IMPOSSIBLE CRIME
testimony of five witnesses:
PEOPLE VS. SALADINO
G. R. No. L-3634 , May 30, 1951
EDITED BY: UNTAL
DECISION
Bartolo Saladino and Anastacio Alejo have appealed from two decisions of Osman and George Plan of that municipality. They had gone on patrol duty to the
the court of first instance of Ilocos Norte convicting them of the murder of Luis
Bernabe.
Accused in one information, they asked, and were granted, separate trials.
But with their consent, the prosecution presented its evidence against both at the
same time. Bartolo Saladino submitted his defense first. Judge Manuel F. Barcelona
found him guilty and sentenced him toreclusion perpetua, with the accessories, and
to indemnify the heirs of the deceased in the sum of P6000, without subsidiary
imprisonment, and to pay one half of the costs. Thereafter Anastacio Alejo presented
his witnesses. Rebuttal and sub-rebuttal testimony followed. Judge Antonio
Belmonte, convicted and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua with the accessories,
and toindemnify the heirs of the deceased in the amount of P3000 with subsidiary
imprisonment and topay on half of the costs.
In this appeal, the appellants submitted, by their respective counsel, two
briefs, which the Solicitor-General answered in one.
The evidence for the prosecution consisted of documentary evidence and the
Januaria Corpus, Dr. Juan Pedro Blanco, Melchor Quevedo, Wilfredo Oaman and
Jesus Menor. These related in substance the following facts and circumstances:
In the night of June 23, 1948 Corporal Bartolo Saladino and Private
Anastacia Alejo of the Philippine Constabulary were resting in the house of Celso
Abucay in Paoay, Ilocos Norte, together with policemen Melchor Quevedo, Wilfredo
barrio for the purpose of apprehending those who on a previous night had fired upon
the dwelling. About midnight they were suddenly awakened by cries for help. They
went down and were approached by one Felix Pasion who reported he had been
robbed, one of the robbers being Luis Bernabe. The next morning,Saladino and Alejo,
accompanied by the policemen proceeded to the house of Luis Bernabe in Barrio
Samac of San Nicolas same province. Having found the suspect, they brought him,
forquestioning, to the residence of Felix Pasion in Barrio Singao same municipality. It
was about ten in the morning. As Pasion reiterated his imputation, Saladino led
Bernabe up the house for further investigation. He was followed by Anastacio Alejo
and the policemen. Bernabe denied the charge. To extract a confession, Saladino
repeatedly boxed and kicked him in different parts of the body. Bernabe continued
denying his guilt. Saladino got a piece of wood, two inched thick and one yard long,
and clubbed him several times on the chest, abdomen and the back.Then he called
on Alejo to take his turn. Alejo reluctantly whipped Bernabe four times with thebranch
of a tree, and then retired to the kitchen. Saladino again questioned his prisoner and
as the latter would not admit his culpability, he repeated the severe beating, and tying
Bernabe’s wrists together with a rubber strap, made him stand on a chair, tied the Anastacio Alejo; that four shots were suddenly heard; and that Alejo, it turned out,
strap to a beam in theceiling and then pushed the chair from under Bernabe with the had fired at Bernabe because the latter had attempted to escape.
result that the latter was lefthanging in the air. While in that position Bernabe was
We also wrote a joint affidavit of the three policemen corroborating his own
cudgeled by Saladino, with the woodenclub, on the sides, armpits, stomach, hips and
version of the affair. He requested the said officers to sign, and they had not the
back. It was at this juncture that policeman Plan interceded for the victim saying,
courage to decline.
“Stop now corporal. Better bring him to your headquarters and there you will
investigate him”. But Saladino ignored plea, and resumed the maltreatment,loudly However a few days afterwards the fiscal quizzed Quevedo, and this man
predicting that Bernabe would confess before noon. After Bernabe had remained gave a different story: one that subsequently accorded with the account given by the
suspended for five minutes, Saladino untied him, made him sit on a chair and urged People’s witnesses during the trial.
him to acknowledge his offense. As Bernabe persisted in his refusal, Saladino kicked
On the witness stand, Bartolo Saladino stuck to his version, which was
the chair and Bernabe fell on the floor, even as Saladino pouncing on his captive
corroborated by Felix Pasion, the man who having charged Luis Bernabe, was
booted him several times until the latter lay motionless on the floor.“It seems he is
indirectly the cause of the outrage, and who was understandably interested in
dead,” Policeman Oaman exclaimed. Saladino replied “No, he is only feigning death”
Saladino’s exoneration. However it was rejected by the trial judge, correctly we
and presently stepped on Bernabe’s throat and chest. Then Saladino let him alone for
believe, because it was contradicted (1) by the three policemen who had no reason to
fifteen minutes, during which time Bernabe did not stir nor breathe. An old man
falsify (2) by the nature and direction of the wounds described by the doctorwho saw
approaching Bernabe and taking his pulse said that the man was dead. Suddenly
them, wounds which could not have been inflicted while Bernabe was running
realizing his predicament, Saladino ordered two civilians to carry Bernabe down and
awayand (3) by the discovery of one of the bullets embedded in the ground
told Alejo: “shoot him now and we will say that he ran away”. Complying with the
underneath the corpse of Luis Bernabe. There is no doubt in our minds that this man
corporal’s order Alejo shot Bernabe four times with his carbine, after the latter had
is guilty of having cruelly tortured and treacherously caused the death of Luis
been laid down flat on his stomach about thirty from the house. Three days
Bernabe.
afterwards Bernabe was intered.

