CDI 1

TRIAL BY ORDEAL
It was an ancient judicial practice by which the guilt or innocence of the accused was
determined by subjecting them to a painful, or at least an unpleasant, usually dangerous
experience. In medieval Europe, like trial by combat, trial by ordeal, such as cruentation, was
sometimes considered a "judgement of God" (Latin: jūdicium Deī, Old English: Godes dōm): a
procedure based on the premise that God would help the innocent by performing a miracle
on their behalf. The practice has much earlier roots, attested to as far back as the Code of
Hammurabi and the Code of Ur-Nammu.
In pre-modern society, the ordeal typically ranked along with
the oath and witness accounts as the central means by which to reach a judicial verdict.

Types of ordeals
By combat
Ordeal by combat took place between two parties in a dispute, either two individuals, or
between an individual and a government or other organization. They, or, under certain
conditions, a designated "champion" acting on their behalf, would fight, and the loser of the
fight or the party represented by the losing champion was deemed guilty or liable. Champions
could be used by one or both parties in an individual versus individual dispute, and could
represent the individual in a trial by an organization; an organization or state government by
its nature had to be represented by a single combatant selected as champion, although there
are numerous cases of high-ranking nobility, state officials and even monarchs volunteering
to serve as champion. Combat between groups of representatives was less common but still
occurred.
- Innocent – the one’s who wins the fight
- Guilty -
A notable case was that of Gero, Count of Alsleben, whose daughter married Siegfried II,
Count of Stade.
By fire
Ordeal by fire was one form of torture. The ordeal of fire typically required that the accused
walk a certain distance, usually 9 feet (2.7 metres) or a certain number of paces, usually three,
over red-hot plowshares or holding a red-hot iron.
- Innocence was sometimes established by a complete lack of injury, but it was more
common for the wound to be bandaged and re-examined three days later by a priest,
who would pronounce that God had intervened to heal it, or that it was merely festering
- Guilty - In which case the suspect would be exiled or put to death.
By boiling oil
Trial by boiling oil has been practiced in villages in certain parts of West Africa, such
as Togo.[9] There are two main alternatives of this trial. In one version, the accused parties are
ordered to retrieve an item from a container of boiling oil, with those who refuse the task being
found guilty.[10] In the other version of the trial, both the accused and the accuser have to
retrieve an item from boiling oil.
- Innocent - with the person or persons whose hand remains unscathed being declared
innocent.
- Guilty – their hands was burned or damaged.
By water
Hot water
First mentioned in the 6th-century Lex Salica, the ordeal of hot water required the
accused to dip their hand into a kettle or pot of boiling water (sometimes oil or lead was
used instead) and retrieve a stone. Assessment of the injury was similar to that for the fire
ordeal. The ordeal would take place in a church, with several in attendance, purified
and praying to God to reveal the truth.
- Innocent - Afterwards, the hand was bound and examined after three days to see
whether it was healing or festering.
- Guilty - If after three days God had not healed their wounds, the suspect was guilty of
the crime.
Cold water
The ordeal of cold water has a precedent in the 13th law of the (the oldest known
surviving code of laws) and the second law of the Code of Hammurabi. Under the Code
of Ur-Nammu, a man who was accused of what some scholars have translated as "sorcery"
was to undergo ordeal by water. If the man were proven innocent through this ordeal, the
accuser was obligated to pay three shekels to the man who underwent judgment. The
Code of Hammurabi dictated that, if a man was accused of a matter by another, the
accused was to leap into a river. If the accused man survived this ordeal, the accused was
to be acquitted. If the accused was found innocent by this ordeal, the accuser was to be
put to death and the accused man was to take possession of the then-deceased accuser's
house.
An ordeal by cold water is mentioned in the Vishnu Smrti, which is one of the texts of
the Dharmaśāstra.
The practice was also set out in Frankish law but was abolished by Emperor Louis the
Pious in 829. The practice reappeared in the Late Middle Ages: in the Dreieicher
Wildbann of 1338, a man accused of poaching was to be submerged in a barrel three
times and to be considered innocent if he sank, and guilty if he floated.
Witch-hunts in Europe
Ordeal by water was associated with the witch-hunts of the 16th and 17th centuries,
although an inverse of most trials by ordeal; if the accused sank, they were considered
innocent, whereas if they floated, this indicated witchcraft. The ordeal would be
conducted with a rope holding the subject so that the person being tested could be
retrieved following the trial. A witch trial including this ordeal took place
in Szeged, Hungary as late as 1728.
 Demonologists varied in their explanations as to why trial by water would be effective,
although spiritual explanations were most common. Some argued that witches floated
because they had renounced baptism when entering the Devil's service.
By cross
The ordeal of the cross was apparently introduced in the Early Middle Ages in an
attempt to discourage judicial duels among Germanic peoples. As with judicial duels, and
unlike most other ordeals, the accuser had to undergo the ordeal together with the accused.
