G.R. No. 221384 - Galacgac vs. Bautista

The crime involved the rape with homicide of Cecilia Arabis, a 7-year-old girl, whose lifeless body was found dumped in a canal.
Cecilia was staying with her mother, Lilia Arabis, at No. 110 Santolan St., Purok I, Sta. Rita, Olongapo City, in a makeshift dwelling partitioned into two rooms.
The accused—Romeo Magalong y Buado, Eduardo Lim alias “Pilay,” and Arsenio Aquino—resided along Santolan St. and were connected by proximity and personal association.

Cecilia, in the late afternoon of 17 November 1987, went to the house of Arsenio Aquino seeking her mother, who was known to be a jueteng collector.
At the time, Magalong and Lim, reportedly under the influence of marijuana (“sabog”), were with Aquino in Aquino’s residence.
As Cecilia entered the house, Aquino observed Magalong fixating his gaze on her; subsequently, Magalong instructed Aquino to bring the young girl to his room.
In the room, Magalong ordered Aquino to choke Cecilia. Aquino, though hesitant, grasped her neck; however, Lim intervened by pushing Aquino aside and directly strangling the victim.
Concurrently, Magalong removed Cecilia’s short pants and panties, took off his own garments, and attempted sexual assault by inserting his finger into her vagina.
When Cecilia protested with loud screams, Magalong pressed his shirt over her mouth, resulting in suffocation and the onset of cardio-respiratory arrest, which, together with other traumatic injuries, led to her death.

Upon ascertaining Cecilia’s death, Magalong ordered Aquino to verify that the area was clear; subsequently, Magalong, assisted by Lim, disposed of the body by dumping it in a shallow canal and covering it with garbage.
Both Magalong and Lim threatened Aquino to prevent him from disclosing details of the incident.
The disappearance of Cecilia prompted a search by her mother and neighbors, leading to the discovery of the battered, decomposing body around noon on 19 November 1987.
The autopsy performed by Dr. Richard A. Patilano revealed abrasions, contusions, a lacerated and gaping hymen with no significant bleeding, and ultimately attributed death to cardio-respiratory arrest compounded by cerebral hemorrhage and multiple traumatic injuries.

The prosecution presented key witnesses—Pat. Bayani Velasco, Amorosa Francisco, and Lilia P. Arabis—corroborating the sequence of events.
Although the testimony of the Rural Health Officer (Dr. Patilano) was dispensed with upon authentication of the death certificate and autopsy report, the testimony of state witness Arsenio Aquino became central to the prosecution’s case.
Initially, Aquino’s minor inconsistencies (including his admission to smoking marijuana) were noted; however, these were confined to collateral matters and did not affect the overall graphic and detailed account of the crime.
For their defense, Magalong and his witnesses provided alibi testimonies concerning his whereabouts, while Lim did not present evidence, instead filing a demurrer to evidence—which was denied.

Whether the inconsistencies in Arsenio Aquino’s testimony—specifically his fluctuating admissions and contradictory statements—undermine its reliability as evidence against the accused.
Whether minor inconsistencies with collateral details may be justifiably disregarded when the core narrative remains consistent.

Whether accused Magalong could have been present at the locus criminis given his asserted alibi of being in another location at the time.
Whether the evidence sufficiently demonstrates that Eduardo Lim’s involvement went beyond that of an accessory and qualifies him as a principal in the commission of the crime.

Whether the sentencing of “reclusion perpetua” (which carries accessory penalties and a definite duration) is correctly differentiated from “life imprisonment” in the context of this heinous crime.
Whether the sentencing should reflect the gravity of the crime, especially given the victim’s age and the brutality of the acts committed.