Lejano vs People - At the very least, there exist a possibility that Alfaro had lied.
e exist a possibility that Alfaro had lied. On the other hand, the semen
GR NO. 176389
Dec. 14, 2010
By: Pax
Topic: Weight and Sufficiency of Evidence
Petitioners: Antonio Lejano
Respondents: People
FACTS:
- On June 30, 1991 the Vizconde Massacre happened wherein Estrellita Vizconde and her 2
daughters were slain in their home in Paranaque.
- The police arrested a group of suspects, some of whom gave detailed confessions. But the
trial court smelled a frame-up and eventually ordered them discharged.
- 4 years later, the NBI announced that it had solved the crime. It presented star-witness
Jessica M. Alfaro who claimed that she witnessed the crime.
- She pointed to accused Hubert Jeffrey P. Webb et al.
- Relying primarily on Alfaro's testimony, on August 10, 1995 the public prosecutors filed an
information for rape with homicide against Webb, et al.
- Along with the star witness Alfaro, the prosecution also presented other witnesses like the
medico legal officer, laundry woman, security guard, the husband of Estrellita, etc.
- Webb’s alibi appeared the strongest since he claimed that he was then across the ocean in
the United States of America
- But impressed by Alfaro’s detailed narration of the crime and the events surrounding it, the
trial court found a credible witness in her.
- RTC eventually rendered judgment against the accused. They were sentenced to reclusion
perpetua.
- CA modified the penalty to only 6 months imprisonment and increasing the amount of
damages awarded to Mr. Vizconde.
- On April 20, 2010, as a result of its initial deliberation in this case, the Court issued a
Resolution granting the request of Webb to submit for DNA analysis the semen specimen
taken from one of the victims cadaver which specimen was then believed still under the
safekeeping of the NBI. The Court granted.
- Unfortunately, the NBI informed the Court that it no longer has custody of the specimen,
the same having been turned over to the trial court.
- The trial record shows, however, that the specimen was not among the object evidence
that the prosecution offered in evidence in the case.
- This outcome prompted accused Webb to file an urgent motion to acquit on the ground
that the government’s failure to preserve such vital evidence has resulted in the denial of his
right to due process.
ISSUE:
W/N failure to conduct a DNA test on the semen specimen found on Carmela is a ground for
Webb’s acquittal.
HELD/RATIO: NO
- The medical evidence clearly established that Carmela was raped and, consistent with this,
semen specimen was found in her. It is true that Alfaro identified Webb in her testimony, as
Carmela’s rapist and killer but serious questions had been raised about her credibility.
specimen was taken from Carmela cannot possibly lie.
- No two persons have the same DNA fingerprint, with the exception of identical twins. If, on
examination, the DNA of the subject specimen does not belong to Webb, then he did not
rape Carmela. It is that simple.
- Thus, the court would have been able to determine that Alfaro committed perjury in saying
that he did. Still, Webb is not entitled to acquittal for failure of the state to produce the
semen specimen at this late stage.
- For one thing, the ruling in Brady vs Maryland that he cites his no longer long been
overtaken by the decision in Arizona vs Youngblood, where the US Supreme Court held that
due process does not require the State to preserve the semen specimen although it might be
useful to the accused unless the latter is able to show bad faith on the part of the
prosecution or the police.
- Here, the state presented a medical expert who testified on the existence of the specimen
and Webb in fact, sought to have the same subjected to DNA test.
- For another, when Webb raised the DNA issue, the rule governing DNA evidence did not yet
exist, the country did not yet have the technology for conducting the test and no Philippine
precedent had as yet recognized its admissibility as evidence.
HOWEVER, SETTING ALL OF THIS ASIDE, ALL OF THE ACCUSED WERE ACQUITTED BECAUSE:
1. The star witness was suspicious
- Alfaro had been hanging around at the NBI as an asset. She supplied her handlers with
information against drug pushers and other criminal elements.
- Because of her talent, the task force gave her "very special treatment" and she became its
"darling,".
- When Alfaro seemed unproductive for sometime, however, they teased her about it and
she was piqued. One day, she unexpectedly told Sacaguing that she knew someone who had
the real story behind the Vizconde massacre.
2. Webb had a very strong alibi
- Webb presented the strongest alibi through (a) the travel preparations; (b) the two
immigration checks; (c) details of US sojourn; (d) the second immigration check; and (e) alibi
versus positive identification; and (f) a documented alibi.
- To establish alibi, the accused must prove by positive, clear, and satisfactory evidence that
(a) he was present at another place at the time of the perpetration of the crime, and (b) that
it was physically impossible for him to be at the scene of the crime.
- RTC ignored his alibi because they had doubts over the travel documents and believed that
it was not impossible that Webb could have secretly return to the Phil., commit the crime,
and go back to the US. This only took around 14 hours.
3. Webb’s alibi rendered the star witnesses’ testimony as perfidious
- For, if the Court accepts the proposition that Webb was in the U.S. when the crime took
place, Alfaro’s testimony will not hold together. Webb’s participation is the anchor of Alfaro’s
story. Without it, the evidence against the others must necessarily fall.