Name: Ulep, Chuck Daniel N.

Course: GE-ELECT 1
Section Code: PCED-02-401A Instructor: Ms. Adorable
I. Read the following summary on the case of Jennifer Laude. (You may also read other
resources regarding the case.)
“On the night of 11 October 2014, Jennifer Laude was brutally killed by Lance Corporal
Joseph Scott Pemberton, a US Marine.
In its December 1, 2015 decision, the Regional Trial Court of Olongapo City, ruled that
Lance Corporal Joseph Scott Pemberton was guilty of homicide and not the murder alleged by
the prosecution.
Sentencing Pemberton to prison for a period of 10-12 years (later reduced to 10 years
after an appeal from the defense), the court found no criminal intent to kill because of the
presence of two (2) mitigating circumstances namely passion and obfuscation, and intoxication.
The court stated that ‘in the heat of passion, he arm-locked the deceased, and dunked
his (her) head in the toilet.’
The court argued that it was the discovery of Jennifer Laude having male genitalia which
‘disgusted and repulsed’ Pemberto and caused such heated passion. Therefore, the court
decided he had no malicious intent to kill, reducing the murder charge to one of homicide.”
II. Indicate in the table below if you AGREE or DISAGREE to the decision of the court and
provide five (5) reasons thereof. Fill out the table provided.

AGREE/DISAGREE
Reasons
(Choose one and specify)

1. I disagree on 10-12 years sentence in Main reason is it’s a homicide or a murder,

prison.
2. reducing the sentence to 10 years that
should be 12 years in maximum.
3. I disagree on RTC of olongapo city
4. I disagree on the courts argumentative
statement.
5.I disagree on the courts final ruling
the sentence for that life time imprisonment
and there’s no parole in a murder nor
homicide.
I don’t believe on his statement or appeal
that there’s no intent on killing or murdering
the victim, yes there’s a presence of the
circumstances but still he still killed it.
It should be ruled as murder not a homicide,
because they said that things caused such a
heated passion on the discovery that the
victim has a male genitalia.
It is clear that pemberton arm-locked and
debunked the victims head then why it is
being ruled as a homicide.
No intent on killing but clearly stated that he
arm locked and debunked the head of the
victim on the heat of passion.