12/8/2015

PeoplevsMore:128820:December23,1999:J.Bellosillo:SecondDivision

SECONDDIVISION

[G.R.No.128820.December23,1999]

PEOPLEOFTHEPHILIPPINES,plaintiffappellee,vs.GAUDIOSOMORE,ERNESTO,MOREandJERWIN
MORE,accusedappellants.
DECISION
BELLOSILLO,J.:

GAUDIOSO,ERNESTOandJERWIN,allsurnamedMORE,werefoundguiltyofmurderbythetrialcourtforthekillingofValentino
Pagumay on 22 February 1994 and sentenced to reclusion perpetua with all its accessory penalties and to pay P28,977.00 for funeral
servicesandotherexpenses,P133,333.00forlossofincomeforfive(5)years,P100,000.00formoraldamages,andthecosts.[1]Theynow
cometousappealingtheirconviction.
Thefactualbackdrop:On22February1994ataboutsixo'clockintheevening,ValentinoPagumayandRomeoMurallawerewalking
alongtheriverinBrgy.Igsoligue,Miagao,Iloilo,ontheirwaytonearbyBrgy.IgbogotogetsometubawhentheychancedupontheMore
brothersGaudiosoalias"Nono,"Ernestoalias"Didoy"andJerwinalias"Max"somethreehundred(300)metersaway.Astheydrewnear,
the accused who were armed with a gun and knives, inexplicably shouted why Valentino and Romeo were pointing guns at them. Both
ValentinoandRomeowereunarmed.WhenValentinonervouslytoldRomeo,whohadnoquarrelwiththeaccused,thattheMorebrothers
weregoingtokillhim,theduoranasfastastheycould.Buttheaccusedchasedthem.
Aboutthreehundred(300)metersfromwherethechasebegan,theaccusedledbyJerwinfinallycaughtupwithValentinowhowas
laggingbehindRomeo.JerwinstabbedValentinoattheleftsideofhismouth.Ernestofollowedbystabbingthevictiminthechest.While
Jerwin and Ernesto were stabbing Valentino Gaudioso held their captive by the shoulders. Gaudioso then took his turn and stabbed
Valentinoonthechestcausingthelattertofalltotheground.Thethree(3)accusedpersistedintheircriminaldesignandpinnedtheirvictim
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/dec99/128820.htm

