University of Mindanao

College of Criminal Justice Education

Matina, Davao City

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Subject

CRI 223 (7222)
Specialized Crime Investigation 1 with Legal Medicine
S.Y. 2023 – 2024

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLE,

vs.
BONIFACIO LOPEZ y MARCELLA, ACCUSED APPELLANT
A CASE STUDY

Presented to:

Prof. Irish Pioneta – Bandolos

Presented by:
Booc, Stephen Rhey M.

May 2024
Introduction
Forensic medicine plays a significant role in legal investigations, especially
contributing to unveiling hidden facts and evidence in criminal cases. It is considered as
a multidisciplinary field because it concerns medical, scientific and lawful methods, which
can greatly help when conducting specialized investigations. Numerous criminal cases
are still unsolved before the assistance of forensic medicine. However, as scientific
development continuously evolves and treating forensic science as part of the application
for law enforcement purposes, investigations become much easier and legally reliable
with the help of various methods. It has been greatly contributing in scientifically
examining physical evidence, identification purposes, and factual presentation during trial
processes. More than that, it has already helped many cases specifically addressing legal
issues surrounding health and human remains. In addition, with the existence of forensic
medicine in criminal investigations, various methods such as autopsy, post mortem,
toxicology, and the like have been developed in order to handle different fields in crime
scene operation and to establish legal facts. With the abovementioned justification,
hence, it is important to develop a deeper understanding of the crucial role of forensic
science and medicine in order to learn how it could enhance the operation in special
investigations.
In the case study that will be tackled in the preceding paragraphs, the researcher
and the reader will be able to develop a detailed understanding of the function of forensic
medicine in a particular criminal case. This will involve various scientific methods applied
in law enforcement and legal presentations which have led to an appropriate verdict of
the said case. Furthermore, the case will be analyzed thoroughly in order to determine
the legal obligations presented and developing criticisms with the considerations of the
investigative process conducted.

Background Research
Dated last 12th of November 1998, a trial was conducted by the Regional Court of
the First Judicial Region stationed in Dagupan City, reviewing the Criminal Case No. 98-
02265-D. The trial process was made in order to determine whether the accused-
appellant, Bonifacio Lopez y Marcella, was guilty or innocent of killing the victim, Gerarda

2
Abdulla y Gina. The former was legally charged of murder complexed with abortion.
Sometime in November 1998, before the day of the trial, a thorough investigation was
made by the law enforcement authorities in order to verify the information reported by the
complainants. The said complaint presented the fact that Bonifacio Lopez, being armed
with a bladed weapon, with treachery and with intent to kill Gina, the victim, unlawfully
and criminally attacked the latter by stabbing her several times, hitting mainly the stomach
which caused her and the fetus’ death. After the police authorities have reviewed the
information received, it was then filed to the court in order to proceed with the prosecution
phase.
Upon the prosecution, prosecutors were in need of evidence in order to prove that
a crime was committed by the accused appellant. During the process, witnesses were
gathered in order to disclose their statements regarding what they have seen that could
help prove the fact of the crime and can be served as legal evidence.
The following people were included as witnesses:
1. Librada Ramirez- mother of the victim
2. John Frank- brother of the victim
3. Esteven Basi- mere passerby
Upon conducting custodial investigation, they were separately questioned in order
for the authorities to gather legal statements of what they have witnessed. All of their
accounts were consistent in a manner proving that the accused appellant had really
committed a crime.
The legal statements provided by the witnesses includes the ff:
a.) On July 19, 1998, Librada Ramirez, the mother of the victim, heard a
commotion inside her house and as she rushed, she saw the accused appellant attacking
her son named John Frank who was already bleeding.
b.) The accused appellant poked a knife at Librada and John Frank tried to wrestle
to stop him, and when Librada was freed, she immediately called for help to the
authorities,
c.) John Frank was able to get away from the situation against Bonifacio Lopez
with the assistance of his neighbor. They locked him out by closing the doors of the house
in order to prevent the entry of the accused.

