Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 237 views

    People of The Philippines Vs Pabiona

    Uploaded by

    jayzzah
    Robert Pagayon was found dead in a well on Benjie Pabiona's property. Pabiona and four others claimed Pagayon fell, while a witness said he saw the five men attacking an unidentified person by the river who was later identified as Pagayon. The court initially convicted the five men of murder. However, the court overturned the conviction, finding the evidence was circumstantial and could indicate either an accident or a crime. As there were two plausible explanations, and the prosecution did not prove motive or all elements of the crime, there was reasonable doubt about the men's guilt. The court ruled Pabiona and the others were not liable for murder.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    People of The Philippines Vs Pabiona

    Uploaded by

    jayzzah
    237 views2 pages
    Robert Pagayon was found dead in a well on Benjie Pabiona's property. Pabiona and four others claimed Pagayon fell, while a witness said he saw the five men attacking an unidentified person by the river who was later identified as Pagayon. The court initially convicted the five men of murder. However, the court overturned the conviction, finding the evidence was circumstantial and could indicate either an accident or a crime. As there were two plausible explanations, and the prosecution did not prove motive or all elements of the crime, there was reasonable doubt about the men's guilt. The court ruled Pabiona and the others were not liable for murder.

    Original Description:

    Case Digest

    Original Title

    People of the Philippines vs Pabiona

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Robert Pagayon was found dead in a well on Benjie Pabiona's property. Pabiona and four others claimed Pagayon fell, while a witness said he saw the five men attacking an unidentified person by the river who was later identified as Pagayon. The court initially convicted the five men of murder. However, the court overturned the conviction, finding the evidence was circumstantial and could indicate either an accident or a crime. As there were two plausible explanations, and the prosecution did not prove motive or all elements of the crime, there was reasonable doubt about the men's guilt. The court ruled Pabiona and the others were not liable for murder.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    237 views2 pages

    People of The Philippines Vs Pabiona

    Uploaded by

    jayzzah
    Robert Pagayon was found dead in a well on Benjie Pabiona's property. Pabiona and four others claimed Pagayon fell, while a witness said he saw the five men attacking an unidentified person by the river who was later identified as Pagayon. The court initially convicted the five men of murder. However, the court overturned the conviction, finding the evidence was circumstantial and could indicate either an accident or a crime. As there were two plausible explanations, and the prosecution did not prove motive or all elements of the crime, there was reasonable doubt about the men's guilt. The court ruled Pabiona and the others were not liable for murder.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    PEOPLE VS PABIONA

    (GR. No. 145803, June 30, 2004)


    FACTS:
    Robert Pagayon was working under the accused when found dead. According
    to the accused they saw Pagayon who was said fell down the well, which the
    victim and the five accused working on inside Pabionas property, they found
    them dead. Pabiona stated that they tried to resuscitate the victim and
    summon his mother to let her know. Emma Pagayon, the victims sister-inlaw, insisted to have an autopsy reports and later found out that the victim
    cause of death is Cardio respiratory arrest due to shock and hemorrhage as a
    result of multiple traumatic injuries to the body.
    Michael Pagayon, cousin of the victim, further testified that he saw the five
    accused mauling unidentified person near the river, and he later said that
    the unidentified person was Robert Pagayon.
    The court rendered a decision convicting the five accused,Benjie Pabiona,
    Roselo Basalatan, Antonio Silarca, and Roberto Metano guilty of crime of
    murder beyond reasonable doubt. However, the accused file a notice of
    appeal for relying only to circumstantial evidences and disregarded
    appellants version of the case.
    ISSUE:
    Whether or not there is sufficient circumstantial evidence and Pabiano and
    other are liable of the crime of murder?
    RULING:
    No. The Court applies the principle of equipoise rule stated that facts and
    circumstances are capable of two or more explanations, one consistent with
    the innocence of the accused and the other consistent with his guilt, then the
    evidence does not fulfill the test of moral certainty and will not justify a
    conviction. In the case at bar, the evidences showed that it can also be an
    accident, falling down and getting hit in the head with a hard object, may
    cause blood clot and scalp hematoma. Under Section 4 of Rule 133 of the
    Rules on Evidence provides that circumstantial evidence is sufficient for
    conviction if the following requisites are complied with: (1) there is more than
    one circumstance; (2) the facts from which the inferences are derived are
    proven; and (3) the combination of all the circumstances is such as to
    produce a conviction beyond reasonable doubt. However because of the
    consistent version statements of the appellants and other circumstantial
    evidence causing doubt to whether a crime has been committed or whether
    the accused has committed it. Also the prosecution was unable to establish
    motive of the appellants in committing such unlawful act, relying only in
    suspicion that probably the accused perform the crime. Failed to suffice the

    evidence and prove the guilt. Therefore, Pabiano and other are not liable for
    the crime of murder.

    You might also like