1/8

12/8/2015

PeoplevsMore:128820:December23,1999:J.Bellosillo:SecondDivision

downwiththeirhandsandknees.Theytookturnsinstabbinghimagainseveraltimes.
As the stabbing progressed Romeo was having an unobstructed view of the occurrence some ten (10) meters away.After they were
through with Valentino the accused turned to Romeo and warned him against telling anybody about the incident and ordered him to go
home.Thethree(3)Morebrothersthenranaway.
When the More brothers were already farther down the river Romeo noticed Juanito Faromal standing a few meters away from the
crimescene.AfterseeingValentinoalreadylifelessRomeolefttoinformthevictim'swife,butonthewayhemetSgt.RomeoGersasohe
reportedthemattertohim.[2]Sgt.Gersapursuedtheaccusedbutcouldnotapprehendthemashealreadygottired.Whenhefiredawarning
shot the three (3) accused retaliated and fired three (3) shots instead.Juanito corroborated the testimony of Romeo regarding the assault
exceptthataccordingtohimitwasonlyGaudiosowhostabbedthevictimwhilehisbrothersJerwinandErnestoonlyassistedinrestraining
thevictim.
Theaccused,ontheirpart,invokedselfdefense.TheversionofErnestoandJerwinwasthatataboutsixo'clockintheeveningof22
February1994theywerewalkingalongaroadinBrgy.Igsoligueaboutten(10)arms'lengthaheadoftheirbrotherGaudiosowhenthey
heardsomeoneaskthelatterforalightforhiscigarette.ErnestoandJerwindidnotrecognizethevoice.Abouttwo(2)minuteslaterthey
heardagunexplode.TheylookedbackandsawGaudiosoandValentinoalreadyonthegroundwrestlingwitheachother.Gaudioso was
sittingastrideValentinoashestabbedthelatter.[3]ErnestoandJerwinrushedtowardsthetwo(2)GaudiosoandValentinoentreating
Gaudiosotostop,buttonoavail.GaudiosoonlystoppedwhenValentinowasalreadydead.Gaudiosothenexplainedtohisbrothersthathe
stabbedValentinobecausethelatterwasgoingtoshoothim.Afterwardstheywenthomeanddidnotreporttheincidentanymoretothe
barangaycaptainsinceitwasalreadylate.
GaudiosoclaimedthatwhenhehandedhiscigarettetoValentinouponthelatter'srequesthe,insteadoftakingthecigarette,suddenly
drew a .38 caliber gun and pointed it at him with the words: "I will shoot you.[4] Reacting immediately, Gaudioso, using both hands,
frustratedValentino'sattemptbygrabbingthelatter'srighthandthatwasholdingthegun,twistedit,andthenusedhisfoottooutbalance
Valentinosendingthelattertotheground.ThusValentinowasnotabletofirehisgun.GaudiosothenstraddledValentinoandpinnedhis
left hand with his right knee while his left hand held Valentino's right that was clutching the gun.In this position, Gaudioso repeatedly
stabbedValentinountilthelatterdied.[5]
On9May1996thetrialcourtfoundallthree(3)accused,Gaudioso,ErnestoandJerwinMore,guiltyasprincipalsbyconspiracyfor
the murder of Valentino Pagumay, qualified by abuse of superior strength. The trial court sustained the version of the prosecution and
