SIMPLE ARSON

CC: All rise, please. This Court is now in session with Honorable
Judge Jayson S. Lumanlan presiding. Silence is hereby enjoined.
COURT: Let us pray.
Chorus: Almighty God, we stand in your Holy presence as our
Supreme Judge. We humbly beseech to bless us and inspire us so
that what we think say and do will be in accordance with your will.
Enlighten our minds, strengthen our spirits and feel our hearts with
fraternal love wisdom and understanding so that we can be effective
channels of truth, justice and peace. In our proceedings today, guide
us in a path of righteousness for the fulfillment of your greater glory.
Amen.
***(The Judge will bang the gavel)
COURT: Call the case, please.
CC: Criminal Case No. R-MKT-20-2021-CR, People of the
Philippines vs. Allan Christian Benitez y Co.
COURT: Appearances please.
PROS: Good afternoon, Your Honor, I am Pros. Jason Mergal of the
prosecutor’s office. For the State, Your Honor.
PAO: Good afternoon, Your Honor, I am Atty. Mario Lagua of the
public attorney’s office. Your Honor.
COURT: Okay, is the accused in present?
CC: Mr. Allan Benitez, kindly raise your hand to signify your
presence. Yes, Your Honor, the accused present.
COURT: How about the private complainants?
CC: Yes, Your Honor, they are also present.
PAO: We are ready for arraignment, Your Honor.
COURT: Arraign the accused, please. Mr. Benitez, what language or
dialect do you prefer, English, Tagalog or what?
ACCUSED: English, Your Honor.
COURT: Okay, proceed
CC: Mr. Witness can you kindly check first if your name was spelled
right?
ACCUSED: yes, ma’am it is correct.
CC: The undersigned Assistant City Prosecutor Jason Mergal
accuses ALLAN BENITEZ of Simple Arson ****
On or about 27 January 2021, in Makati City and within the
jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accuse,
with intent to cause damage, did then and there willfully,
unlawfully and feloniously set on fire the residential apartment
owned by complainant Romulo D. Santos, to the damage and
prejudice of the latter in the total amount of PHP 45,000.00.
Contrary to law.
COURT: How do you wish to plea?
ACCUSED: Not guilty, Your Honor.
COURT: Okay, the accused was arraigned, with the assistance of
court appointed counsel, by reading to him the Information in English,
a language known and understood by him, and he pleaded not guilty
into the crime charged. Enter, therefore, a plea of not guilty into the
record.
Pursuant to the Revised Guidelines of Continuous Trial, we will now
proceed to the Pre-trial of this case. Counsels, do you have any
stipulations or admissions?
PROS: Yes, Your Honor. May we know from the defense if he is
willing to stipulate as to the jurisdiction of this court over the case and
as to the identity of the accused as the one charged in the
information?
DEFENSE: Yes, Your Honor, admitted.
PROS: May we request the marking of the following exhibits for the
prosecution
EXHIBITS
“A” – Spot Investigation Report prepared by SFO1 Jan Ludwig Go
“A-1” - Signature
“B” – Malayang Sinumpaang Salaysay of Romulo Santos y Dacome
“B-1” – page 2
“B-1a” - signature
“B-2” – page 3
“B-3” – page 4
“B-3a” - signature
“C” – Malayang Sinumpaang Salaysay of Antonio S. Araullo
“C-1” – Page 2
“C-1a” - Signature
“D” – Photographs of the Fire Scene
“E” - Evidence Systematic Diagram
“F” - Forensic Chemistry Report No. 2021-01-030
“G” – Judicial Affidavit od Romulo Santos y Dacome
“G-1” – page 2
“G-2” – page 3
“G-3” – Page 4
“G-4” – Page 5
“G-4a” – signature previously marked as “B-1a”
“H” – USB containing CCTV Footage of the incident

COURT: How about the documents to be marked for the defense.