They stood on either side of a cross and stretched out their hands horizontally. The first one to
lower their arms lost. This ordeal was prescribed by Charlemagne in 779 and again in 806. A
capitulary of Louis the Pious in 819[21] and a decree of Lothar I, recorded in 876, abolished the
ordeal so as to avoid the mockery of Christ.
- Innocent – the last to lower their hands
- Guilty – the one who lowered his arms first.
By ingestion
Franconian law prescribed that an accused was to be given dry bread and cheese
blessed by a priest. If the accused choked on the food, they were considered guilty. This was
transformed into the ordeal of the Eucharist (trial by sacrament) mentioned by Regino of
Prüm ca. 900:AD; the accused was to take the oath of innocence. It was believed that if the
oath had been false, the person would die within the same year.
Numbers 5:12–27 prescribes that a woman suspected of adultery—one called
a Sotah in later commentaries—should be made to swallow "the bitter water that cause the
curse" by the priest in order to determine her guilt. The accused would be condemned only if
'her belly shall swell and her thigh shall rot'. One writer has recently argued that the procedure
has a rational basis, envisioning punishment only upon clear proof of pregnancy (a swelling
belly) or venereal disease (a rotting thigh) (unless of course the woman was impregnated by
her own husband; and of course even historical people were well aware that pregnancy
would manifest itself in a very obvious fashion without bothering with rituals and drinking of
special potions. Other scholars think an abortifacient a more likely explanation; if the holy
water causes miscarriage, it is proof of guilt).[22]
By poison
Some cultures, such as the Efik Uburutu people of present-day Nigeria, would administer
the poisonous Calabar bean (Physostigma venenosum; known as esere in Efik), which
contains physostigmine, in an attempt to detect guilt.
- Innocent - A defendant who vomited up the bean.
- Guilty - A defendant who became ill or died.
The "penalty of the peach" was an ancient ordeal that involved peach pits or their
extracts. Peach pits contain amygdalin, which is metabolized into cyanide [but penalty is not
the same as trial]
In early modern Europe, the Mass was unofficially used as a form of poison ordeal: a
suspected party was forced to take the Eucharist on the grounds that, if they were guilty
- Guilty - they would be eternally damned, and hence their unwillingness to take the test
would give an indication of their guilt.
By turf
An Icelandic ordeal tradition involves the accused walking under a piece of turf. In this
form of trial, the defendant could prove his innocence by passing under a strip of turf that had
been raised to form an arch with each and resting on the ground.
- Innocent – if the accused could pass easily without anything happening to him, his
innocence was proven.
- Guilty - If the turf falls on the accused's head, the accused person is pronounced guilty.
Ordeal of Sacrament ( A special trial of ordeal )
Whereby an accused priest would be regained to take the wafer of communion.
- Innocent – they would swallow it without incident.
- Guilty – the accused clergy member was expected to choked the sacrament.
Trial of Ordeal Bean
By swallowing a calabar bean (which is an extremely poisonous seed to identify whether a
women was a witch or possessed by an evil spirit.
- Innocent – vomits the seed
- Guilty – ingested the calabar bean, which likely kill her because the seed releases
chemicals that disrupt communication between the muscular and nervous system. Due
to Asphyxiation when the diaphragm failed to respond.
0rdeal by Bitter water 9 if a woman was suspected of adultery)
The husband would bring his wife to the priest, who would begun the ritual by offering
ground barley at the altar. The priest will make her swear an oath written on a scroll that she
had engaged on sexual relations with anyone other than her husband. The priest will wash the
scroll in a cup of water and mix dirt in it. The woman would drink ‘this mixture which was called
the bitter curse – cursing water.
- Innocent – remained fertile
- Guilty – becomes infertile as the mixture was supposed to harm her reproductive organs.
Ordeal by blood
During this trial the corpse of the victim was placed on top of a small platform. Then each
of the suspected murderers would touch the body.
- Guilty(murderer) - It was believed that the true murderer touched the body of his victim,
the wound would start bleeding fresh blood.
- Innocent - If the wound did not bleed when touched, that suspect would be declared
innocent.

Suppression
Popes were generally opposed to ordeals, although there are some apocryphal
accounts describing their cooperation with the practice.[1] At first there was no general
decree against ordeals, and they were only declared unlawful in individual
cases. Eventually Pope Innocent III in Fourth Council of the Lateran (1215) promulgated a
canon forbidding blessing of participants before ordeals. This decision was followed by further
prohibitions by synods in thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. The Holy Roman
Emperor Frederick II (1194–1250) was the first king who explicitly outlawed trials by ordeal as
they were considered irrational (Constitutions of Melfi). In England, things started to change
with Henry III of England (1220).