rejectedthetheoryofselfdefenseprimarilyinviewoftheeighteen(18)stabwoundssustainedbythevictimandthefactthattheywere
caused by at least two (2) different knives, one singlebladed and the other doublebladed, indicating that there were at least two (2)
assailants.Thethree(3)accusedwereaccordinglysentencedtosufferthepenaltyofreclusionperpetuawithallitsaccessorypenalties,and
topaydamagesinthetotalamountofP262,310.00plusthecosts.
Accusedappellantscontendinthisappealthatthetrialcourterred:(a)innotappreciatingintheirfavorthejustifyingcircumstanceof
selfdefense,insistingthatalltheelementsthereofweresuccessfullyestablished,and,(b)infindingthemguiltybeyondreasonabledoubtof
murdernotwithstandingtheinconsistenciesinthetestimoniesofprosecutionwitnessesRomeoMuralla,JuanitoFaromalandSgt.Gersa.
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/dec99/128820.htm

2/8

12/8/2015

PeoplevsMore:128820:December23,1999:J.Bellosillo:SecondDivision

Wefindnomeritintheappeal.Whenselfdefenseisinvokedbyanaccusedchargedwithmurderorhomicidehenecessarilyownsup
tothekillingbutmayescapecriminalliabilitybyprovingthatitwasjustifiedandthatheincurrednocriminalliabilitytherefor.[6]Hence,
the three (3) elements of selfdefense, namely: (a) unlawful aggression on the part of the victim (b) reasonable necessity of the means
employedtopreventorrepeltheaggressionand,(c)lackofsufficientprovocationonthepartofthepersondefendinghimself,whichmust
be proved by clear and convincing evidence.[7] However, without unlawful aggression there can be no selfdefense, either complete or
incomplete.[8]
Intheinstantcase,accusedappellantssoughttoestablishunlawfulaggressiononthepartofValentinoPagumaybytestifyingthatthe
latter,afteraskingGaudiosoforalightforhiscigarette,suddenlyandfornoreasonatall,drewhisgunandpointeditatGaudiosowiththe
threateningwords,"Iwillshootyou."However,quiteanenlighteningandrevealingnarrativefollowsthus:
Q:WhenValentinoPagumaydrewhisgunfromhiswaistwhatdidyoudo?
A:Bothmyhandscaughthishandholdingthefirearmxxxx
Q:WhenyouwereabletograbthehandofValentinoPagumaywhathappenednext?
A:Hefelltotheground.
Q:SoyouwanttotelltheCourtthatimmediatelyafteryougrabbedortookholdofhishandheimmediatelyfelltotheground?
A:YessirbecausehewrestledwithmewhenItookholdbothofhishand(sic)andtwistedhisarm.
Q:WhenValentinoPagumayfelltothegroundwhatdidyoudo?
A:AfterhefelltothegroundIsatonhisabdomen.Myrightkneewaspinningdownhislefthandwhilemylefthandwaspinningonthegroundhis
righthandandthenIdeliveredseveralsuccessivestabblowsonhisbreastxxxx
Q:Andhowmanytimesdidyoustabhim?
A:IwasnotabletocountthenumberoftimesbecauseIwasstabbinghimsuccessively.
Q:Andyoucannotestimatethenumberofstabblowsyoudeliveredtohim?
A:IwasnotabletocountthenumberofblowsbecauseIwasstabbingandhittinghimuntilhisdeath(underscoringours).[9]

