Facts: On the night of 26 December 1909, while Concepcion Lat was walking with his suitor Exe

quiel Castillo and several male friends, Jose Larel approached and kissed her and ran towards hi
s house. The male companions ran after him but did not overtook him. On 28 December when
an entertainment was going on, Laurel and Castillo gave contradicting stories as to who called
who to clarify to explain what happpened two nights ago. Suffice to say, at the ground floor w
here Laurel and Castillo spoke at the distance from the others, suddenly Castillo struck LAurel w
ith his cane twice prompting the other to stab him with a penknife. Castillo contended that afte
r asking him to explain for his actions against Lat, Laurel stabbed him and he was forced to de
fend himself. Castillo managed to go to a nearby drugstore to had his wounds tended as he su
ffered serious injuries. Court ofFirst Instance found Laurel and his companions guilty of frustrated
murder.

Issue: Whether or not Laurel and his co-defendants are guilty of a crime against Castillo

Decision: Judgment reversed. Laurel and his co-defendents are acquitted. The court is forced to
think that the peron who would consider himself aggrieved at the kiss given to LAt is her suitor
Castillo. And it would appear a reasonable conclusion that it is Castillo who was offended for t
he boldness of LAurel’s action and would demand an explanation of the offense.The invitation c
oming from Castilloand by testimonies of the witnesses that it was Castillo who provoked and c
ommenced the assault. A person who uses a pocketknife to seriously wound him on the head
with a cane and continues to beat him employs rational means of self defense.