PEOPLE v.

SANCHEZ, George Medialdea, Luis Corcolon, Rogelio Corcolon, Zoilo Ama, Balwin
Brion and Pepito Kawit

FACTS:

PROSECUTION VERSION

- based on the recollection of star witnesses Aurelio Centeno and Vincencio Malabanan (co-
conspirators turned state witness).

 On morning of June 28, 1993, Medialdea and Centeno picked up Malabanan on his
residence at the thought that they will arrest a drug pusher and gun runner, Rodolfo
Calva alias Tisoy
 Ama and Luis Corcolon was then picked up and headed back to Calauan and there
the group picked up Rogelio Corcolon
 The group proceeded to Los Baños with the plan to take a pretty young lady to be
given to their Mayor as the latter long desired for her.
 Finding nothing inside UPLB, the group proceeded to Agrix complex where they
located Eileen Sarmenta and Allan Gomez who were inside a tamaraw van as
passengers.
 Eileen and Allan were forcibly taken and brought to Erais Farm, in Brgy. Curba,
which is owned by the Mayor.
 Except for Malabanan and Centeno who used the ambulance when going back from
Los Baños the group used van (tamaraw) in taking Eileen and Allan.
 In the farm, Allan was beaten badly.
 Around 1:00 am of the next day, a crying Eileen was dragged out of the warehouse,
hair dishevelled, mouth cover with handkerchief and hands tied and stripped off
short.
 The Mayor with satisfaction, thanked Luis and Medialdea for the “gift” then,
endorsed Eileen to the group for the pleasure.
 Along the way to Calauan, Allan was killed.
 The next destination was a sugarcane filed in Sitio Papatok, Km 74, Brgy. Mabacan,
where Eileen was gang raped with the instruction of Luis “Turbohin na rin natin ang
tinorbu ni boss”
 Though Eileen pleaded to stop torture, the group did not stop and later killed her
and left.
 Centeno did not join the group in raping Eileen beyond the invitation of the rest.
 June 29, 1993, Medialdea, Centeno, Malabanan, Luis and Ama made an apparent
police investigation. They got Allan’s and Eileen’s body to Brgy. Imok and Brgy.
Mabacan respectively and brought to the Municipal hall.
 June 30, 1993, Centeno was found involved in the rape -slay so he went to the
Mayor and the latter give him 2k to keep silent or hide.
 The Mayor made a claim that he visit his mistress and a place in Makati when the
incident happen.
 He imputed Kit Alqueza, a feared and dangerous student of the university, as the
prime suspect of the said crime.
  The said Mayor had even surrendered Luis and Rogelio Corcolon to Camp Crame as
a CIS suspected them.
 August 13, 1993, the Mayor of Calauan Laguna was arrested at his residence and
brought Camp-Vicente Lim whereat he saw Centeno and Malabanan.
 Medialdea, together with Ama and Malabanan were questioned of why the van was
deamed. He claimed that Mayor Caño, the chief of police who made the order to
clean the van.
 Medialdea also imputed Kit Alqueza as the one who kill Allan as the latter dated Kit’s
girlfriend.
 Luis also imputed Kit in a greater detail that he had a direct experience with latter
planning to kill Kit. He also saw Kit driving the same van where the body of Eileen
was found.
 Luis claimed that he answered “yes” to all question during investigation as he was
badly tortured
 Rogelio Boy Corcolon testified that he never left his house on the night of June 28,
1993. The CIS raided his house on July 7, 1993 and had a bounty of 100k like Luis.
 Boy and Luis were brought to Camp Crame on July 12. He claimed that he his
brother was tortured.
 Ama’s version is also similar with the group story that on June 28, 1993 they were at
hunt for “Tisoy” Imputing also Kit to the crime.
 Brion, Mayor’s nephew denied the company with the appellant and he detailed the
torture he experience while detained:
 Kawit, Houseboy of the Mayor, claimed that he slept early on the night of June 28.
He just signed to a paper given by a police as he was for release but it did not
happen.
ISSUE:
Whether witnesses Centeno and Malabanan’s credibility, whose open-court narrations served
as principal basis for the trial court rendition of a guilty verdict.
HELD:
Appellant tried to discredit Centano’s Sworn Statements (S.S.)
1. S.S. Aug 13, 1993
- Victim were brought CPAMMS
- SS. Aug 15, 1993
- Victims were brought to Erains Farm
2. SS. Aug 13, 1993
- Named Edwin and identified another person he did not know
- SS. Aug 17, 1993
- Named Edwin Casico
- Other person as Lito Angeles
3. SS. Aug 13, 1993
- He drove Corcolon brothers to the house of Edgardos “Uod” Lavadia in Los Baños there
they saw Kit Alqueza
- SS. Aug 30, 1993
- They did not go to Lavadia and that during the whole day, Centeno was with Malabanan
  On Aug 13, 1993 SS, Centeno explained that he was dictated by CIS agent, while on August 30,
1993 SS, he was under witness protection program.
 On taking the victims to Erains Farm instead of CPAMMS as originally indicated in Aug 13, 1993
SS.,
 Centeno explained that when he gave his statement, he was hoping that Mayor would help him.
 It was on Aug 15, 1993 when Centeno decided to correct his statement when Mayor Sanchez
already in prison
SC:
Our Supreme Court has recognized that the inherent fear of reprisal by witnesses who refuse
initially to disclose what they know about a crime is quite understandable, especially when the accused
is a man of power and influence in the community.
SC:
People v. Pascua (206 SCRA 628 [1992]), the Supreme Court observed that ‘Fear for one’s life
explains the failure on the part of a witness to immediately notify the authorities of what exactly
transpired’.
SC:
The Court will not reject the testimony of Centeno on the basis of inconsistencies in his sworn
statements taken by police authorities which have been sufficiently explained. What is more important
is that Centeno testified on the witness stand in a categorical, straightforward, spontaneous and frank
manner and remained consistent on cross examination.
SC:
Sworn statement/affidavits are generally subordinate in importance to open court declarations
because the former are often executed when an affiant’s mental faculties are not in such a state as to
afford him a fair opportunity of narrating in full the incident which has transpired.