DEFENSE: Yes Your Honor. May we request the Marking of the
following Exhibits for the defense.
“A” – Judicial Affidavit of Allan Christian Benitez Co
“A-1” – page 2
“A-2” – page 3
“A-3 – Page 4
“A-3a” – signature
COURT: Okay, Prosecutor Mergal, how many witnesses are you
going to present?
PROS: We intend to present two witnesses, Your Honor, namely,
SFO1 Jan Ludwig Go and Romulo D. Santos
Also, Your Honor, if the defense is willing to stipulate as to the
existence of Spot Investigation Report prepared by SFO1 Go as the
Lead fire investigator on case, so that, Your Honor, we will dispense
with the presentation of SFO1 Go.
DEFENSE: We will stipulate, Your Honor, only as to the existence of
the Spot Investigation Report and Progress Investigation report with
counter stipulation that the SFO1 Go has no personal knowledge of
the commission of the crime.
COURT: Okay, so stipulated. The presentation of SFO1 Go, as
witness, is hereby dispensed with.
COURT: How about for the defense?
DEFENSE: Your Honor, we will present our lone witness, accused
ALLAN BENITEZ.
COURT: Okay. Done?
DEFENSE and PROS: Yes, Your Honor.
COURT: Okay, the pre-trial order of this case shall control the
proceedings of this case. The parties and their respective counsels
are hereby directed to affix their signatures in the pre-trial order. The
pre-trial of this case is now terminated. Let’s proceed to the initial
presentation of prosecution’s evidence.
Are you ready, fiscal?
PROS: Yes, Your Honor. May we call to the witness stand our first
witness, SFO1 Jan Ludwig Go.
COURT: Okay, swear in the witness, please.
CC: Kindly raise your right hand, sir. Do you solemnly swear to tell
the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth before this
Honorable Court?
W: Yes, ma’am.
CC: Please tell your name and other personal circumstances.
W: I am SFO1 Jan Ludwig Go, 30 years old, single, Senior Fire Office
1, Lead Fire Arson investigator, assigned at Makati City Central Fire
Station and currently residing at Malakas St. Diliman, Quezon City.
CC: Your Honor the witness is ready
COURT: Make the offer.
PROS: Your Honor, we are offering the testimony of the witness to
prove the material allegations in the information filed against the
accused; to prove that he is the fire arson investigator at the time of
the incident, particularly after the fire was put out by the ground
firefighters, and that he personally conducted ocular inspection of the
burned site and he personally collected samples of debris to submit
to the laboratory to determine if there was the existence of flammable
substances; he would also prove the circumstances behind the arson
that happened at the apartment of the private complainant; he will
also identify several documents, if any, and to prove other relevant
matters. May we proceed, Your Honor?
COURT: You may proceed.
Direct Examination by Prosec. Mergal.
Q: Mr. witness, you mentioned your name to be Jan Ludwig Go of
Bureau of Fire Protection. Can you tell us where is your present
assignment?
A: I am presently assigned at the Investigation and Intelligence Unit
of Makati City Central Fire Station as a Lead Fire Arson Investigator.
Q: Prior to this incident of January 27 2021 how long have you been
a fire arson investigator.
A: Almost nine (9) years, sir.
Q: As a fire arson investigator, do you remember of any incident that
happened on or about January 27 2021?
A: Yes, sir.
Q: What was that?
A: That a fire incident was reported to our office at #9F Intalan St,
Comembo, Makati City.
Q: Do you remember what time the incident was reported?
A: Around 4:00 o’clock in the morning, sir.
Q: After this was reported to your office, what did you do next?
A: Our duty radio and telephone operator, immediately dispatched the
nearest firetruck to the location of the fire incident. When the
firefighters arrived, the fire was already extinguished by the renters of
the said apartment nevertheless fire fighters proceed with the
mopping operations to ensure that the fire will not rekindle.
Q: How long did it take to put out the fire?
A: When the responding unit arrived at 0420H where they affirmed
