2/17/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 352

VOL. 352, FEBRUARY 20, 2001 307

People vs. Endino

*
G.R. No. 133026. February 20, 2001.

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs.

EDWARD ENDINO (at large) and GERRY GALGARIN
alias TOTO, accused. GERRY GALGARIN alias TOTO,
accused-appellant.

Criminal Law; Flight; An accused’s attempt at jailbreak

reveals a guilty conscience.—Corroborating further accused-
appellant’s guilt, probably with intense incriminating effect, were
his immediate flight after the slaying, and his attempt at
jailbreak revealing a guilty conscience, hence, his persistent effort
to evade the clutches of the law.
Same; Custodial Investigation; Extrajudicial Confessions;
Admissions; Mass Media; A videotaped interview showing the
accused unburdening his guilt willingly, openly and publicly in
the presence of newsmen does not form part of custodial
investigation if it was not given to police officers but to media men
in an attempt to elicit sympathy and forgiveness from the public.—
Apropos the court a quo’s admission of accused-appellant’s
videotaped confession, we find such admission proper. The
interview was recorded on video and it showed accused-appellant
unburdening his guilt willingly, openly and publicly in the
presence of newsmen. Such confession does not form part of
custodial investigation as it was not given to police officers but to
media men in an attempt to elicit sympathy and forgiveness from
the public. Besides, if he had indeed been forced into confessing,
he could have easily sought succor from the newsmen who, in all
likelihood, would have been symphatetic with him.
Same; Same; Same; Same; Same; Because of the inherent
danger in the use of television as a medium for admitting one’s
guilt, and the recurrence of this phenomenon in several cases, it is
prudent that trial courts are reminded that extreme caution must
be taken in further admitting confessions.—However, because of
the inherent danger in the use of television as a medium for
admitting one’s guilt, and the recurrence of this phenomenon in
several cases, it is prudent that trial courts are reminded that

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000168fa936292d2416da9003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 1/10
2/17/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 352

extreme caution must be taken in further admitting similar

confessions. For in all probability, the police, with the connivance
of unscrupulous media practitioners, may attempt to legitimize
coerced extrajudicial confessions and place them beyond the
exclusionary rule by having an accused admit an offense on
television. Such a situation would be detrimen-

_______________

* SECOND DIVISION.

308

308 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People vs. Endino

tal to the guaranteed rights of the accused and thus imperil our
criminal justice system.
Same; Same; Same; Same; Same; We should never presume
that all media confessions described as voluntary have been freely
given—this type of confession always remains suspect and
therefore should be thoroughly examined and scrutinized.—A word
of counsel then to lower courts: we should never presume that all
media confessions described as voluntary have been freely given.
This type of confession always remains suspect and therefore
should be thoroughly examined and scrutinized. Detection of
coerced confessions is admittedly a difficult and arduous task for
the courts to make. It requires persistence and determination in
separating polluted confessions from untainted ones. We have a
sworn duty to be vigilant and protective of the rights guaranteed
by the Constitution.
Same; Murder; Aggravating Circumstances; Treachery; The
crime committed is murder where the victim was stabbed while he
was simply standing on the pavement with his girlfriend waiting
for a ride, blissfully oblivious of the accused’s criminal design.—
With all the evidence tightly ringed around accused-appellant, the
question that next presents itself is whether the trial court
correctly denominated the crime as murder qualified by
treachery. Doubtless, the crime committed is one of murder
considering that the victim was stabbed while he was simply
standing on the pavement with his girlfriend waiting for a ride,
blissfully oblivious of the accused’s criminal design. The
suddenness of the assault on an unsuspecting victim, without the

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000168fa936292d2416da9003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 2/10
2/17/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 352

slightest provocation from him who had no opportunity to parry

the attack, certainly qualifies the killing to murder.

APPEAL from a decision of the Regional Trial Court of

Puerto Princesa City, Br. 49.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.

     The Solicitor General for plaintiff-appellee.
     Robert Y. Peneyra for accused-appellant.

BELLOSILLO, J.:

YIELDING to man’s brutish instinct for revenge, Edward

Endino, with the aid of Gerry Galgarin alias Toto, slew
Dennis Aquino in the presence of a lady whose love they
once shared.