Theoretical approaches
According to a theory put forward by economics professor Peter Leeson, trial by ordeal
may have been effective at sorting the guilty from the innocent. On the assumption that
defendants were believers in divine intervention for the innocent, then only the truly innocent
would choose to endure a trial; guilty defendants would confess or settle cases instead.
Therefore, the theory goes, church and judicial authorities could routinely rig ordeals so that
the participants—presumably innocent—could pass them. To support this theory, Leeson
points to the great latitude given to the priests in administering the ordeal and interpreting the
results of the ordeal. He also points to the overall high exoneration rate of accused persons
undergoing the ordeal, when intuitively one would expect a very high proportion of people
carrying a red hot iron to be badly burned and thus fail the ordeal.

CJL 1
Brief History
Early nomads who settled in the Philippines realized that members of their community
committed some infractions. It was then that they realized that there was a need for them to
organize a body to arrest offenders and conduct trials. Trial by ordeal was first instituted in
order to determine the guilt of the accused. Under trial by ordeal, a person accused of a crime
was ordered to perform an act which may hurt him like the act of placing his hands in boiling
water. If he got hurt, he was declared guilty; otherwise he was innocent. This was based on
the belief during that time that God protected the innocent persons.
When Magellan arrived, he found out that there were already organized settlers here in
the Philippines being governed by local chieftains, like sultans and rajas. Each sultan or rajah
headed a barangay and he was the one charged with conducting trial and punishing those
who were found guilty. At present, the Philippine government provided for a manner on how
to deal with persons who are arrested for the commission of a crime. Such manner is found
under our enacted laws and juris prudence as well as those adopted laws from foreign
countries and those provided for by international laws.
DEFINITION
- CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM (CJS) in the system in the community charged with direct
responsibility for the prevention, reduction and control of crime. It is widely looked upon
as the conglomeration of government agencies involved in the law enforcement,
prosecution, defense, adjudication, punishment and rehabilitation of all the means to
enforce those standards of conduct, which are deemed necessary to protect
individuals and to maintain general community well-being.
- CJS creates the laws governing social behavior, attempts to prevent violation of the
laws, apprehends violators, judges and punishes those who violate them. CJS operates
 by linking the police, prosecuting agencies, courts, correctional institutions and the
mobilized community to form an operational cycle designed to promote justice for
criminal victims as well as those who are accused and convicted of crimes.
- Essentially, CJS is “the system or process in the community by which crimes are
investigated, and the person suspected thereof is taken into custody, prosecuted in
court, and punished if found guilty, provision being made for their correction and
rehabilitation”.
CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM AS A SYSTEM AND A PROCESS
- As a system, the CJS is the machinery which society uses in prevention of crime. The
process is the totality of activities of law enforcers, prosecutors, defense lawyers, judges
and correction personnel as well as those efforts of the mobilized communities in crime
prevention.
- A system is one which consists of several parts that interact with each other to produce
some results, serve some functions or meet some objectives. Each part of the system is
expected to perform their responsibilities for the attainment of their common goals and
objectives.
- As a process, CJS refers to the orderly progression of events from the time a person is
arrested or taken out of the community.
- A criminal is a person who committed a crime and was convicted of a crime by final
judgment.
Parties to a criminal case
- 1. Accused – the most pampered party in a criminal case
- 2. Victim\ complainant – the forgotten party in a criminal case
- 3. People of the Philippines – the actual offended party
DEFINITION OF CRIME AND ITS CLASSIFICATIONS
a. According to the law punishing it:
1. Felony-a crime under the Revised Penal Code
2. Offense-a crime punished under special law
3. Violation of ordinances.
b. According to presence or absence of intent:
1. Intentional crime
2. Culpable crimes.
c. According to gravity:
1. Grave;
2. Less grave;
3. Light offenses.
d. According to impact to society:
1. Crimes mala inse;
 2. Crimes mala prohibita
e. According to presence or absence of attempted and/or frustrated stage
: 1. Formal crimes;
2. Material crimes.
CRIMES CAN BE COMMITTED IN TWO WAYS
1. Commission;
2. Omission.
Requisites of crime by commission:
1. Freedom – it is the capacity of a person to do whatever he/she pleases;
2. Intelligence – it is the capacity of a person top foresee the consequences of his
actions;
3. Intent – it is the compelling force that induces a person to do something.
Requisites of a crime by omission:
1. Freedom;
2. Intelligence;
3. Failure of a person to do and act which is mandated to him by law
When does judgment become final?
Judgment becomes final in any of the following instances:
1. After the lapse of 15 days to appeal;
2. When the accused waives his right to appeal;
3. When the accused applies for probation; and
4. When the case is decided with finality by the Supreme Court and the right to fila a
motion for reconsideration is closed.
Note: The term “waive” as used in number 2 means to renounce.
Definition of justice:
Justice is the act of rendering what is due and treating a person equally. These persons
must, however, fall within the same classification. (Gacayan, 2006)
What is the meaning of the term classification as used in the definition above?