first alarm, it was declared fire out at about 0425H, sir
Q: Were there other neighboring houses that were affected?
A: None Sir.
Q: You said that the fire was declared fire out around 0425H. What
time did you arrived at the fire incident?
A: I cannot recall sir. But as soon as the nearest firetruck was
dispatched my team and I immediately proceeded to the fire scene.
Q: Upon arrival at the location of the incident, what did you do, if any?
A: I conducted an initial interview of possible witnesses nearby then
conducted an ocular inspection and investigation to the burned
premises, sir.
Q: What did you find out when you made the ocular inspection.
A: Based on the fire pattern, it was determined that the fire originated
from the wooden box hanging on the wall on the right portion of the
gate.
Q: Do you have documents with you that would support your findings
and investigation conducted?
A: Yes, I have here with me a photograph of the fire scene sir.
Prosec: Your Honor witness handed to this representation colored
printed photographs of the burned house and burned debris.
Court: Duly Noted.
Pros: Witness also shows a systematic sketch of the burned house.
Court: Duly Noted
Pros: This one. What is this?
A: The ashes and debris gathered
Q: What is the importance of these ashes and debris to this case.
A: During the investigation there was no other source of ignition that
could found in this area. So we gathered, ashes and debris in order to
determine if there were possibilities of using a flammable substance
to start the fire.
Pros: Your Honor, may we request that the page containing several
photographs be marked as Exhibit “D” and series, your Honor?
COURT: Mark and sub-mark them accordingly.
Pros: Your Honor, may we also move that the systematic diagram be
marked as Exhibit E
COURT: Mark It
Q: Were you able to submit the collected debris to the Arson
Laboratory?
A: Yes, Sir.
Q: What proof do you have that the Arson Laboratory conducted an
examination thereof?
A: I have here the result from the Arson Laboratory sir.
Pros: Your Honor, may we request that the Forensic Chemistry
Report No. 2021-01-030 be marked as Exhibit F
COURT: Mark It
Q: Based on the document you presented from this representation,
what was the result of the Arson Laboratory with regard to the debris
you submitted?
A: It conveys negative result for flammable substance, sir.
Q: What does it mean if there was no finding of any flammable
substance?
A: As part of our Standard operating procedures, we collect ashes
and debris from the point of origin of the fire to determine whether the
fire was caused by a flammable substance which would add up the
prima facie evidence for arson. However, in this case the result
turned out to be negative. Nevertheless, this result does not conclude
that the fire was not intentionally set because there are other ways to
set a fire without any flammable substance, sir.
Q: In your experience as a fore arson investigator, what are the
flammable substances that you are looking for?
A: The most common are gasoline, kerosene and petroleum sir.
Q: Based on your investigation, in this case, was the fire started
accidentally or intentionally?
A: From the fire pattern, there was no other source of ignition that
could be found from where it started, it could be possible that it was
intentionally set, sir.
Q: What could have the person who started the fire used to set a fire
in that part of the house?
A: We could not determine sir.
Q: As a fire arson investigator, is it possible that a lighter could have
been used to light the wooden Box?
A: It could be possible because there is no other source of ignition
can be found from the place where it originated, sir.
Q: Earlier you mentioned that upon arrival you conducted initial
interview on witnesses, were you able to reduce that in writing?
A: Yes sir.
Q: Where is that document, Mr. Witness?
A: Here Sir.
Pros: Your Honor, witness handed to this representation the Spot
Investigation report prepared by the witness previously marked as
exhibit A
COURT: Duly Noted.
Q: How many witnesses were you able to interview in this case?
A: I was able to interview one(1) witness sir.