3
 d.) John Frank saw the accused appellant jumping off the fence in order to enter
inside the bathroom where the victim, Gina, who is also John Frank’s pregnant sister was
taking a bath.
e.) John Frank stood up in the sink and peeped through the bathroom and
witnessed how Bonifacio Lopez violently attacked Gina with a bladed weapon who fell on
her back to the ground.
f.) Librada Ramirez stated that after calling the authorities for help, she
immediately returned to the house and that was the time when she saw her daughter
Gina, bleeding and running out from the bathroom. She added that together with John
Frank, they were able to assist Gina and when she was about to be lifted by the
ambulance, the accused appellant rushed towards the helpless victim and then violently
stabbed her again.
g.) Librada Ramirez then added that they were able to bring Gina to the
Pangasinan Provincial Hospital where she was declared dead on arrival.
The abovementioned statements were legally recorded by the prosecutors in order
to establish a ground basis for which can be used as admissible evidence during trial
proceedings. Additionally, an autopsy was made on the cadaver of Gina in order to gather
external and internal findings which could be used as strong evidence proving that there
are wounds and the death of the fetus in the womb. The autopsy report was made by Dr.
Benjamin Marcial Bautista who is a Rural Health Physician in the city.
The results generally showed multiple stab wounds, multiple organ perforation in
the uterus, stomach, lung, liver, small intestine and wounds in the parietal area hitting the
fetus resulting in its death. The specific findings of the autopsy report issued by Dr.
Bautista are shown below:
External Findings
1. Corpse in is Rigor Mortis stage and full term pregnant
2. Stab Wound, 3cm. Left mid axillary line
3. Stab Wound, 3cm, Left mid clavicular line
4. Stab wound, 3 cm. right, anterior axillary line
5. Stab wound, 5 cm. left, para vertebra
6. Stab wound; 3 cm. Left anterior axillary line

4
 7. Lacerated wound 4 cm. Right, thigh
8. Stab wound, 3 cm. right mid scapular line, buttocks
9. Stab wound, 3 cm. right, sygematic lateral,
Internal Findings
1. Intrathoracic Hemorrhage, moderate
2. Intra-abdominal hemorrhage, massive
3. Small intestine, and multiple perforation
4. Pregnant uterus with prolapse umbilical cord
Through the assistance of forensic medicine, specifically autopsy and the
witnesses’ statements, it led to filing the evidence in the court so that a trial process will
be made to legally convict Bonifacio Lopez with the crime of murder complexed with
abortion.

Trial Proceedings
The trial of the accused appellant, Bonifacio Lopez happened on November 12,
1998, where both parties were given opportunity to prove their faithfulness in the eyes of
law through presenting various forensic and testimonial evidences. During the trial, it was
generally woven by the testimonial evidence provided by the eyewitnesses in favor of the
plaintiff appellee. Legal statements that were gathered during the prosecution phase
became admissible evidence in the trial including the account stories of Librada Ramirez,
John Frank and Esteven Basi which were accepted by the court. Another testimonial
evidence of a scientific expert was included. The autopsy report issued by Dr. Benjamin
Marcial Bautista was interpreted by him showing the findings which have led to the death
of the victim and the fetus inside the womb. Lastly, no medical certificate was provided
by John Frank proving that he was stabbed by the accused appellant which led to a small
conspiracy on his testimonies.
On the other hand, the accused appellant did not provide any forensic evidence to
defend his innocence other than the testimonial evidence provided by his daughter and
he also testified on his behalf.

5
 Legal Statements provided by the accused appellant’s party:
a.) On May 25, 1998, Bonifacio Lopez’s daughter named Marilyn, went missing
probably because of the quarrel of Gina and his wife, in which Gina told his wife that their
daughter was a flirt.
b.) That on June 3, 1998, he found a letter from Marilyn’s belongings stating that
she had her baby aborted and that Librada was the one who maneuvered the abortion.
c.) On July 19, 1998, the accused appellant said that he was in his house having
lunch with his family, and he went to the house of Librada to clarify the abortion incident.
Which then resulted in the commotion, leading to John Frank taking a knife from the
kitchen and stabbing Bonifacio Lopez. Then the accused and John Frank fought for
possession of a knife and then he said, he may have accidentally stabbed Gina because
of the scuffle.
The accused was also asked if he had knowledge that the victim was pregnant in
which he admitted the fact.
During the trial, the accused appellant did not provide any medical certificate and
forensic to prove that he was stabbed by John Frank in the abdomen. More than that,
there were no other presented facts in the court to corroborate his account which led to
having less faith on his behalf.
Given that the plaintiff has provided scientific expert testimony, forensic evidence,
and consistent testimonial facts from the eye-witnesses, Bonifacio Lopez, in November
12, 1998 was found guilty of murder with abortion. Due to the fact that he committed a
complex crime, the penalty imposed by the court was the maximum period punishment
of Murder and Intentional Abortion which was the death penalty. Moreover, the court
ordered him to pay the plaintiff a fine of P50, 000.00 as a civil indemnity for causing moral
damages to the family of the victim especially that he killed a fetus.