309

VOL. 352, FEBRUARY 20, 2001 309

People vs. Endino

On a busy street in Puerto Princesa City in the evening of

16 October 1991, an emboldened Gerry Galgarin, uncle of
accused Edward Endino, suddenly and without warning
lunged at Dennis and stabbed him repeatedly on the chest.
Dennis’ girlfriend Clara Agagas who was with him,
stunned by the unexpected attack, pleaded to Galgarin to
stop. Dennis struggled and succeeded momentarily to free
himself from his attacker. Dennis dashed towards the
nearby Midtown Sales but his escape was foiled when from
out of nowhere Edward Endino appeared and fired at
Dennis. As Dennis staggered for safety, the two (2)
assailants fled in the direction of the airport.
Meanwhile, Dennis, wounded and bleeding, sought
refuge inside the Elohim Store where he collapsed on the
floor. He was grasping for breath and near death. Clara
with the help of some onlookers took him to the hospital
but Dennis expired even before he could receive medical
attention. According to the autopsy report of Dr. Josephine
Goh-Cruz, cause of death was “cardio-respiratory arrest
secondary to hypovolemic shock 1
secondary to a stab wound
which penetrated the heart.”
On 18 October 1991, an Information for the murder of
Dennis Aquino was filed against Edward Endino and
accused-appellant Gerry Galgarin and warrants were
issued for their arrest. However, as both accused remained
at large, the trial court issued on 26 December 1991 an

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000168fa936292d2416da9003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 3/10
2/17/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 352

order putting the case in the archives without prejudice to

its reinstatement upon their apprehension.
On 19 November 1992, Gerry Galgarin was arrested
through the combined efforts of the Antipolo and Palawan
police forces at a house in Sitio Sto. Niño, Antipolo, Rizal.
He was immediately taken into temporary custody by the
Antipolo Police. Early in the evening of the following day,
he was fetched from the Antipolo Police Station by PO3
Gaudencio Manlavi and PO3 Edwin Magbanua of the
Palawan police force to be taken to Palawan and be tried
accordingly.
On their way to the airport, they stopped at the ABS-
CBN television station where accused Galgarin was
interviewed by report-

_______________

1 See Exh. “C”; Original Records, p. 75.

310

310 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People vs. Endino

ers. Video footages of the interview were taken showing

Galgarin admitting his guilt while pointing to his nephew
Edward Endino as the gunman. According to Galgarin,
after attacking Aquino, they left for Roxas, Palawan, where
his sister Langging who is Edward’s mother, was waiting.
Langging gave them money for their fare for Manila. They
took the boat for Batangas, where they stayed for a few
days, and proceeded to Manila where they separated, with
him heading for Antipolo. Galgarin appealed for Edward to
give himself up to the authorities. His interview was shown
over the ABS-CBN evening news program TV Patrol.
The case against accused-appellant Gerry Galgarin was
established through the testimony of Clara Agagas who
said that she was with the victim Dennis Aquino standing
outside the Soundlab Recording Studio, a barhouse owned
by him, when Galgarin suddenly approached them and
without any prior warning stabbed Dennis. Dennis tried to
run away, but Edward, a spurned lover who harbored ill-
feelings towards her and Dennis, shot Dennis. She
recognized Edward2 and Gerry because the street was
sufficiently lighted.
The testimony of Clara Agagas was corroborated by
Anita Leong, next-door neighbor of Dennis, who testified
that a little past six o’clock in the evening of 16 October
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000168fa936292d2416da9003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 4/10
2/17/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 352

1991 Gerry Galgarin together with a companion went to

her house looking for Dennis. She instructed them to
proceed to the Soundlab Recording Studio as Dennis might
still be there. But a few minutes later she heard a shot.
Instinctively, she instructed her two (2) young daughters to
duck for cover while she anxiously waited for her seven (7)-
year old daughter Josephine who was out of the house for
an errand for her. Soon enough she heard Josephine
knocking at their door. She was crying because
3
she said her
Kuya Dennis had been shot and stabbed.
Josephine confirmed her mother’s testimony and even
said that she had seen Gerry Galgarin stab her Kuya
Dennis and she could remember
4
Gerry very well because of
the mole below his nose.

________________

2 TSN, 19 March 1993, pp. 80-126.

3 TSN, 25 June 1993, pp. 127-155.
4 TSN, 28 July 1993, pp. 156-186.

311

VOL. 352, FEBRUARY 20, 2001 311

People vs. Endino

For his part, accused-appellant Gerry Galgarin disclaimed

having taken part in the slaying of Dennis. Gerry asserted
that on 14 October 1991 he was in Antipolo to help his
common-law wife Maria Marasigan give birth to their first
born. He stayed with her until the 16th of October when 5
she was discharged from the Pedragoza Maternity Clinic.
Clarita Florentino Pedragoza, the midwife who delivered
his son, supported the alibi of accused-appellant. However,
she admitted that when she registered the child’s birth on
13 December 1993 or more than two (2) years after the
delivery, she informed 6the civil registrar that the child’s
father was “unknown.” His story was also confirmed by
Dolores Arciaga and Maria Tomenio, his co-workers at the
Kainan sa Kubo Sing Along Restaurant, who testified that
accused-appellant was fetched by a neighbor from the
restaurant in the early afternoon of 14 October
7
with the
news that his wife was having labor pains.
Accused-appellant disowned the confession which he
made over TV Patrol and claimed that it was induced by
the threats of the arresting police officers. He asserted that
the videotaped confession was constitutionally infirmed

