PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS ARMANDO REANZARES
A Case Study
Presented to the Criminology Department
UNIVERSITY OF MINDANAO BANSALAN COLLEGE
Bansalan, Davao del Sur
_____________________
BAISAC, FRANK W
August 2019
1
A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE CRIME
On 10 May 1994 at around 8:10 in the evening. spouses Gregorio Tactacan
and Lilia Tactacan owned a sari-saristore in San Miguel, Sto. Tomas, Batangas. the
Tactacan spouses closed their store and left for home in Barangay San Roque, Sto.
Tomas, Batangas on board their passenger-type jeepney. As Gregorio was
maneuvering his jeep backwards from where it was parked two (2) unidentified men
suddenly climbed on board. His wife Lilia immediately asked them where they were
going and they answered that they were bound for the town proper. When Lilia
informed them that they were not going to pass through the town proper, the two (2)
said they would just get off at the nearest intersection. After negotiating some 500
meters, one of the hitchhikers pointed a .38 caliber revolver at Gregorio while the
other poked a balisong at Lilia's neck and ordered Gregorio to stop the vehicle. Two
(2) other persons, one of whom was later identified as accused Armando Reanzares,
were seen waiting for them at a distance. As soon as the vehicle stopped, the
accused and his companion approached the vehicle. Gregorio was then pulled from
the driver's seat to the back of the vehicle. They gagged and blindfolded him and tied
his hands and feet. They also took his Seiko wristwatch worth P2,500.00. The
accused then drove the vehicle after being told by one of them, "Sigei-drive mo na”.
Gregorio did not know where they were headed for as he was blindfolded. After
several minutes, he felt the vehicle making a u-turn and stopped after ten (10)
minutes. During the entire trip, his wife kept uttering, "Maawa kayo sa amin,marami
kaming anak, kunin nyo na lahat ng gusto ninyo." Immediately after the last time she
uttered these words a commotion ensued and Lilia was heard saying, "aray!"
Gregorio heard her but could not do anything. After three (3) minutes the commotion
ceased. Then he heard someone tell him, "Huwag kang kikilos diyan, ha," and left.
2
Gregorio then untied his hands and feet, removed his gag and blindfold and jumped
out of the vehicle. The culprits were all gone, including his wife. He ran to San Roque
East shouting for help. When Gregorio returned to the crime scene, the jeepney was
still there. He went to the drivers seat. There he saw his wife lying on the floor of the
jeepney with blood splattered all over her body. Her bag containing P1,200.00 was
missing. He brought her immediately to the C. P. Reyes Hospital where she was
pronounced dead on arrival.
3
SOLUTION
The supreme court considered the refusal of the witness to undergo lie detector test
is only disputable presumption We cannot subscribe to this contention as the
procedure of ascertaining the truth by means of a lie detector test has never been
accepted in our jurisdiction; thus, any findings based thereon cannot be considered
conclusive. under Sec. 3, par. (e), Rule 131, of the Rules of Court on evidence,
which does not apply in the present case as the evidence allegedly omitted is equally
accessible and available to the defense. These attempts of the accused to discredit
Gregorio obviously cannot hold ground. Neither can they bolster his alibi. Although
lie detector test helps to aid investigating criminal incidents and issues, speeds up
the process of investigation, eliminates innocent suspects and honesty test but I
agree to the decision of the supreme court that lie detector is not admissible in
ascertaining the truths because lie detector test is depend on the examiner, subjects
and the instrument or the machine to be used in conducting the polygraph
examination. In addition, lie detector test depends on the skills or the art of the
examiner in conducting the polygraph examination, the subject must be in good
physical and mental condition and the instrument which the examiner should check
the sensors/transducers attached to the subjects body.
4
CONCLUSION
The decision of the supreme court is the acussed found guilty beyond reasonable
doubt because when The trial court observed that Gregorio Tactacan testified in a
categorical, straightforward, spontaneous and frank manner, and was consistent on
cross-examination.although Gregorio refuse to be subjected to a lie detector test.
The trial court cannot subscribe to this contention as the procedure of ascertaining
the truth by means of a lie detector test has never been accepted in our jurisdiction;
thus, any findings based thereon cannot be considered conclusive. The suspect
found guilty because his father and brother testimonies did not meet the requisite
quantum to establish his alibi. While his father testified that the accused borrowed
money from him for his fare to Bicol for the baptism of a daughter, he could not say
whether the accused actually went to Bicol. As regards the claim of Romeo, brother
of the accused, that he accompanied the accused to the bus stop on 9 May 1994
and even helped him with his things, seeing the accused off is not the same as
seeing him actually get off at his destination. the trial court was correct in
disregarding the alibi of the accused not only because he was positively identified by
Gregorio Tactacan but also because it was not shown that it was physically
impossible for him to be at the crime scene on the date and time of the incident.
5
6