Classification means that congress may classify a group or groups of persons whom a
certain law is applicable.
What is the meaning of system?
A system is a combination of related elements organized into a complex whole. It may
also refer to the process to be followed.
JUSTICE DELAYED JUSTICE DENIED: ESSENCE of JUSTICE under the CONSTITUTION.
 No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor
shall any person be deprived of the equal protection of the law. (art III, sec. 1, 1987
consti.)
DUE PROCESS: is a guaranty against any arbitrariness on the part of the government, whether
committed by legislative, executive or the judiciary.
Kinds of Due process:
1. Procedural Due Process – is one which hears before it condemns, which proceeds
upon inquiry.
2. Substantive Due Process – requires the intrinsic validity of the law in interfering the
rights of the person to his life, liberty, or property.
CJS Philippines. This body is composed of the following:
A. Main Pillars:
1. Law Enforcement – known as the front pillar or prime mover of the CJS. Arrests
offenders or violators of the law.
2. Prosecution – Gather necessary evidences with the help of law enforcement.
Determines the existence of prima facie case. Files and prosecutes the case In
court.
3. Court – is known as the center core of the CJS. It is the arbiter of justice.
Conducts hearing and renders authoritative judgment.
4. Correction – considered as the weakest pillar of the CJS. Controls those which
were convicted by the court and segregate them from the community.
5. Community – the informal pillar of the CJS. It is also known as the widest pillar.
The place where the criminal comes from and where he will return to. Accepts
the re-entry of ex- convicts.
B. As to auxiliary pillars:
1. Parole and probation administration – Supervise low risk, non-serious law
violator – those convicted who are sentenced with imprisonment of not more
than 6 years. Select inmates ready for re-entry into society. For prisoners who
served the minimum of their sentences.
These pillars are concerned in the prevention, control, and reduction of delinquency.
CJS is America = Law enforcement, Court, and Correction.

LAW ENFORCEMENT: FIRST PILLAR

The Philippines has various law enforcement agencies to police the officers of the
government. There are as many law enforcement agencies as there are offices of the
government. Some of the law enforcement bodies includes but are not limited to the
following:
1. Philippine National Police
2. National Bureau of investigation
3. National Police Commission
 4. Department of Finance
5. Department of Foreign Affairs
6. Department of environment and Natural Resources
7. Barangay Tanods
PHILIPPINE NATIONAL POLICE
Police defined:
As an individual – this refers to those who were tasked to protect life, liberty, or property
of the people. Prevent the existence of crime. Apprehend offenders and are known as
the front liners of the CJS.
As to agency – is one created under the constitution forming part of the executive
department incharge of apprehending offenders and to execute the law.
Note: execute as used above means to enforce the law.
Policeman – and agent of person in authority endowed by law to enforce the law.
Symbolically, heis the law.
KINDS OF POLICEMEN
1. Traditional policeman – a policeman walking in uniform performing patrol work,
working constantly and orderly, observing persons and things to accomplish crime
prevention missions. They are the best public servants who serves the public instead of
dominating them.
2. Contemporary policeman – The materialistic, arrogant, college educated agent of
persons in authority whose insights of public service is for the public to serve him as a
source of extrain come.
Police corruption is the use of the police position for PERSONAL GAIN
The Blue Wall of Silence – Police officers who know of wrongdoing by other police will not take
action against them or provide information against them to investigators because of 2 things:
1. Police mistrust their superiors and bear being given disproportionately harsh
punishment to set an example or to alleviate political pressure on their administrators;
2. They fear alienating their brothers and sister officers, upon whom they depend for
back up assistance in dangerous situations. To the public, it appears that the police
protect their own even against legitimate grievances and complaints of the community.
DIFFERENT POLICE ACTIVITIES
A. Prevention of Crimes – intended to prevent the root causes of crimes.
B. Repression or suppression of crimes – to reduce the opportunity of would be offenders
into committing a crime through various means like patrol.
C. Apprehending Offenders – arrest
D. Conduct search and seizure – with or without warrant
E. Investigation of crimes
F. Protection of lives and properties.
Relationship between the Law enforcement and Community
Such relationship may be explained by discussing first the criteria in reorganizing the PNP
under R.A. 8551 and the fundamental concepts concerning police service.
Criteria to be considered by the NaPolCom:
1. Increase police visibility through dispersal of personnel from the headquarters to the
fields offices and by the appointment and assignment of non-uniformed personnel
positions which are purely administrative, technical, clerical or menial in nature and
other positions which are not actually and directly related to police operation; and
2. Efficient and optimized delivery of police services to the community.
In modern concept, police men are considered more effective in the absence of crime. Police
officers are not limited to the act of arresting offenders or to other matters dealing with
offenders but also includes other services for the public.