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000168fa936292d2416da9003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 5/10
2/17/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 352

and inadmissible under the exclusionary 8

rule provided in
Sec. 12, Art. III, of the Constitution.
The trial court however admitted the video footages on
the strength of the testimony of the police officers that no
force or compulsion was exerted on accused-appellant and
upon a finding that his confession was made before a group
of newsmen that could have dissipated any semblance of
hostility towards him. The court gave credence to the
arresting officers’ assertion that it was even

________________

5 TSN, 3 February 1994, pp. 322-350.

6 TSN, 28 August 1995, p. 365.
7 TSN, 22 November 1993, pp. 228-266.
8 Sec. 12. x x x x (2) No torture, force, violence, threat, intimidation, or
any other means which vitiate the free will shall be used against him.
Secret detention places, solitary, incommunicado, or other similar forms of
detention are prohibited.
(3) Any confession or admission obtained in violation of this or Section
17 hereof shall be inadmissible in evidence against him.

312

312 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People vs. Endino

accused-appellant who pleaded with them that he be

allowed to air his appeal on national television for Edward
to surrender.
The alibi of Galgarin was likewise rejected since there
was no convincing evidence to support his allegation that
he was not at the locus criminis on the evening of 16
October 1991. Accordingly, accused-appellant Gerry9
Galgarin was convicted of murder qualified by treachery
and sentenced to reclusion perpetua. Additionally, he was
ordered to indemnify the heirs of Dennis Aquino
P50,000.00 as compensatory damages and P72,725.35 as
actual damages. The case against his nephew and co-
accused Edward Endino remained in the archives without
prejudice10 to its reinstatement as soon as he could be
arrested.
In his Appellant’s Brief, Gerry Galgarin assails the trial
court for rejecting his alibi and admitting his videotaped
confession as evidence against him.
The argument that accused-appellant could not be at the
scene of the crime on 16 October 1991 as he was in Antipolo
assisting his wife who was giving birth on the 14th of that
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000168fa936292d2416da9003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 6/10
2/17/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 352

month, is not persuasive. Alibi11 is a weak defense. The

testimony of Cornelio Tejero, Jr., Philippine Airlines Load
Controller of the Puerto Princesa City, that the name of
“Gerry Galgarin” did not appear on their passenger
manifest for the 16 October 1991 Manila-Puerto Princesa
flight, could not be relied upon inasmuch as he himself
admitted that they could not be sure of their passengers’
real identities. The testimonies of accused-appellant’s co-
workers that he was in Antipolo on 14 October 1991 did not
fortify his defense either since these witnesses did not
categorically state that they saw him in Antipolo in the
evening of 16 October 1991.
With accused-appellant having been positively identified
by the prosecution witnesses as the one who stabbed
Dennis, his bare denial proves futile and unavailing.
Josephine Leong’s identification of accused-appellant was
given in a very categorical and spon-

_______________

9 The lower court characterized the attack against Dennis Aquino as

sudden and unexpected; Rollo, p. 32.
10 Decision penned by Judge Panfilo S. Salva, RTC-Br. 49, Puerto
Princesa City; Rollo, pp. 25-33.
11 TSN, 7 February 1996, pp. 389-399.

313

VOL. 352, FEBRUARY 20, 2001 313

People vs. Endino

taneous manner. Her confidence as to the attacker’s

identity was clearly shown by her vivid recollection of him
having a mole below his nose, which is correct. Moreover, it
is inconceivable for Josephine and Anita to implicate
accused-appellant, a complete stranger to them, if there
was no truth to their assertion. As for Clara, her naming of
accused-appellant as her boyfriend’s assailant was not done
out of spite, but was impelled by her desire to seek justice
for Dennis.
Corroborating further accused-appellant’s guilt,
probably with intense incriminating effect, were his
immediate12
flight after the slaying, and his attempt at
jailbreak revealing a guilty conscience, hence, his
persistent effort to evade the clutches of the law.
Apropos the court a quo’s admission of accused-
appellant’s videotaped confession, we find such admission
proper. The interview was recorded on video and it showed
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000168fa936292d2416da9003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 7/10
2/17/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 352

accused-appellant unburdening his guilt willingly, openly

and publicly in the presence of newsmen. Such confession
does not form part of custodial investigation as it was not
given to police officers but to media men in an attempt to
elicit sympathy and forgiveness from the public. Besides, if
he had indeed been forced into confessing, he could have
easily sought succor from the newsmen who, in all
likelihood, would have been symphatetic
13
with him. As the
trial court stated in its Decision —

Furthermore, accused, in his TV interview (Exh. H), freely

admitted that he had stabbed Dennis Aquino, and that Edward
Endino had shot him (Aquino). There is no showing that the
interview of accused was coerced or against his will. Hence, there
is basis to accept the truth of his statements therein.

