustained by the deceased
and the presence of the bloodstains on the beddings
of the victim. These facts and circumstances belie the
claim of the appellant that he clubbed the victim in
self-defense. On the contrary, they sufficiently
indicate that the fatal injuries were inflicted upon the
victim when the latter was lying defenseless on the
floor, as he was either sleeping or was just beginning
to wake up.
RE: JOSEFINA'S ACQUITTAL (IN CASE SIR ASKS):
Although appellant Josefina Molina admitted in her extra-
judicial statement that she was the paramour of her co-
appellant for over a year, there is no proof that she had
knowledge of the criminal design of her co-appellant.
Neither has she cooperated with him by previous or
simultaneous acts, much less is there any showing that she
supplied the principal with material or moral aid. Her only
participation was in assisting Verzola in bringing the body
of the deceased to the ground.
So can Josefina be held criminally liable as an accessory
for assisting Verzalo in bringing the body of Bernardo to
the ground? NO. SC disagrees with CFI's findings that
Josefina bringing down Bernardo's body was to destroy
the body of the crime. There is no iota of proof that
Josefina Molina ever attempted "to destroy the body of the
crime" or to make it appear that death of the victim was
accidental. It must be noted that Josefina testified that she
helped Verzola in bring the body of the deceased down the
stairs accuse of fear. Even if she assisted hVerzola without
duress, simply assisting Verzola in bringing the body down
the house to the foot of the stairs and leaving said body for
anyone to see, cannot be classified as an attempt to conceal
or destroy the body of the crime, the effects or instruments
thereof, must be done to prevent the discovery of the crime.
In the case at bar, the body was left at the foot of the stairs
at a place where it was easily visible to the public. Under
such circumstances, there could not have been any attempt
on the part of Josefina to conceal or destroy the body of the
crime.
An accessory does not participate in the criminal design,
nor cooperate in the commission of the felony, but, with
knowledge of the commission of the crime, he
subsequently takes part in 3 ways: (a) by profiting from the
effects of the crime; (b) by concealing the body, effects or
instruments of the crime in order to prevent its discovery;
and (c) by assisting in the escape or concealment of the
principal of the crime, provided he acts with abuse of his
public functions or the principal is guilty of treason,
parricide, murder, or an attempt to take the life of the Chief
Executive, or is known to be habitually guilty of some
other crime. The main difference separating accessories
after the fact the responsibility of the accessories is
subsequent to the consummation of the crime and
subordinate to that of the principal.