Q: Do you remember the name?
A: Yes, sir. The owner of the apartment, Romulo Santos
Q: In your Spot Investigation Report, you mentioned that Romulo
Santos got up from his bed and saw someone running inside their
compound on their TV Screen caught by the CCTV camera and when
the person did not come back he decided to check it out unfortunately
when he looked outside then he saw fire at the ceiling of the hallway,
Mr. Witness?
A: Yes Sir
Q: This Person that you interviewed did he execute any affidavit?
A: I interviewed him and he had sworn his affidavit before our officer.
Prosec: Your Honor may we just move that the Affidavit of Romulo
Santos be marked as Exhibit B
COURT: Mark it.
Q: What is your final conclusion as to the arson incident happened on
January 27 2021?
A: Based on the origin of fire, I can say that the incident could have
been intentionally set because there is no other possibility that it
could have not.
Q: As an investigator, what is your recommendation with regard to
this incident that happened January 27 2021?
A: Based from the fire pattern and the origin of fire, I can say that this
incident could be an intentional one, sir.
Prosec: I have nothing further, your Honor.
COURT: Cross? Atty. Lagua?
PAO: Yes, Your Honor.
(CROSS EXAMINATION)
PAO: Good afternoon, Mr. witness.
W: Good afternoon, sir.
Q: You mentioned a while ago that you were able to determine the
origin of the fire based on the fire pattern, correct?
W: Yes, sir.
Q: What distinctive feature of the fire pattern would make you say that
this is indeed the place where the fire started?
W: Because you could already determine how the fire spread, where
it was concentrated and where it originated, sir.
Q: What features do you look for?
W: Based on the charring, we can determine what part of the wood
was first caught by fire. Charring is characterized like a crocodile skin
which you will see breaking the wood.
Q: I have here a copy of Spot Investigation Report dated January 27,
2021. I will give it to you so that you can personally check it. Can you
recall who prepared and signed the document that you are holding
now?
W: I personally prepared and signed this document sir.
Q: Did you mention in the document that you are holding now a
certain Romulo Romulo Santos Y Dacome .
W: Yes sir.
Q: And who is this person?
W: The person who gave a CCTV footage about the incident sir.
Q: Did you personally and completely watch the content of the CCTV
footage?
W: Yes, sir
Q: Based on the CCTV footage, did you see any person who actually
causes fire to the incident?
W: None sir.
Q: So, are you saying now that you did not see any person who
intentionally causes fire to the incident?
W: If based on the CCTV, Yes sir.
PAO: that would be all your HONOR.
COURT: Any redirect examination?
PROSEC: None, Your Honor.
COURT: Okay, you are done. The witness is excused.
Who is your next witness?
PROSEC: Our second witness, Your Honor, is the complainant in the
person of Romulo D. Santos
COURT: Swear in the witness, please.
BCC: Kindly raise your right hand Mr. Witness. Do you solemnly
swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth before
this Honorable Court?
W: Yes, I do.
BCC: Please take your seat, Mr Witness. Kindly state your name,
age, marital status, address and other personal circumstances.
W: Romulo Dacome Santos, 56 years old, married, resident of #9F
Intalan St Comembo Makati City, I am unemployed but I am the
owner of the burned apartment.
BCC: Your Honor, the witness is ready.
PROS: Your Honor, the testimony of this witness is being offered to
prove that on January 27, 2021 at about 04:18 in the morning, the
accused with intent and malice set fire his apartment; to identify some
documents and to testify other matters relative to the information.
COURT: Any comment?
ATTY. LAGUA: Subject to cross, Your Honor.
(DIRECT EXAMINATION BY PROSEC MERGAL)
PROS: Good afternoon Mr. Witness
W: Good afternoon
Pros: Mr. Witness, do you recall having executed a judicial affidavit in
relation to this case?
W: yes Sir.
Pros: If this judicial affidavit be shown to you will you be able to
identify it?
W: Yes Sir.