On the other hand Anastacio Alejo admitted having whipped and shot Luis
Saladino lost no time preparing his defense. On that same day, June 24, he
Bernabe uponorders of Saladino, who allegedly backed his command to shoot by
swore before the assistant fiscal an affidavit stating that, while he was conversing
pointing his pistol at Alejo.His attorneys also insist that Luis Bernabe was already
with Pasion inside thehouse, Luis Bernabe was downstairs under the vigilance of
dead when Alejo fired at the corpse. clothing might have been produced by the embalming fluid that oozed out; and third
because in post-mortem wounds blood comes out too from the blood vessels.
Of course obedience to the order of a superior official is not an excuse where
(Angeles, LegalMedicine Sec. 105). All of which raise, at least, a doubt that Bernabe,
the orderwas not for a lawful purpose. (People v. Bañaga 54 Phil. 247; People v.
was already dead whenshot. Such doubt must be resolved in favor of appellant Alejo
Moreno 43 Of. Gaz.4644)
From the foregoing it is plain that Bernabe having died as a consequence of
Like the trial judge, we do not believe Alejo fired the shots at the point of
the violent mauling by Saladino, the latter must be declared guilty of
Saladino’s gun. We believe the shooting occurred in the manner described by the
assassination. Anastacio Alejo does not appear to have conspired with him, and is
prosecution witnesses.
not liable either as principal or as accomplice of the murder. But he is guilty
Yet the matter of Bernabe’s moment of death is of grave doubt. Two eye-witnesses as accessory after the fact for having performed acts tending toconceal Saladino’s
who declared for the prosecution, namely, policemen Quevedo and Oaman crime by making it appear that Bernabe had run away.
repeatedly stated on the witness stand that after the maltreatment, and before
U.S. v. Cuison 20 Phil. 433 is a relevant example. Facundo Balangac was
Bernabe was carried downstairs to be shot,he had already expired. Policeman Jorge
shot from behind by Private Valentin Fortuna in the cemetery of Barili, Cebu.
Plan, another eye-witness confirming Alejo’s testimony declared that when Bernabe
lay flat on the floor and did not stir, an old man felt his pulse and pronounced him “Some hours afterwards, the defendant Cuison with several constabulary privates,
dead. among them Valentin Fortuna, went byorder of Lieutenant Poggi to the place where
the body of the deceased lay, and commanded thesoldiers to spread out in skirmish
The medical expert, on the contrary, asserted that death was due to the loss
like and discharge their firearms into the air; then thedefendant, with the private
of blood occasioned by the three shots that pierced the body of Bernabe. Alejo’s
Fortunam, went to the house of Epimaco Sosa to ask him for a daggerto place beside
attorney-de-officio madea thorough analysis of such testimony, pointing out that the
the body of a man whom they had shot, thereby to give the appearance that
medical examination was superficial,because it took place a few moments before the
thedeceased had been carrying a dagger.”
burial when the body was already in a “moderately advance state of decomposition” ,
and that the conclusion derived by said expert from the amount of blood in the This court declared the defendant Cuison guilty of accessory after the fact
garments worn by the corpse which he examined were not those worn at the time of saying:
the shooting; second because the cadaver had been embalmed and the stainson the
“But we do find criminal liability in the acts performed by Corporal Cuison, even
though he obeyed orders from his Lieutenant, Poggi; such liability consists in his this appellant. So ordered.
havingintervened subsequently to the commission of the crime, by furnishing the
means to make it appear that the deceased was armed and that it was necessary to
kill him on account of his resistance to the constabulary man, who, to lend color to
such pretended resistance,discharged their firearms into the air, under the direction of
Cuison, at the place therewhere the corpse was lying; and also consists in his having
tried to find a dagger to place beside the deceased. Such acts must be characterized
as concealment, and since they arenot only wrong but also unlawful, the defendant is
not exempt from liability, even thoughhe acted in obedience to a command from his
superior, because such command was illegal and in conflict with law and justice.
Therefore it can not be alleged that obedience was due, or that it exempts the
defendant from criminal liability.”

As accessory after the fact, Alejo is liable to a penalty lower by two degrees
than that prescribedby law for the consummated felony of murder, namely, prision
correctional in its maximumperiod to prision mayor in its medium period. (Art. 53 in
connection with Art. 248 of theRevised Penal Code.)

Therefore, in as much as the penalty imposed on appellant Saladino accords

with the law,the judgment against him is affirmed, with costs.

As to appellant Alejo the appealed decision is revoked and one will be

entered sentencing him to imprisonment for not less than 3 years of prision
correctional nor more than six years and two months, of prision mayor; and in case of
insolvency of Saladino to indemnify the heirs of thedeceased in the sum of P6000
without subsidiary imprisonment in case of his own inability topay. No costs against