Title
People vs. Clores
Case
G.R. No. L-61408
Decision Date
Oct 12, 1983
A family accused of murder in 1970 was acquitted by the Supreme Court due to unreliable eyewitness testimony, weak prosecution evidence, and credible alibis, upholding the presumption of innocence.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-61408)

Charges and Sentencing

The defendants were charged with murder under Criminal Case No. 412. The trial court sentenced Isidro, Edmundo, and Gavino Clores to reclusion perpetua, ordered them to indemnify the heirs of Victorio Barcarse, Jr. in the amount of P12,000.00, and required them to pay the costs of the trial. Cynthia Clores, the daughter, was acquitted due to a lack of evidence.

Background of the Incident

On April 11, 1970, representatives from the Barcarse family, including Felisa Barcarse and her son Victorio, visited Isidro Clores's home to discuss the potential marriage of Victorio and Isidro's daughter Salome. After an inconclusive preliminary discussion, Cynthia Clores fetched Victorio on April 24, 1970, for further discussions, but he did not return home. His mother, Felisa, later reported his disappearance and suspected foul play after discovering a body wrapped in a sack.

Investigation and Eyewitness Testimony

The initial investigation, led by Philippine Constabulary Investigator Eustaquio Mellilin, failed to yield useful evidence. However, in June 1975, after an eyewitness named Morel Callueng came forward, the case was revived. Callueng alleged that he witnessed the murder. He claimed to have seen Gavino sitting on top of Victorio, gagging him while Edmundo struck him repeatedly with a rifle butt. Isidro was purportedly present, encouraging Edmundo to complete the act.

Defense Claims

The defendants presented a defense based on denial and alibi, asserting their absence during the incident. Edmundo claimed he was in Quezon City at the time, Isidro testified he was ill in Manila, and Gavino maintained he was at his workplace. The appellants argued that their familial ties to Victorio negated any motive for murder.

Trial Court's Rationale

The trial court accepted Callueng's testimony, emphasizing its consistency and clarity. It found that the positive identification of the defendants outweighed their alibis. The court dismissed the defense's claims regarding political motivations behind the charges as inconsequential, prioritizing the eyewitness identification.

Appeal and Solicitor General's Position

In the subsequent appeal, the Solicitor General recommended that the conviction be overturned, citing significant inconsistencies and concerns regarding the credibility of Callueng. The Solicitor General highlighted discrepancies in Callueng’s testimony, including confusion about how he arrived at the scene and what he actually witnessed, arguing that these inconsistencies undermined the reliability of his account.

Presumption of Innocence and Weakness of Prosecution's Case

The appellate court emphasized the presumption of innocence, s

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.