We agree. However, because of the inherent danger in the

use of television as a medium for admitting one’s guilt, and
the recur-

________________

12 In his Order dated 9 March 1994 then Presiding Judge Sabas R.

Acosta took note of accused-appellant’s attempted escape from the PNP
Headquarters Detention Cell sometime in October of 1993; Original
Records, p. 180.
13 See Exh. “H,” p. 8; Rollo, p. 32.

314

314 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People vs. Endino

14
rence of this phenomenon in several cases, it is prudent
that trial courts are reminded that extreme caution must
be taken in further admitting similar confessions. For in all
probability, the police, with the connivance of unscrupulous
media practitioners, may attempt to legitimize coerced
extrajudicial confessions and place them beyond the
exclusionary rule by having an accused admit an offense on
television. Such a situation would be detrimental to the
guaranteed rights of the accused and thus imperil our
criminal justice system.
We do not suggest that videotaped confessions given
before media men by an accused with the knowledge of and
in the presence of police officers are impermissible. Indeed,
the line between proper and invalid police techniques and
conduct is a difficult one to draw, particularly in cases such

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000168fa936292d2416da9003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 8/10
2/17/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 352

as this where it is essential to make sharp judgments in

determining whether a confession was given under coercive
physical or psychological atmosphere.
A word of counsel then to lower courts: we should never
presume that all media confessions described as voluntary
have been freely given. This type of confession always
remains suspect and therefore should be thoroughly
examined and scrutinized. Detection of coerced confessions
is admittedly a difficult and arduous task for the courts to
make. It requires persistence and determination in
separating polluted confessions from untainted ones. We
have a sworn duty to be vigilant and protective of the
rights guaranteed by the Constitution.
With all the evidence tightly ringed around accused-
appellant, the question that next presents itself is whether
the trial court correctly denominated the crime as murder
qualified by treachery. Doubtless, the crime committed is
one of murder considering that the victim was stabbed
while he was simply standing on the pavement with his
girlfriend waiting for a ride, blissfully oblivious of the
accused’s criminal design. The suddenness of the assault on
an unsuspecting victim, without the slightest provocation
from him

________________

14 People v. Vizcarra, No. L-38859, 30 July 1982, 115 SCRA 743; People
v. Bernardo, G.R. No. 97393, 17 March 1993, 220 SCRA 31; People v.
Andan, G.R No. 116437, 3 March 1997, 269 SCRA 95.

315

VOL. 352, FEBRUARY 20, 2001 315

People vs. Endino

who had no opportunity to 15parry the attack, certainly

qualifies the killing to murder.
WHEREFORE, the Decision of the court a quo finding
accused-appellant GERRY GALGARIN alias Toto guilty of
Murder qualified by Treachery, sentencing him to reclusion
perpetua, and ordering him to indemnify the heirs of
Dennis Aquino in the amount of P50,000.00 as
compensatory damages and P72,725.35 as actual damages,
is AFFIRMED with the MODIFICATION that accused-
appellant is further ordered to compensate the decedent’s
heirs P50,000.00 as moral damages for their emotional and
mental anguish. Costs against accused-appellant.
SO ORDERED.
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000168fa936292d2416da9003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 9/10
2/17/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 352

     Mendoza, Quisumbing, Buena and De Leon, Jr., JJ.,

concur.

Judgment affirmed with modification.

Notes.—The ruling in People v. Andan, 269 SCRA 95

(1997), does not authorize the police to obtain confessions
they cannot otherwise obtain through media reporters who
are actually acting for the police. (People vs. Morada, 307
SCRA 362 [1999])
It is axiomatic that flight negates self-defense and
indicates guilt. (People vs. Mier, 324 SCRA 628 [2000])

——o0o——

_______________

15 People v. Sumalpong, G.R. No. 124705, 20 January 1998, 284 SCRA

464; People v. Medina, G.R. No. 113691, 6 February 1998, 286 SCRA 44;
People v. Ebrada, G.R. No. 122774, 25 September 1998, 296 SCRA 353.

316

© Copyright 2019 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights reserved.

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000168fa936292d2416da9003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 10/10