PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs.

RENATO ESPAOL FACTS: Appellant Renato Espaol was charged with killing his wife, Gloria Pascua Espaol. At one point during the victims wake, a nephew of the victim, approached appellant and asked why the latter killed his aunt. Appellant just kept silent. Such instance was used as a circumstantial evidence against then accused. Article 246 of the RPC, parricide is the killing of ones legitimate or illegitimate father, mother, child, any ascendant, descendant or spouse and is punishable by the single indivisible penalty of reclusion perpetua to death. (NOTE: Article 246. Parricide. Any person who shall kill his father, mother or child, whether legitimate or illegitimate, or any of his ascendants, or descendants, or his spouse, shall be guilty of parricide and shall be punished by the penalty of reclusion perpetua to death.) ISSUE: Whether or not the accuseds silence when asked by the victims relative constitutes an admission by silence. RULING: Yes. Another piece of evidence against appellant was his silence when his wifes nephew asked him why he killed his wife. His silence on this accusation is deemed an admission under Section 32, Rule 130 of the Rules of Court: (NOTE: Section 32. Admission by silence. An act or declaration made in the presence and within the hearing observation of a party who does or says nothing when the act or declaration is such as naturally to call for action or comment if not true, and when proper and possible for him to do so, may be given in evidence against him.)