In enforcing the said criteria, the Community Oriented Policing System was established for the
law enforcement and the community to have a harmonious relationship. Under this system,
police officers conduct seminars, tree planting or other similar activities to show how they care
for the community and in return, the community will assist the police in performing their
functions.
To have effective coordination between the law enforcement and the public, the Police
Community Relations Office was established. The Police Community Relations is defined as the
sum total of dealings of the police with the people it serves and whose goodwill and
cooperation it craves for to insure the greatest possible efficiency in public service. It covers
the following:
a. The entire field of public information designed to bridge any communication gap
between the police and the public;
b. The public relations intended to maintain harmony and mutual support between the
police and the community development;
c. The mass communication for the purpose of conditioning both friendly and the hostile
public, thereby insuring and facilitating the attainment of police objectives.
Other definition of terms related to Community Oriented Policing System:
a. Public Relation – is the act of bringing about better understanding, confidence, and
acceptance of an individual or an organization.
b. Police Public Relation – is the continuing process by which endeavors are made to
obtain the goodwill and cooperation of the public for the effective enforcement of the
law and the accomplishment of police purpose.
c. Human Relations – consists of fundamental precepts, both moral and legal, which
governs the relationship among men in all aspects of life.
Distinction between prevention of crime and repression/suppression of crimes
Such distinction may be understood by explaining and understanding first the formula of
crime.
The formula of crime;
CRIME = Desire + opportunity (to commit a crime)
 Resistance (not to commit a crime)
- If the combination of desire and opportunity is stronger than resistance, crime will be
committed
- If the combination of desire and opportunity is weaker than resistance, crime will not
be committed. In Prevention of crime, the law enforcement is strengthening the
resistance and weakening the desire of a person to commit a crime while in repression/
suppression of a crime, the law enforcement is reducing the opportunity of a person to
commit a crime, an example: patrol.
Note: the term resistance as used above refers to resistance against criminality.
Some provisions of the Holy Bible in relation to the Desire of Committing a Crime
or Resistance against Criminality.
The devil, or Satan, is a spiritual being totally keeping us from living for the glory and pleasure
of God to himself or to others. The devil has 3 main weapons he uses against God’s people
and they are the following:
a. Temptation – Satan’s favorite method of attack;
b. Deception – in case temptation doesn’t work, deception will be used;
c. Accusation – such is used to produce doubt.
Poverty and other root cause of Crimes
Other authors pinpoint that the root cause of crimes is related to poverty, materialism,
and lack of wisdom or inner satisfaction.
ARREST
- Arrest is the taking of a person in custody in order that he may be bound to answer for
the commission of an offense.
Rules to be considered in Conducting Arrest:
a. No violence or unnecessary force shall be used in making an arrest;
b. The person arrested shall not be subject to a greater restraint than is necessary for his
detention;
c. It shall be the duty of the officer executing the warrant to arrest the accused and
deliver him to the nearest police station or jail without unnecessary delay;
d. The head of the office to whom the warrant of arrest was delivered for execution shall
cause the warrant to be executed within 10 days from its receipt. Within 10 days after
the expiration of the period, the officer whom it was assigned for execution shall make
a report to the judge who issued the warrant. In case of his failure to execute the
warrant, he shall state the reason therefore; and
e. Arrest may be made on any day at any time during the day or night. (sections
1,2,3,4,5, and6, Rule 113, Rules of Court)
Warrant of Arrest
- Warrant of arrest is an order in writing issued in the name of the people of the
Philippines, signed by the judge and directed to a peace officer, commanding him to
arrest a person or persons stated therein and deliver them before the court.
Requisites for a valid warrant of arrest:
1. It shall be issued upon probable cause;
2. The probable cause is determined personally by the judge upon examination under
author affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce; and
3. Particularly describing the person to be arrested. (sec. 2, art III philconsti.)
Take note: Oath is applicable if the person making his affidavit believes in God while
affirmation is applicable to someone who does not believe in God.
Life Span of a Warrant of Arrest
As long as the person stated in the warrant of arrest is not arrested, it shall remain valid
even if several years already lapsed. However, the head of the office to which the
warrant of arrest was delivered for execution shall cause the warrant to be executed
within 10 days from its receipt. Within 10 days after the expiration period, the officer to
whom it was assigned for execution shall make a report to the judge who issued the
warrant. In case of his failure to execute the warrant, he shall state the reason for its non-
execution but the validity of the warrant is not affected. ( sec 4, rule 113 of the rules of
court).
As a rule, every arrest must be done by virtue of a warrant of arrest, what are the exemptions
to this rule?
The exemptions to this rule are as follows:
1. When in the presence of the arresting person, the person to be arrested has
committed, is actually committing, or is attempting to commit an offense;
2. When an offense has just been committed and the arresting person has probable
cause to believe based on the personal knowledge of facts and circumstances that
the person to be arrested committed it; and
3. When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped from a penal
establishment or place where he is serving final judgement or is temporally confined
while his case is pending, or has escaped while being transferred from one confinement
to another.