Pros: Mr. witness, I am showing to you a judicial affidavit with 5
pages dated February 22 2021, could you review the judicial affidavit
and tell us how it is related to the judicial affidavit you executed?
W: Yes sir this is the same
Pros: On the page 4 thereof, there is a name Romulo D Santos and
on top of that name is a signature. Could you tell us whose name and
signature are those?
W:Those are mine sir
Pros: To confirm you answered this judicial affidavit in English?
W: Yes sir
Q: Do you affirm and confirm to the truthfulness and veracity of the
statements contained in your judicial affidavit?
W: Yes sir.
Pros: At this point we would like to manifest that the judicial affidavit
of the witness be marked as exhibit G to form part of the direct
testimony of the witness.
COURT: Mark it.
Pros: Mr. witness in your judicial affidavit, you mentioned that you put
the CCTV footage in a USB, now, I am showing you a USB, is this
the USB you said that contained the footage?
W: Yes Sir
PROS: May we have this USB marked as Exhibit H
COURT: Marked it
Pros: Also, Your Honor may I request that the CCTV footage be
played for the appreciation of the court in the USB allegedly
containing the same that is being referred to by the witness.
COURT: Okay. Granted.
Pros: We would like it to make it on record that we are playing the
USB presented by the witness containing the CCTV footage your
Honor subject matter of this case.
COURT: Is this the actual time?
W: Yes Your Honor. At about 04:09:07 a spark suddenly flashed on
the location of Allan then he then ran away around 04:09:09.
PROS: I have no further questions your Honor.
COURT: Cross? Atty. Lagua?
PAO: Yes, Your Honor.
COURT: Proceed.
Q: Did you personally and completely watch the content of the CCTV
footage which was played before this Honorable Court?
W: Yes, sir
Q: Based on the CCTV footage, did you see any person who actually
causes fire to the incident?
W: No sir, But I saw Mr. Benitez went out from our gate and torn a
paper near our gate and went back inside thereafter.
Q: So, are you saying now that you did not actually see Mr. Benitez
causes fire to your apartment unit.
W: If based on the CCTV, Yes sir.
Q: Mr. witness, I am showing to you a sworn statement (Sinumpaang
salaysay) consisting of five pages with dated January 27, 2021, could
you review the sworn statement and tell us who signed and gave the
testimonies that can be read therein.
W: I signed and gave all the information stated in this sworn
statement (Sinumpaang salaysay) sir.
Q: Have you stated thereto that you actually see Mr. Benitez causes
fire to your apartment units?
W: Never sir.
PAO: No further questions your Honor.
COURT: Redirect? Prosec Mergal?
PROS: None Your Honor.
COURT: Okay you are done. The witness is excused from the
witness stand. Is he your last witness?
PROS: Yes your Honor.
COURT: Are you ready to orally offer your exhibits?
PROS: yes Your Honor.
COURT: OKAY PROCEED.
PROS:
EXHIBITS
“A” – Spot Investigation Report
prepared by SFO1 Jan Ludwig
Go
“A-1” - Signature
“B” – Malayang Sinumpaang
Salaysay of Romulo Santos y
Dacome
“B-1” – page 2
“B-1a” - signature
“B-2” – page 3
“B-3” – page 4
“B-3a” - signature
“C” – Malayang Sinumpaang
Salaysay of Antonio S. Araullo
“C-1” – Page 2
“C-1a” - Signature
“D” – Photographs of the Fire
PURPOSE
-to prove that a fire incident
occurred at #9F Intalan St.
Comembo, Makati City on 27
January 2021 and that the
fire incident was investigated
by SFO1 Jan Ludwig Go, Fire
Arson investigator of Makati
City Fire Station. Further, to
prove that he signed this
document
-to prove that Romulo Santos
y Dacome, complainant and
witness gave his statement to
the BFP investigator and
narrated what happened on
the early morning of 27
January 2021 at #9F Intalan
St. Comembo Makati City.
Also that he subscribed and
sworn his statement.
-to prove that Antonio S.
Araullo conducted the
warrantless arrest against
Allan Christian Benitez and
that the latter was then
turned over to the custody of
Makati City Fire Station.
-to prove the result of ocular
Scene inspection and initial
investigation conducted by
the fire arson investigator