6
Analysis
In the tackled criminal case, it is evident how forensic evidence was used as a
legal basis to come up with the final verdict of the accused appellant. Even though the
trial process was generally woven by the consistent eyewitness’s accounts, without the
aid of the autopsy report issued by the credible physician, Dr. Benjamin Marcial Bautista,
it is hard to defend the cause of death of Gina and the fetus. With the presence of a
forensic autopsy, it was able to determine how the latter was killed. It created a ground
foundation to prove how faithful and consistent are the legal statements provided by the
witnesses of the commission of crime. More than that, the examination of the body
proposed that because of the injuries inflicted to Gina, it led to severe internal wounds
causing the fetus inside the womb to die. The court found that the evidence was credible
enough to be used as an admissible fact, which was then presented by the scientific
expert testimonies. Due to the fact that Dr. Benjamin Marcial Bautista was reliable to
testify and that his examination was grounded with facts and science and are generally
accepted, the court accepted this as evidence to be used against the accused appellant.
The court requested John Frank and Bonifacio Lopez to present medical
certificates to prove that they were stabbed during the scuffle. However, they failed to
show it during the trial which was a downside in demonstrating their testimonies as true
and legal. In this matter, we can see how significant is the role of forensic medicine in
establishing a basis for unsubstantiated statements. Since the accused appellant was not
able to present a scientific fact, the court found it hard to believe the faithfulness of his
behalf. On the other hand, even though John Frank did not present the same requirement,
the court determined that his account corroborates with the other testimonies and that he
was able to clearly explain the reason behind the failure of submitting such a certificate.
It is evident in this case how the trial prioritizes evidence that are considered to be reliable
and legal, and that these medical certificates and scientific findings are important in
clarifying a doubt in hand.
Testimonial evidence that was provided during the investigation and trial process
also played a crucial role in determining the final decision of the criminal case. In the
account of Dr. Bautista, his testimonies were strongly considered as admissible evidence
due to the fact that he was a licensed physician and is credible enough to be one. The

7
court reviewed beforehand the present evidence in which they found that the findings
provided by the physician is legal, scientific, based on facts, and is generally accepted in
the science community. Other testimonies coming from the eye witnesses were just used
in order to prove how consistent their narrations are with each other.
In this particular case, it is observed how forensic medicine, specifically the
medical certificates and autopsy played a crucial role in helping the legal process to be
established factually. Without its aid, other evidence would not be meaningful and will
stay as an unreasonable doubt in the eyes of law. Hence, we can certainly say that the
forensic medicine used in this case greatly assisted the judicial process in order to reach
a verdict that contains a legal and factual basis.

Legal Implications
In conducting the investigation and trial process, the forensic methods were used
as a legal basis to prove how factual the other evidence is and the final decision imposed
on the accused appellant. Moreover, it was used as a form of admissible fact which is
helpful in determining the correct criminal charges to be rendered to Bonifacio Lopez.
Furthermore, by the help of scientific findings and testimonial evidence gathered during
the prosecution, it clarified the investigation on what to file against the accused and to
what extent should the suspect criminally and civilly be liable for. During the trial, the
established legal facts that were produced through forensic implications were then used
against the accused appellant and so that he could prove to the court his innocence or
guilt. But because the plaintiff-appellee have already presented reliable evidence, they
were able to show a justification beyond reasonable doubt that in fact the accused
certainly committed the crime charged to him.
On the other hand, the party of Bonifacio Lopez was not able to present to the
court an admissible fact which could prove his innocence. Even though their testimonial
evidence was rendered, it was not enough to convince the jury that he had not committed
such a crime, certainly because of the absence of legal basis and scientific findings.
It is evident in this case how the presented facts were weighted and balanced in
order to conduct a fair judicial and trial process. The court generally prioritized the side
that was able to provide strong factual evidence. Since the plaintiff appellee was able to

8
do so, the juries were convinced that Bonifacio Lopez was indeed guilty of the crime of
murder complexed with abortion. The court used the findings and evidence of the former
to determine what extent of criminal and civil liability should be the convict responsible
for. More than that, it was used as a basis to legally render the punishment that the convict
should be receiving. Due to the absence and lack of admissible evidence on the side of
the convict, the criminal case was completed in favor of the plaintiff appellee.