In cases falling under paragraphs (a) and (b.) above, the person arrested without a warrant
shall be forthwith delivered to the nearest police station or jail and shall undergo a preliminary
investigation or inquest proceeding.
What is the method of conducting arrest with warrant of arrest by a police officer?
When making an arrest by virtue of a warrant, the officer shall inform the person to be
arrested of the cause of the arrest and the fact that a warrant has been issued for is
arrest, except when he flees or forcibly resists before the officer has opportunity to so
inform him, or when the giving of such information will imperil the arrest.
The officer need not to have the warrant of arrest in his possession at the time of the
arrest but after the arrest, if the person arrested so requires, the warrant shall be shown
to him as soon as practicable.
What is the method of conducting arrest without warrant of arrest by a police officer?
 When making an arrest without warrant, the officer shall inform the person to be arrested
of his authority and the cause of the arrest, unless the latter is either engaged in the
commission of an offense, is pursued immediately after its commission, has escaped,
flees, or forcibly resists before the officer has opportunity to so inform him, or when the
giving of such information will imperil the arrest.
What is the method of conducting arrest by private person?
The private person when making an arrest, shall inform the person to be arrested of the
intention to arrest him and the cause of the arrest, unless the latter is either engaged in
the commission of an offense, is pursued immediately after its commission, has escaped,
flees, or forcibly resists before the person making the arrest has opportunity to so inform
him, or when the giving of such information will imperil the arrest.
What if the person lawfully arrested escapes?
If a person lawfully arrested escapes, any person may immediately pursue or retake him
without a warrant at any time and in any place within the Philippines. This is known as
Hot Pursuit.
What are the rights of police officers conducting arrest and what are the rights of arrested
person?
The rights of the police officers conducting arrest are the following:
A. The right to summon assistance: An officer making an arrest may usually summon as
many persons as he deems necessary to assist him in effecting arrest. Every person so
summoned by an officer shall assist him in effecting the arrest when he can render such
assistance without detriment to himself.
B. Right to break into building or enclosure; and An officer, in order to make an arrest
either by virtue of a warrant, or without a warrant may break into any building or n where
the person to be arrested is or is reasonably believed to be, if he is refused admittance
thereto, after announcing his authority and purpose.
C. Right to break out from building or enclosure. Whenever an officer has entered the
building or enclosure to conduct arrest, he may breakout therefrom when necessary to
liberate himself.
The rights of the arrested persons are the following:
a. Right against torture, force, intimidation and the like; and
b. Right to be visited and conferred privately with his lawyer in the jail or any other place
of custody at any hour of the day or night, subject to reasonable regulations.
What are the crimes that may be committed by a police officer while conducting
arrest, whether with or without warrant?
The crimes that maybe committed by a police officer while conducting arrests, whether with
or without warrant, are as follows
A. Delay in the delivery of detained persons to the proper Judicial authority is committed
by the public officer or employee who shall detain any person for some legal ground
and shall fail to deliver such person to the proper judicial authorities within the following
period:
● 12 hours for crimes punishable by light penalties;
 ● 18 hours for crimes punishable by correctional penalties; and
● 36 hours for crimes punishable by afflictive or capital punishment
B. Unlawful arrest is committed by any person who, in any case other than those
authorized by law, shall arrest or detain another for the purpose of delivering him to
proper judicial authorities.
What is the arrest is not authorized by law and the person arrested is delivered to any other
place aside from jail or police station?
- If the arrest is not authorized by law and the person arrested is delivered to any other
place aside from jail or police station, the arresting person is liable for the crime of
kidnapping.
- If the arresting person detains the arrested person without legal ground, he is liable
either
1. Illegal detention – if the detaining person is a private person
2. Arbitrary detention- if the detaining person is a public officer or employee
What if the arrest is not authorized by law and with lewd design?
If the arrest is not authorized by law and with lewd design, the arresting person
committed the crime of forcible abduction. There is a lewd design if the arresting person
has the intention to have sexual intercourse with the arresting person.
C. Expulsion- is committed by any public officer or employee who, not being authorized
by law, shall expel any person from the Philippine Islands or shall compel such person to
change his residence.
Define search warrant. State the requisites of a valid search warrant.
Search Warrant- is an order in writing issued in the name of the people in the Philippines,
signed by a judge and directed to a peace officer, commanding him to search for personal
property described therein and bring it before the court.
The requisites of a valid search warrant are the following:
a. It shall be issued upon probable cause;
b. The probable cause is determined personally by the judge upon examination under
author affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce; and
c. Particularly describing the things and place to be search.
Take note: Search is defined as the act of looking into carefully in order to find some
concealed items. On the other hand, seizure is to take into custody of something.
A search warrant maybe issued for the search and seizure of the following personal properties:
a. Subject of the offense
b. Stolen or embezzled and other proceeds or fruits of the offense
c. Used or intended to be used as a means of committing a crime.