“E” - Evidence Systematic -to prove the location of the

Diagram fire and where the evidence
which submitted to the Arson
laboratory retrieved and/or
collected

“F” - Forensic Chemistry Report -to prove the findings of the

No. 2021-01-030 Arson laboratory regarding
the submitted evidence of the
fire arson investigator

“G” – Judicial Affidavit of Romulo -to prove that he had Allan

Santos y Dacome Christian Benitez herein
“G-1” – page 2 accused as the person who
“G-2” – page 3 set fire his apartment, and to
“G-3” – Page 4 introduce a CCTV Footage
“G-4” – Page 5 that shows the accused on
“G-4a” – signature previously the location of the fire before
marked as “B-1a” its ignition.

“H” – USB containing CCTV -to prove that Allan Christian

Footage of the incident Benitez was on the location
of the origin of fire before the
fire’s ignition

COURT: ATTY LAGUA, ANY COMMENT?

PAO: “NO COMMENT, YOUR HONOR”
COURT: Okay, without opposition from the defense, Exhibits “A” to
“H” and its sub-markings are hereby admitted for the purpose/s for
which the same were offered.
PROS: Your Honor, with the admission of our Exhibits, we are now
resting our case.
COURT: Okay, let’s proceed to the presentation of the defense
evidence. Are you ready Atty. Lagua?
ATTY Lagua: Yes, Your Honor. We are calling to the witness stand
our lone witness, ALLAN CHRISTIAN BENITEZ y CO
COURT: Swear in the witness please.
BCC: Mister witness, kindly raise your right hand. Do you solemnly
swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth before
this Honorable Court?
W: Yes, ma’am.
CC: Please take your seat, Mr Witness. Kindly state your name, and
other personal circumstances.
ACCUSED: My Name is Allan Christian C. Benitez 31 years old
residing at 9F Intalan St. Comembo Makati City currently
Unemployed.
CC: The witness is ready your Honor
COURT: Your witness, attorney.
ATTY. LAGUA: This witness is being presented to refute the
allegations in the information as well as the testimonies of the
prosecution’s witnesses.
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY ATTY. LAGUA.
Q: Mr. Witness you are being charge for violation of Section 1 of PD
1613 for setting on fire the apartment owned by herein private
complainant Romulo Santos, is this true?
W: No, your sir.
PAO: Mr. Witness, do you recall having executed a judicial affidavit in
relation to this case?
W: yes Sir.
PAO: If this judicial affidavit be shown to you will you be able to
identify it?
W: Yes Sir.
PAO: Mr. witness, I am showing to you a judicial affidavit with 4
pages dated March 3 2021, could you review the judicial affidavit and
tell us how it is related to the judicial affidavit you executed?
W: Yes sir this is the same
PAO: On the page 3 thereof, there is a name Allan Christian C.
Benitez and on top of that name is a signature. Could you tell us
whose name and signature are those?
W:Those are mine sir
PAO: To confirm you answered this judicial affidavit in English?
W: Yes sir
Q: Do you affirm and confirm to the truthfulness and veracity of the
statements contained in your judicial affidavit?
W: Yes sir.
Pros: At this point we would like to manifest that the judicial affidavit
of the witness be marked as exhibit A to form part of the direct
testimony of the witness.
COURT: Mark it.
Q: That would be all, your Honor

Court: Cross?

PROS: No Cross, Your Honor.

COURT: Do you have any other witness, Atty. Lagua?

PAO: None, Your Honor.

COURT: Okay, the witness is excused from the witness stand. Are
you ready to formally offer your exhibits?
PAO: yes Your Honor.
COURT: OKAY PROCEED.
PAO:
Exhibit “A” – Judicial Affidavit of Allan Christian Benitez y Co
“A-1” – page 2
“A-2” – page 3
“A-3 – Page 4
“A-3a” – signature
PURPOSE: to prove the existence of doubt on the charged of simple
arson against the accused and deny all allegations against him
COURT: Any Comment Prosec. Mergal?

Pros: No Comment Your Honor.

COURT: Okay, without opposition from the prosecution. Exhibits “A”

and its sub-markings are hereby admitted for the purpose/s for which
the same were offered.
ATTY LADUA: Your Honor, with the admission of our Exhibits, we are
now resting our case.
COURT: Prosec Mergal do you have any rebuttal evidence?
Prosec MERGAL: None Your Honor.
COURT: Okay, we are done. Let this case be scheduled for
promulgation on June 4, 2021. Are there other cases to hear?

CC: None your Honor. ……. ALL RISE SESSION IS ADJOURNED.

(BANG ULIT NG GAVEL JUDGE)