Clearly, the unlawful aggression allegedly started by Valentino assuming it to be true had already ceased by the time Gaudioso
repeatedly stabbed Valentino to death. Gaudioso himself testified that after Valentino threatened to shoot him, he was able to grab
Valentino's right hand which was holding the gun, outbalance him, and then pin both his hands while the latter was lying prone on the
ground.HavingthusimmobilizedValentino,therewasobviouslynomorereasonforGaudiosotostabValentinoeighteen(18)timesashe
didbecausetheallegedunlawfulaggressionfromValentinohadstopped.Inlegitimateselfdefensetheaggressionmuststillbeexistingor
continuingwhenthepersonmakingthedefenseattacksorinjurestheaggressor.[10]Thuswhentheunlawfulaggressionceasestoexist,the
onemakingthedefensehasnomorerighttokilltheformeraggressor.[11]Insuchcases,lessviolentmeanswouldhavesufficedhence,if
notresortedto,thepleaofselfdefensemustfail.[12]
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/dec99/128820.htm

3/8

12/8/2015

PeoplevsMore:128820:December23,1999:J.Bellosillo:SecondDivision

IntheinstantcaseValentinowasalreadyeffectivelyimmobilizedbyGaudioso,hence,thelattercouldhaveeithersimplyboxedthe
formerwithhisfreerighthand,hithimonanonvitalpartofhisbody,[13]orbetteryet,summonedhisbrothersErnestoandJerwinwho
werejuststandingafewmetersawaytohelphiminensuringnofurtheraggressionfromValentino.However,quiteinconsistentwithhis
plea of selfdefense, Gaudioso did none of these things.Instead, he even ignored his brothers' entreaties for him to stop, rebuffed their
effortstotheextentofevenaccidentallyhittingJerwinasclaimedbythelatter,[14]andcontinuedstabbingValentinosuccessivelyuntilthe
latterdied.[15]Consideringallthese,thepleaofselfdefensecannotbutbereceivedwithincredulityanddisbelief.
In addition to the foregoing, several other circumstances exist to further undermine the plea of selfdefense and establish accused
appellants'collectiveguilt.
First,thetrialcourtcorrectlynotedthatthevictimsustainedatotalofeighteen(18)stabwounds,fourteen(14)ofwhichwereinflicted
ontheanteriorchestalone,andfour(4)ofwhichwerefatal.Itisanoftrepeatedrulethatthepresenceofalargenumberofwoundsonthe
partofthevictimnegatesselfdefensebecause,ratherthansuggestanefforttodefendoneself,itinsteadstronglyindicatesadetermined
efforttokillthevictim.[16]Second,theclaimthatGaudiosoalonekilledValentinoinselfdefenseandthatErnestoandJerwinhadnothing
todowiththekillingwasdisprovednotonlybyRomeoandJuanito'spositiveidentificationofErnestoandJerwinascoconspirators(at
least) to the crime but, more importantly, by the fact that the stab wounds themselves indicated that there was actually more than one
assailant.AstestifiedtobyDr.MaryJoyceM.Faeldan,theActingMunicipalHealthOfficerofMiagaowhoautopsiedthecadaver,the
eighteen(18)stabwoundssustainedbythevictimwerenotallcausedbyasingleweaponbutbytwo(2)kindsofknives,i.e.,onesingle
bladed,andtheother,doublebladed.Whilethree(3)stabwoundshadbluntandcontussedextremitiesindicatingthattheywereinflicted
with the use of a blunt singlebladed knife, the remaining fourteen (14) stab wounds had regular distinct cleancut edges and sharp
extremitiesindicatingasharpdoublebladedknifeasthemurderweapon.[17]SinceonlyGaudioso'srighthandwasfreetoholdaweapon,
hislefthandalreadygrippingValentino'srighthand,thenitisquiteobviousthathisbrotherslikewiseparticipatedintheassaultasclaimed
bytheprosecutionwitnessesbecauseGaudioso,evidently,couldnothavemanagedtwo(2)weaponsatthesametimewithonlyhisright
handfree.
Third, accusedappellants did not inform the authorities about the incident. If they were really innocent as they claimed to be, they
shouldhavetoldtheauthoritiesabouttheaccidentalkilling.[18]Theirexcusethatitwasalreadylateisnotonlyshallowbutquiteincredible
considering three (3) factors:(a) accusedappellants managed to get home at the relatively early hour of 6:30 in the evening[19](b)the
houseofthebarangaycaptaintowhomtheycouldhavereportedtheincidentwasamerefifty(50)metersawayfromtheirownhouse[20]
and, (c) Gaudioso was himself a barangay official making it easier for him to approach the other barangay authorities who were but his
colleagues.[21]
Fourth,accusedappellantsdonotdenythattheydidnotsurrendertoSgt.Gersawhenthelattersawthemimmediatelyafterthekilling.
In fact, they ignored his warning shot and ran away.Worse, accusedappellants even returned fire with three (3) gunshots of their own,
continued their flight until Sgt. Gersa gave up the chase through sheer exhaustion, and yielded only when they were already invited for
questioningbythepoliceafterhavingbeenidentifiedasthekillersbyeyewitnessesRomeoMurallaandJuanitoFaromal.
Ontheallegedinconsistenciesinthetestimoniesoftheprosecutionwitnesses,sufficeittosaythatinconsistenciesonminorandtrivial
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/dec99/128820.htm