Take note: there are two kinds of properties and they are the real properties and the personal
properties. Real properties are those which cannot be transferred from one place to another.
Some examples of this are lands buildings, roads, and the like. Personal properties, on the other
hand, are those which can be transferred from one place to another. Some examples of this
are ammunitions, firearms, clothes and the like.
It must also be stressed further that it be served in the day time, unless the affidavit asserts that
the property is on the person or on the place ordered to be searched, in which case, a
direction may be inserted that it be served at any time of the day or night.
The life span of a search warrant:
A search warrant shall be valid in 10 days from its date. Thereafter, it shall be void.
The distinction between warrant of arrest and search warrant:
The distinction between warrant of arrest and search warrant are the following:
a. The warrant of arrest and search warrant are orders in writing issued in the name of
the people of the Philippines, signed by a judge and directed to a peace officer;
b. The warrant of arrest and search warrant are issued only upon probable cause;
c. The warrant of arrest is intended to arrest a person, while a search warrant is
intended to search and seize things specified therein;
d. The warrant of arrest remains valid as long as the person stated therein is not
arrested regardless of the number of days that already lapsed, while a search
warrant is valid within10days from issue;
e. The warrant of arrest may not be in possession of the arresting person while
conducting arrest, while the search warrant must be in possession of the police
officer when while conducting search and seizure; and
f. The warrant of arrest maybe executed anytime of the day and night, while search
warrant as rule must be executed during daytime.
What is the rule in conducting search and seizure? What are the exemption to this rule?
As a rule, every search and seizure must be done by virtue of a search warrant.
The exemption to this rule include the following:
a. Consented search
Under consented search, the right against unreasonable search and seizure
maybe voluntarily waived by a person being searched provided the following
requisites of a waived are present:
● Existence of a right;
● Person has knowledge, either actual or constructive, of the existence of such
right; and
● Said person had an actual intention of relinquishing such right.
b. Search incidental to lawful arrest;
Under search incidental to lawful arrest, a person lawfully arrested may be
searched for dangerous weapons or anything which may have been used or constitute
proof in the commission of an offense without search warrant.
 C. Plainview search; Under plain view search, illegal things at sight maybe seized even
without a warrant to do so. The things must be readily seen without any effort of locating
it.
An example of Plainview search is while a policeman was conducting patrol, he
saw a hand gun held by a person whom he believes not to be a policeman. In such
case, the policeman may inquire about the license and other documents pertinent to
the lawful possession of that handgun. In case no document is presented, that person
maybe arrested and his hand gun maybe seized.
d. Search in moving vehicle;
and Under search in moving vehicle especially in checkpoints, moving vehicles
may be searched provided that it is limited to visual search, except in the case of
national emergency.
e. Customs search
Under custom search, the personnel of Bureau of Customs conduct search to
enforce customs law or to regulate exports and imports. Take note: these enumerated
instances are also known as warrantless search.
What are the crimes may be committed by a policeman while conducting search?
A. Violation of domicile;
Violation of domicile is committed by any public officer or employee who, not being
authorized by judicial order, shall enter the dwelling against the will of the owner thereof,
search papers or other effects found therein without the previous consent of the owner or
having surreptitiously entered said dwelling and being required to leave said premises, shall
refuse to do so.
B. Search warrant maliciously obtained;
Search warrant maliciously obtained is committed by a public officer or employee who
procures a search warrant without just cause. An example of this is if a police officer applies
for search warrant and intentionally lied in his affidavit. Basing on said affidavit, the judge
issued a search warrant.
C. Abuse in the authority of search warrants legally obtained;
and Abuse in the authority of search warrants legally obtained is committed by a public
officer or employee who has legally procured a search warrant but exceeds his authority
or uses unnecessary severity in executing the same.
D. Searching domicile without witnesses
Searching domicile without witnesses is committed by a public officer or employee who
is armed with a search warrant legally procured and searches the domicile, papers, or
other belongings of any person without the presence of the owner, or any member of the
family, or at least two witnesses residing in the same locality. An example of this is a
policeman, armed with search warrant legally procured, searches the house of a person
without the owner but with the presence of a 7-year old child of the owner. Take note: the
phrase “any member of the family or at least two witnesses resides in the same locality” as
stated above refers to a person of sufficient age and discretion. A person is considered of
sufficient age if he attains the age of majority (18 years old) and he is of sufficient discretion
if he is sane.
In responding to the crime scene, what must be taken into consideration by a policeman?
Every policeman, in responding to the crime scene, must not forget to save life first.
Apprehension to criminals and preservation of evidence are the next priorities.
What is custodial investigation? What are its requisites?
Custodial investigation is any questioning initiated by law enforcement officers after a
person has been taken into custody of otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in
any significant way.