Ethical Considerations
It is observed in the case how the Regional Trial Court conducted a fair judicial
process on both parties. However, in some areas, there were things that needed to be
considered and addressed especially on the matter of complex crime situations, scientific
evidence presented and the reliability of testimonies from the eyewitnesses.
In this particular case, Bonifacio Lopez committed the crime of murder and
intentional abortion towards Girarda “Gina” Abdulla which led to the court’s decision to
impose the maximum period of punishment which is death penalty. In this matter, it is not
justifiable to render such heavy punishment to the convict because he committed two
independent crimes and it does not constitute a single criminal charge because of the
circumstances presented. It is evident that the convict had the intent to kill Gina and was
treacherous which is an element of Murder under the Article No.248 of Revised Penal
Code. Additionally, the convict has knowledge that the victim was pregnant which
constitutes an intent to kill the fetus inside the womb violating the Article 256 of the
Revised Penal Code which is Intentional Abortion. In the abovementioned justification, it
should be justifiable enough to only impose a penalty and fine that is consistent and
proportionate with the laws that the convict violated. It is not clarified in the court trial why
he has to be responsible for answering the offense through experiencing the maximum
period penalty of both murder and abortion. Hence, it is more justifiable if the convict was
rendered with a punishment of both independent criminal charges and not be combined
as one since the circumstances of his actions are clearly distinguished.
In the matter of testimonial evidence, there were potential holes which should be
addressed by court since especially it was not clarified during the trial on how the
statements of eye witnesses were consistent in a manner. That maybe the plaintiff

9
appellee part has already planned out to go all out against the convict in order to assure
that he shall be responsible for his actions. Moreover, the convict was not clearly given a
chance to ask the other party to provide legal evidence that could strongly support their
statements. Even if the scientific expert who conducted the autopsy has already rendered
its reliable testimonies, the court should further include evidence that is proportionate to
what the witnesses are stating. On the side of the convict, it was unnecessary to include
the testimonies of the daughter which was considered as unreliable, inconsistent and the
value was already outweighed by its prejudicial nature. This would only probably lead to
causing moral damages on behalf of those who testify just because the judge wasn’t able
to act as a gatekeeper to prevent the juries from hearing such inadequate evidence.

Conclusion and Recommendations

Upon entirely examining the case, it is clear how the role of forensic medicine used
in law enforcement purposes and trial process could be vital especially on establishing
legal basis for criminal charges and verdict, and treating it as an admissible fact to prove
one's innocence or guilt. It is because this interdisciplinary field of science provides
accurate and timely evidence for identification of suspects, determining criminal liability,
and providing factual scientific information. For example, in the case of People of the
Philippines vs Bonifacio Lopez y Marcella 1998 in which it used a specific type of forensic
examination to assess and assist the whole investigative and judicial proceedings.
Additionally, this type of field grounded with scientific justification ensures effectiveness
of presenting facts that should be consistent with the other evidence presented. Majorly,
it provides a backbone to assure that the other information, hearsays, statements and the
likes are indeed legal and correct.
To further develop the capabilities of forensic medicine in its application to law
enforcement and trial processes, it should improve more on determining whether it is
reliable and credible enough to be presented during legal proceedings. So that the judge
could act its function in preventing the juries in hearing evidence that are unnecessary,
not valuable and lacking a legal basis. Moreover, the court should establish more strict
requirements on presenting such type of evidence before it could be legally rendered
during hearings since it is a type of science which could have a lot of potential bias

10
especially when being interpreted through testimonies. Generally, to further enhance the
authenticity and credibility of forensic medicine, recommendations must be done towards
its quality, reliability and acceptance in the scientific community.
In conclusion, forensic medicine should be developed more in order to increase its
potential in contributing to a more legal and just system. On the contrary, without its aid
and usage, specialized investigations and trial proceedings would not have a legal basis
in conducting its function, and would result in a biased, subjective, unsubstantiated, and
unreliable judicial process system.

11
Reference List:
Reyes, L. B. (2021). The Revised Penal Code: Criminal Law Book Two. Rex Book Store.
Dabu, P. T. (2016). The Revised Penal Code: A Comprehensive Reviewer. Rex Books.
https://shorturl.at/ABKQR
https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/36902

12