PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES V.

ELYBOY SO Y ORBES
[G.R. NO. 10664. August 28, 1995]
KAPUNAN, J:

FACTS OF THE CASE:

- On June 1991, accused Elyboy So, while walking his friend, Teresita Domingo, passed
by the house of his first cousins, Esteban, Emy and Edgar all surnamed So. When they
passed his cousins’ house, he was invited by his cousin Edgar to have a drink with them.

- After walking his companion home, Elyboy went to his cousin’s place and joined them in
their drinking session.

- In this drinking session, accused met Mario, the future husband of his cousin Emy.After a
while, Emy felt sleepy so she went inside the house to sleep. While Emy was sleeping
inside the house, she was awakened by the noises coming from the outside. It turned out
that the accused had an argument with someone and he was shouting loudly, disturbing
the neighbors in the proess. After the accused was pacified, Mario told him to go home as
he was disturbing their neighbors.

- Come morning while Emy and Mario were waiting for a taxi, Elyboy suddenly appeared
from behind and attacked Mario with an eleven inch fan knife. He repeatedly stabbed
Mario despite the pleas of Emy to stop. Even when Mario tried to run but unfortunately
slipped, Elyboy still continued to attack him. Accused fled from the scene and ran in a
dark alley. After a while the policemen came to arrest him and asked him to surrender,
accused then surrendered.

- Accused argued that he was defending himself from the deceased and that he was insane
at the time of the incident,

- The RTC held that he is guilty of murder and imposing on him reclusion perpetua.
Hence, the appeal to Supreme Court.

ISSUES:

- Whether or not he is guilty of murder

- Whether or not the lower court erred in disregarding his insanity and self-defense claim
- Whether or not the lower court erred in when it held that the testimony of the accused-appellant
Elyboy is undeserving of credit, improbable and implausible.
HELD:

- The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the RTC and dismissed the Petition of
Accused.

Credibility of witness

The question whether the lower court erred when it held the testimony of the accused-apellant
undeserving of credit raises the issue of the credibility of the witness. Appellant would like the
S.C. to believe that the testimony of Emy So is biased and this was aggravated by her grudge
towards the accused. “The Court has time and again ruled that mere relationship of the witness
to the victim does not automatically impair his credibility and render the testimony less worthy of
faith and credit”

Self-defense

According the Supreme Court, the essential element to prove self-defense is if

there is an unlawful aggression done by the deceased. Accused claim that Mario attacked
him with a knife, this did not convince the Supreme Court “Even if we allow appellant's
contention that Mario Tuquero was the initial unlawful aggressor, we still cannot sustain
his plea of self-defense. After appellant successfully wrested the knife from Tuquero, the
unlawful aggression had ceased. After the unlawful aggression has ceased, the one
making the defense has no more right to kill or even wound the former aggressor”

Also, the presence of the large number of wounds that the deceased sustained, the
nature and extent of the stabbed wounds indicated the determination of the accused to kill
the deceased.

Insanity

Claim is unmeritorious “In order that insanity may be taken as an exempting

circumstance, there must be complete depreciation of intelligence in the commission of
the act or that the accused acted without the least discernment. Mere abnormality of his
mental faculties does not exclude imputability”. The fact that he recalls what transpired
before, during and after the incident and even knows the nature and content of his
testimony does not betray an abnormal mind.