4/8

12/8/2015

PeoplevsMore:128820:December23,1999:J.Bellosillo:SecondDivision

matters do not diminish but rather bolster a witness's credibility as they in fact manifest spontaneity and lack of scheming.[22] In other
words,theyarebadgesoftruthratherthanindiciaoffalsehood.[23]ThustheallegedcontradictionsontherelativepositionsofRomeoand
Valentino while the latter was being stabbed, whether it was Romeo or Juanito who informed the victim's wife about the incident, and
whether Juanito was indeed taken by Sgt. Gersa to Camp Monteclaro after the incident, are but trivial and minor inconsistencies which
neither detract from the essential integrity of the prosecution's evidence nor strengthen accusedappellants' flagging plea of selfdefense.
Havingalreadypleadedselfdefense,accusedappellantscouldnotinvoketheallegedweaknessoftheprosecution'sevidence,for,evenif
the latter were weak (which is certainly not so in the instant case), it could not be disbelieved in view of their open admission of
responsibilityforthekilling.[24]
On the civil liabilities of accusedappellants a modification of the amounts awarded by the trial court is in order.By way of moral
damages,thetrialcourtawardedP100,000.00.Sincetheawardisnotmeanttoenrichtheheirsofthevictimbutonlytocompensatethemfor
injuries sustained to their feelings we reduce the amount to P50,000.00 consistent with prevailing jurisprudence.[25] A reduction of the
actualdamagesawardedislikewiseproper.ThetrialcourtawardedP28,977.00forvariousexpensesincurredbythevictim'swidowasa
resultofthekilling.However,sinceonlythecostsofthetomb,coffin,embalmingandfuneralservicesinthetotalamountofP8,977.00
wereproperlyreceipted[26] the estimated amount of P20,000.00 allegedly spent for food and drinks consumed during the wake must be
disallowedfornothavingbeencompetentlyproved.TheCourtcanonlygivecredittoexpenseswhichhavebeendulysubstantiated.[27]
Onthevictim'slossofearningcapacity,VictoriaPagumaytestifiedthatherhusband,afarmer,was53yearsoldwhenhewaskilled,
withanaverageannualincomeofP40,000.00toP50,000.00.[28]UsingP40,000.00asthedeceased'saverageannualincomewhilestillalive,
thetrialcourtawardedP133,333.00 for loss of earning capacity after multiplying twothirds (P26,666.67) of the victim's average annual
income[29]byfive(5)years.Noreasonwasgiven,andnolegalbasisexists,whylostincomewasawardedforonlyfive(5)years.Onthe
contrary,thevictim'slostearningsaretobecomputedaccordingtotheformulaadoptedbytheCourtinseveraldecidedcases,[30]towit:net
earning capacity ("X") equals life expectancy[31] multiplied by gross annual income[32] less living expenses.[33] Thus, the victim's lost
earningcapacityamountedtoP405,000.00asmaybeshownhereunder
X=2(8053)x[P45,000P22,500]
3
X=2(27)xP22,500
3
X=54xP22,500
3
X=18xP22,500
X=P405,000.00
Finally,anawardofanotherP50,000.00iswarrantedascivilindemnityforthedeathofthevictimwithoutneedofevidenceorproofof
damages.[34]
WHEREFORE, the appealed Decision dated 9 May 1996 of the Regional Trial Court of Iloilo City, Branch 25, finding accused
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/dec99/128820.htm

5/8

12/8/2015

PeoplevsMore:128820:December23,1999:J.Bellosillo:SecondDivision

appellants GAUDIOSO MORE, ERNESTO MORE and JERWIN MORE guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Murder is AFFIRMED.
Accusedappellantsareorderedtopay,jointlyandseverally,theheirsofValentinoPagumaythefollowingamounts:(a)P50,000.00ascivil
indemnity(b)P50,000.00 as moral damages (c) P8,977.00 as actual damages and, (d) P405,000.00 for loss of earning capacity. Costs
againstaccusedappellants.
SOORDERED.
Mendoza,Quisumbing,BuenaandDeLeon,Jr.,JJ.,concur.

[1]DecisionpennedbyJudgeBartolomeM.Fanual,RTCBr.25,IloiloCityRollo,pp.2133.
[2]TSN,23September1994,pp.516.
[3]TSN,10November1994,pp.37.
[4]TSN,8June1995,p.16.
[5]Id.,p.12.
[6]Peoplev.Galapin,G.R.No.124215,31July1998,293SCRA474,488Peoplev.Molina,G.R.Nos.11583536,22July1998,292SCRA742,776Peoplev.
Villamor,G.R.No.124981,10July1998,292SCRA384,395Peoplev.Aguilar,G.R.Nos.12062223,10July1998,292SCRA349,356Peoplev.Magaro,G.R.
No.113021,2July1998,291SCRA681,686Peoplev.Amamangpang,G.R.No.108491,2July1998,291SCRA638,649650Peoplev.Solis,G.R.No.124127,
29June1998,291SCRA529,534535Peoplev.DelaCruz,G.R.Nos.10961923,26June1998,291SCRA164,180.
[7]Peoplev.Navarro,G.R.No.125538,3September1998,295SCRA139,144.
[8] People v. Sol, G.R. No. 118504, 7 May 1997, 272 SCRA 392, 401 People v. Ignacio, G.R. No. 107801, 26 March 1997, 270 SCRA 445, 451 People v.
Agravante,G.R.Nos.10540204,5September1994,236SCRA300,313.
[9]TSN,8June1995,pp.812.
[10]Peoplev.Decena,G.R.No.107874,4August1994,235SCRA67,74.
[11]Peoplev.Babor,G.R.No.106875,24September1996,262SCRA359,365Peoplev.Santos,G.R.No.9925960,29March1996,255SCRA309,318319
Peoplev.So,G.R.No.104664,28August1995,247SCRA708,720Peoplev.Maceda,G.R.No.91106,27May1991,197SCRA499,509.
[12]SeePeoplec.Capoquian,G.R.No.109145,22September1994,236SCRA655,664.
[13]Ibid.
[14]TSN,23February1995,pp.2030.
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/dec99/128820.htm

