Q: Do you swear to tell the truth and nothing but the
truth?
Also, I had a duty to accomplish a medico legal for
each of my cases and I had to appear before the honorable courts of law in connection with the cases that I handled, sir.
A: Yes Maam.
Q: How many medico legal cases have you handled?
Q: After 1969 what did you do?
A: Approximately around 10,000 cases sir.
A: I took the medical board exam.
Q: How many reached the courts?
Q: When did you pass the boards?
A: About 20%. Around 2000.
A: I passed in March 1970.
Q: Being a doctor, have you had any seminars, special
trainings on this field?
Q: Thereafter, did you take an oath being a doctor?
A: Yes. Q: After taking the oath, what did you do then? A: I applied for a position of medico legal officer of the NBI and I was accepted sometime in June of 1970. Q: Until what time? A: Up to the time I retired from the NBI in the year 2000. Q: What was the nature of your work as medico legal of the NBI? A: It was purely medico legal work involving autopsies, medico legal autopsies, medico legal examinations, physical examinations of person of those alledgedly been victims of physical injuries and of sexual assault.
A: Mostly training at the NBI. I also had to attend
seminars regarding legal medecines and sometimes each of us would be resource persons for several topic regarding legal medicines. Q: Have you gone abroad for special training? A: I was fortunate to be given a government grant to have an in depth training in legal medicine in the US for a short time. Q: By legal medicine, what do you mean by that? A: It is the branch of medicine that deals with the application of medical knowledge in relation to law. Q: After retiring from the NBI, what did you do next?
A: I have the privilege of teaching legal medicine to
medical students of the UST Faculty of Medicine and Surgery and as substitute instructor at the St. Lukes Medical School for a period of 5 semesters. Q: Are you a member of any medical associations? A: I am a current member and a founding member of the Philippine Association of Forensic Medicine, Inc. Q: Okay Dr. Garcia. In connection with this case, you were subpoenaed to bring the medical report and other record of one patient, Arjay Valenton. Do you have a copy of that record? A: I have here my copy of the medico legal report on the examination done on one Arjay Valenton. (Presents Medico Legal Report) Q: This is an original copy which you gave me a while ago, are you referring to this medico legal report?
Q: There is a two page attachment in your medico
legal report. What are these attachments? A: One is the sketch of the human head depicting four sides of the human head. Q: And the other attachment. What is that? A: This is the sketch of the human body showing the front and the back side. Atty. Manalo: For purposes of identification. Your honor, we request to substitute our Exhibit E with this original copy, Your honor. Court: Granted! Atty. Manalo: And the attachment No. 1 as Exh. E-1 and attachment no. 2 as Exh E-2. Court: Mark them.
A: Yes Sir. This is the original medico legal report on
the examination of one Arjay Valenton
Q: In this medico legal report, it is stated here that you
made examination on patient Arjay Valenton, private complainant in this case, on September 26, 2006 is that correct?
Q: There appears a signature above the printed name
Roberto V. Garcia, M.D., whose signature is this?
A: That is correct sir.
A: Mine sir.
Q: What was the reason for the examination?
Atty. Manalo: For purposes of identification. Your
honor... I withdraw that.
A: I had to comply with request of the patient himself
to be for the purpose of a medico legal evaluation of the injuries he sustained and also for the accomplishment of a medico legal report he may use for a legal proceeding. Q: What is the difference between your medico legal report and the medical certificate issued by Dr. Hernandez, the attending physician?
A: This was taken by the witness from the medical
record. It will show that this was the operation performed on this person. Q: After the examination of the patient on September 26, 2006, you made several physical examination findings stated in this report? A: Yes sir.
A: a medical certificate is a certification of what the
physician saw on the patient and which may include what he did to what he saw on the body of the patient.
Q: And you depicted the findings of those
examinations in the form of sketches? Exhibits E-1 and E-2. Is that correct?
Q: You made an examination of the body of Valenton
more than a month after the infliction. My question is are the physical injuries you found consistent with the date of infliction on August 2, 2006?
A: Yes sir.
A: Yes sir.
A: Yes sir.
Q: What is your basis?
Q: And how would you describe these injuries?
A: My basis will be my findings correlated to the
medical records of the patient at the Manila East Medical Center.
A: There were brownish linear scars on the face of the
patient at the time of the examination. Three of which were with sutured marks and four of which did not present any sutured mark.
Q:You stated in your medico legal report that a layer
suture of repair of lacerated wounds of the face. Neck. Left side. Thorax. Left side of the patient were conducted. Is that correct?
Q: On Exhibit E-1, the sketch of the wound shown on
the frontal portion of the face that there are several injuries (1-7), did you find these on the patient?