It shall include the practice of issuing an invitation to a person who is investigated in
connection with an offense he is suspected to have committed, without prejudice to
the liability of the inviting officer for any violation of law.
The requisites of custodial investigation are as follows:
a. The questions being asked are no longer general inquiry; and
b. The person being questioned is considered as a suspect in the crime committed
What is the meaning of general inquiry?
General inquiry is a question that maybe asked to any person. Some examples of this are as
follows:
a. What is your name?
b. How young you are?
c. Are you single?
In case of homicide, a policeman is interviewing a person to determine if that person can
identify the suspect. Is there custodial investigation in this case?
None yet, there is no custodial in this case. This is because the person being investigated
is not yet considered as a suspect in the crime committed. This is true even if in truth the
person being investigated is the one who committed the crime.
What if a person is already considered as a suspect so he is being investigated inside his own
house and the purpose of said investigation is to determine his participation in the crime
committed, is there custodial investigation?
Yes, there is custodial investigation. This is because the determining factor in the
existence of custodial investigation is whether or not the requisites of custodial
investigation are present. The place of conducting investigation is not a determining
factor.
What are the three tools or I’s of criminal investigation?
The 3 I’s are the following:
a. Information I the knowledge which the investigator gathered and acquired from the
person. Take note: the term information as defined in this discussion is different from the
information defined in the prosecution stage. Information, as defined in the prosecution
stage is an accusation in writing charging a person with an offense, subscribed by the
prosecutor and filed in court.
b. Interrogation is a questioning of a person suspected of having committed an offense
or of a person who is reluctant to make a full disclosure of information in his possession
 which is pertinent to the investigation. Interview is the questioning of a person who is
believed to possess knowledge that is of official interest to the investigator. The person
being questioned usually gives his account of an incident under investigation or offers
information concerning a person under investigated in his own manner and words.
C. Instrumentation is the application of instruments and methods of physical science
to the detection of crime.
What are the rights of persons under custodial investigation?
The rights of persons under custodial investigation include the following:
a. Right to be informed of his rights to remain silent;
b. Right to have a competent and independent counsel preferably of his own choice
or to be provided with one.
c. Rights against torture, force, violence, threat, and intimidation or any other means
which vitiates his free will
d. Rights to be held in secret, solitary, incommunicado, or any other similar forms of
detention
The person under investigation for the commission of an offense shall have the right to waive
his rights to remain silent and his right to have a counsel provided:
a. The waiver is done voluntarily;
b. Done intelligently;
c. In the presence of a competent and independent counsel and in writing.
What if the rights stated in the preceding question are not complied with?
If the rights as stated are not complied with by the investigating officer, any admission,
confession, or any evidences obtained during investigation will be inadmissible in any
proceeding. This is known as the “Doctrine of the fruit of the Poisonous Tree”. This
doctrine states that any evidences illegally obtained is not admissible in any
proceeding. In addition, the investigation officer may also be charged criminally,
administratively, and/or civilly.
NOTE: If the investigating official is not a police officer, there is no need for him/her to
state the rights of persons under investigation for the commission of an offense. These
rights are being informed to a person being investigated only if the investigating officer
is a law enforcer.
Difference between Confession and Admission.
Confession is the direct acknowledgement of guilt while admission is the indirect
acknowledgement of guilt. An example of confession is that if the accused
acknowledged that he was the one who committed the crime. An example of
admission is that if the accused acknowledged that he owns the tools used in
committing the crime but denies the actual commission of the crime.
Kinds of Confession and Admission:
a. Judicial Confession/admission – are those done in open court in the presence of the
judge;
b. Extra-judicial Confession/ admission – are those made outside of that.
Crimes that may be committed by a policeman while conducting custodial investigation.
A. Violation of Paragraph a (1), section 3 of RA 7438 – is committed by any arresting
public officer or employee, or any investigation officer, who fails to inform any person
arrested, detained, or under custodial investigation of his right to remain silent and to
have competent and independent counsel preferably of his own choice.
B. Violation of Paragraph a (2), section 3 of 7438 – is committed by any arresting public
officer or employee, or any investigating officer, who fails to provide a competent and
independent counsel to a person arrested, detained of under custodial investigation for
the commission of an offense if the latter cannot afford the services of his own counsel.
C. Violation of Paragraph b, section 3 of RA 7438 – is committed by any person who
obstructs, prevents or prohibits any lawyer, member of the immediate family of a person
arrested, detained or under custodial investigation, or any medical doctor or priest or
religious minister chosen by him/her, or from threatening him, or from ministering to his
spiritual needs, of any hour of the day or, in urgent cases, of the night. The Philippine
Constitution provides that the public office is a public trust. Public officers and
employees must at all times be accountable to the people, serve them with utmost
responsibility, integrity, loyalty, and efficiency, and act with patriotism and justice, and
lead modest lives. (Sec. 1, art XI Phil. Consti.)