6/8

12/8/2015

PeoplevsMore:128820:December23,1999:J.Bellosillo:SecondDivision

[15]TSN,8June1995,p.12.
[16]Peoplev.Magallanes,G.R.No.114265,8July1997,275SCRA222,231Peoplev.Alvarez,G.R.No.117689,30January1997,267SCRA266,276.
[17]TSN,30September1994,p.12.
[18]Peoplev.Rivera,G.R.No.101798,10May1993,221SCRA647,654.
[19]TSN,23February1995,pp.2930.
[20]TSN,10November1994,p.22.
[21]TSN,8June1995,p.24.
[22]Peoplev.Cristobal,G.R.No.116279,29January1996,252SCRA507,517.
[23]Peoplev.Laray,G.R.No.101809,20February1996,253SCRA654,665.
[24]Peoplev.Pea,G.R.No.116022,1July1998,291SCRA606,614.
[25]Peoplev.Iligan,G.R.No.128286,20July1999.
[26]SeeExhs."F,""G,"and"H."
[27]SeePeoplev.Gutierrez,Jr.,G.R.No.116281,8February1999.
[28]TSN,20October1994,p.5.
[29]Thewidowtestifiedthat1/3ofherhusband'sannualincomewasalwaysspentforhis"personalsupport"TSN,20October1994,p.6.
[30]Peoplev.Panida,G.R.Nos.127125and138952,6July1999Peoplev.Verde,G.R.No.119077,10February1999citingSanitarySteamLaundry,Inc.v.Court
ofAppeals,G.R.No.119092,10December1998,MetroManilaTransitCorporationv.CourtofAppeals,G.R.Nos.116617and126395,16November1998,Negros
NavigationCo.,Inc.v.CourtofAppeals,281SCRA534(1997),andVillaReyTransit,Inc.v.CourtofAppeals,31SCRA511(1970).
[31]Theacceptedformulafordetermininglifeexpectancyis2/3multipliedby[80minusageofthedeceased](NegrosNavigationCo.,Inc.v.CourtofAppeals,G.R.
No.110398,7November1997,281SCRA534,546547).
[32]Grossannualincomeisthedeceased'sannualincomebeforedeductionoflivingexpenses[50%ofgrossannualincome](Davilav.PhilippineAirlines,No.L
28512,28February1973,49SCRA497,505,citingVillaReyTransit,Inc.v.CourtofAppeals,No.L25499,18February1970,31SCRA511).
[33]Livingexpensesarecomputedat50%ofgrossannualincome.SeePeoplev.Panida,G.R.Nos.127125,and138952,6July1999,andPeoplev.Verde,G.R.No.
119077,10February1999.
[34] Peoplev.Espanola,G.R.No.119308,18April1997,271SCRA689,716Peoplev.Eribal,G.R.No.127662,25March1999Peoplev.Piamonte,G.R.No.
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/dec99/128820.htm

7/8

12/8/2015

PeoplevsMore:128820:December23,1999:J.Bellosillo:SecondDivision

91999,25February1999Peoplev.Batidor,G.R.No.126027,18February1999.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/dec99/128820.htm

8/8