Q: In your opinion Doctor, what could have caused
these wounds? A: There were linear scars on the face of the patient. There are a lot of possible causes for these. I would believe that these linear scars were caused by any
sharp edge, a sharp cutting edge of an instrument or
object like a sharp cutting edge of a broken piece of glass or a knife even a sharp cutting edge of a tin can. Q: If you were hit by an empty bottle of beer on your head, would it result to these findings? A: Yes. Provided that the sharp cutting edge of the broken piece of the broken bottle would run against the skin of the face in such a way that it produce the injuries noted on the face of the patient. I would consider that as probable cause. Q: The back portion of the head in your sketch E-1 shows to wounds. Please describe each. A: There are also linear scars found at the back of the left ear both of which contain sutured marks. I believe that these were also the cause of sharp edge instrument. Q: Can this be caused by a broken glass? A: Yes sir. Q: Let us go to Exh. 2, there is a sketch of a human body showing 3 wounds on the left side of the body. Please describe. A: Yes sir. One wound did not present any sutured mark, was measured 0.8x0.1 centimeters. It was located below the left breast. On the other hand, the two wounds were with sutured marks on the left side of the trunk of the patient with 6.5 cm length and 8 cm
width. Again they could have been caused by a sharp
cutting edge of an instrument. Q: On these two wound measuring 0.8x0.1 cm and 1.4x0.4 cm, could have these been caused by an ice pick or a sharpened screw driver? A: For the 1.4x0.4 cm wound, this could have been caused by the previously mentioned instruments and also with a sharpened end of a screw driver. On the other hand, the 0.8x0.1 cm wound likewise could have been caused by a sharpened end of a screw driver or an ice pick provided this was altered in the hospital. I noted in the medical records that some kind of intervention was performed which means there was a removal of dead tissues, which we call retrieval. The discrepancy in the measurement of the wound and the tip of an ice pick is explained by this. Q: in your findings doctor and an examination of the medical records of the patient in the hospital, did you find any life threatening wounds on the patient? A: Not by themselves and not right away sir. Although, there would be bleeding as a result of the open wounds, it would not constitute a bleeding with a severe category that it will cause death right away. Q: If no medical attention will be given to the patient, what will happen to him if he had these type of injuries?
A: The patient would have, although not right away,
lost so much blood. He would have developed infection which would later on produced death, sir. I understand that he was given anti-tetanus treatment. Atty. Manalo: That will be all your honor.
They must have been facing each other when assailant
attacked. Q: So doctor, could you tell if there was a fight or a struggle between the victim and the assailant?
Court: Cross?
A: Struggle was not established by physical
examination of the patient.
Atty. Mendoza: Cross your honor.
Q: How about the injury on the left neck of patient?
Q: Doctor, would it be safe to say that the injuries
sustained by the patient would not cause his immediate death?
A: Same maam. The two probably were standing
facing each other. Likewise, it is possible that the assailant is standing on the left side of the patient to inflict such blow.
A: That is correct, maam. He would not have died right
away. Q: Most of the injuries by complainant is on the left side. Correct? A: Yes. Q: So, what could have been the possible position of the assailant when he sustained the injuries? A: If I may give my separate answer maam depending on the location of the injuries. Q: For example the ones on the face of the patient? A: If the assailant and the patient were standing on the same level on direct position with the assailant holding the positive weapon or object, it is the right hand.
Q: How about the injury on the left thorax of the
patient? A: Same answer maam. Q: So doctor, is it safe to say that the assailant was not on the back of the patient when the patient sustained all those injuries? A: The only possibility that assailant was at the back of the patient was if he was holding the weapon in his left hand. That would be the most convenient location of the assailant. Q: So if the assailant was right handed, he could not have inflicted those injuries if he were at the back? A: Probably not but not entirely excluded. It would be most inconvenient to stab a person on his left side
from his back using a right hand.The possibility is not
excluded but not considered.
A: I was going over the records but no entry to that
effect is present.
Q: And doctor, it was Dr. Hernandez who first treated
and examined the patient and not you and it was only referred to you upon request of the patient in case there is a necessity for him to get a medico legal certificate?
Q: So it is safe to say that patient went to you just for
a possible medico legal document or certificate?
A: Thats correct maam. Not for a medical reason.
Court: Re-direct?
Q: And the findings on the medico legal report you
submitted and presented before the honorable court were based on the findings and medical records of the patient?
Atty. Manalo: Re-direct.
A: Not fully, my report was based on my examination
and I have to know the internal effects of the injuries so I had to consult the medical records of the patient and i had to see considering the time difference which is more than a month comparing to that. I had to see what they really observed at the time and what they did to form my own opinion whenever asked later.
A: The color was brown so it is completely healed.
Q: So when you examined the patient on Sept. 26,
2006, he was already an outpatient? A: I believe so. Q: Was there a recommendation from the attending physician, Dr. Hernandez to refer this matter to you Doctor being the medico legal consultant of Manila East Medical Center?
A: And possible court appearance maam
Atty. Mendoza: That will be all Your Honor.
Q: When you examined the patient on September 26,
2006, were the wounds completely absolutely healed?
Q: You said in your report that the healing period is 20
to 30 days? A: No sir. My conclusion did not refer to the healing of the wounds. It refers to the time that medical attention is necessary to treat the wounds and the time the patient is incapacitated to work. Q: In your opinion doctor, would the assailant that caused the injuries of the patient be placed on the left side? A: I separated my answer basing on the group of injuries. That statement will be true with regard to the neck injury and the body injury. The facial injury would be different.
Q: Except the neck wounds and the body wounds on
the left part of the body of the patient, would it be possible that they were caused by an assailant which was on the left side of the patients body? A: Yes sir. The body wound and the neck wound would have been caused by the assailant being on the left side of the patient.
Atty: Mendoza: Yes your honor.
Q: Doctor, what could be the possible distance of the assailant when he hit the patient which caused him to sustain those injuries?
Q: Even if he is a little bit farther?
A: I will base my answer on the ability of the assailant
with the positive weapon using the right hand able to reach the target. It would approximate 3 feet. But this is only an approximation.