 Inconsistencies of Centeno testimony are trivial details which do not, in actuality, touch upon
the “why” and “wherefore” of the crime committed.
 Inconsistencies referring only to minor details and collateral matters do not affect either the
substances of their declaration their veracity or the weight of their testimony.
 Other pieces of evidence
- Missing self-loop from the pair of white short worn by Eileen on the night of crime was
recovered from Erians Farm (by prosecution witness Major. Lilita Chamber a forensic
chemist)
Ballistic examination
- The striations of the empty shell were some as those registered by the cartridges from
M16 rifle bearing Sr. No. 773159 surrendered by Luis Corcolon.
 - Metallic fragment on Eileen’s body has characteristic as those from bullet fired from an
M16 Rifle (by Chief Ballistics Vincente de Vera).
Autopsy and Vagina Examination
- Butteresses all the more the gang rape story due to multiple contusion on Eileen’s
body, fresh shallow laceration on her hymen, congested cervix, gaping labia majora and
cozing whitish fluid (sperm) from “vaginal opening” ( Dr. Vadimir V. Villaseñor, medico-
legal Officer).

Appellant counter argument: there can be no multiple rape if there is only one laceration on Eileen’s
body
Dr. Brion who made a counter argument is an uncle by consanguinity and estimable counsel of Mayor
Sanchez.

SC:
We dismiss appellants’ argument by reiterating anew that the absences of extensive abrasions
or contusions on the vaginal wall does not rule out rape because the slightest penetrations is enough.

 Appellant’s claim that publicity given to this case impaired their right to a fair trial.
SC: just like all high profile and high stance criminal trials, persuasive publicity is inevitable

 The press does not simple publish info, but also guards against the miscarriage of justice.
- Subjecting police, prosecutors and judicial process to extensive public scrutiny and
criticism.
WHEREFORE, the assailed decision is hereby AFFIRMED in all respects. In addition, each of the
appellants having been found guilty of seven (7) counts of rape with homicide.
Note: The decision of the SC for the indemnity will be discussed in separate digest as modification was
made therein.