Topic: Disguise as an aggravating circumstance.
The fact that one covers his face with a handkerchief constitutes disguise because he thereby avoids recognition
Accused-Appellant: CIRIACO PIRING
Victims: Leonardo Nacpil and Marcelina Mercado
Serious Physical Injury: Jose Nacpil 13y/o son
Appeal: Decision of CFI Pampanga be reversed of double murder
Aggravating circumstances: treachery, disguise, and dwelling
Mitigating circumstances: lack of instruction
Verdict: Guilty of two counts of murder
Penalty: Reclusion Perpetua
Facts:
1. On October 9, 1935, spouses Leon Nacpil, and Marcelino Mercado were attacked and killed; their 13y/o son Jose Nacpil, seriously wounded, while they were all sleeping in Barrio Ungut, Porac, Pampanga. After hitting them with bolo, their house was also set on fire.
2. There had been an ongoing talk in the town that the murdered spouses were witches. About a month prior to the incident, Leon had an altercation with the accuseds when they confronted him about it, wounding him in the little finger.
3. Upon petition of the accused, two separate cases were filed in the case of double murder; one for Felix Capili and Flaviano Capili, and another for Ciriaco Piring
4. Piring denied his participation to the crimes and testified that he only did it upon the threat to his life made by his uncle, Felix Capili. The defense also tried to discredit the credibility of the key witness of the prosecution, Jose, saying that he must have been hallucinating.
5. Jose testified that he was awakened by his father's cries and that he saw a man covered by a handkerchief who attacked his father and mother, and also approached him saying "there's a boy" as if he were addressing somebody else. Then struck his face with a bolo. When he woke up, their house was already on fire. He said that a voice guided him to the safety of his sister's house, which was a kilometer away. He said it was Jesus.
Issue:
1. W/N Piring is guilty of double murder.
2. W/N the aggravating circumstances of nighttime, uninhabited place, cruelty, and aid of armed persons, disguise, dwelling, and cruelty in addition to the qualifying circumstance of treachery be appreciated.
3. W/N the penalty should be death penalty.
Ruling:
1. Yes, he is guilty not just of only one crime of double murder but of two crimes of murder of Leonardo Nacpil and Marcelina Mercado.
The high court found merit on Jose Nacpil's testimony that the man who attacked them that night wore the same clothes the next morning. Piring did wear the same clothes the morning after the incident. The teen also maintained that the voice belonged to the appellant, which leaves no doubt that he directly participated in the murders.
2. Treachery should be considered as a qualifying circumstance of the said crimes. Covering one's face with a handkerchief was also appreciated as an aggravating circumstance of disguise as it was used to avoid recognition. And dwelling because the crimes were committed in the very house of the victims.
Nighttime was necessarily included in treachery. Uninhabited place hasn't been proven since there were other houses nearby. Cruelty wasn't appreciated since the spouses had been dead when their house was set on fire. And all of them acted under the same plan for the same purpose so there was no aid of armed men.
3. No. There has been no unanimity in the imposition of the highest penalty so reclusion perpetua, the next higher in degree shall be imposed.
Comments
Post a Comment