G.R. No. 51770 - People vs. Galit

Case Summary (G.R. No. 51770)

Factual Background of the Homicide

The victim, Mrs. Natividad Fernando, a 70‑year‑old widow, was found dead in her bedroom with seven wounds inflicted by a blunt instrument. The medico‑legal necropsy indicated massive cerebral hemorrhage and death from shock and hemorrhage. The prosecution alleged that Galit conspired with two others (named as Juling Dulay and “Pabling”) to enter the victim’s house, kill her, and steal cash and valuables.

Arrest, Custody and Allegations of Coercion

More than two weeks after the homicide, local police picked up Galit on suspicion; the case was referred to the NBI. The NBI conducted custodial interrogation. The decision recounts that investigating officers brutally maltreated the accused—physically mauling and beating him, covering his face with a rag, and pushing his face into a toilet bowl of human waste—until he admitted participation and signed a prepared confession (salaysay). He was also photographed in what was described as a reenactment against his will.

Statutory and Jurisprudential Proscription of Maltreatment

Article 235 of the Revised Penal Code punishes maltreatment of prisoners, imposing penalties that increase if the purpose is to extort a confession or obtain information. The Court reiterated its longstanding condemnation of practices that use maltreatment to extort confessions, citing People v. Cabrera and other precedent as consistent authority rejecting coerced confessions as grave violations of human rights.

Trial Court Disposition and Sentencing

At trial the Circuit Criminal Court of Pasig found Galit guilty of Robbery with Homicide and sentenced him to death, ordered indemnity to the heirs in the amount of P110,000, and imposed costs. The trial judge rendered decision immediately after the defense rested on August 11, 1978.

Prosecution’s Evidentiary Case

The prosecution’s case rested primarily on witness Florentino Valentino’s testimony and the accused’s alleged extrajudicial confession. Valentino testified to overhearing Galit and his wife quarrel and to statements suggesting Galit intended to leave because of involvement in robbing and killing the victim; he also claimed to have seen Galit carrying a bag containing coins. Valentino related a narrative in which the three conspirators met, entered the victim’s premises by breaking the back wall, one of them used a bolo to hack the victim, and afterwards they divided the loot (each allegedly receiving P70). Photographs and the necropsy report were introduced to establish the victim’s injuries and death.

Defense and Contest to Confession

Galit consistently denied participation, claimed an alibi (that he was at his house in Marikina when the crime occurred), and specifically challenged the admissibility of the extrajudicial salaysay on the ground that it was obtained by torture, force and intimidation and without the benefit of counsel. He also contested the voluntariness of the reenactment photographs, which he said were done against his will and without counsel.

Court’s Assessment of the Evidence

The Supreme Court found the prosecution’s evidence insufficient to support conviction. The decision emphasized the absence of eyewitnesses who actually saw the killing, the absence of recovered property linking the accused to the robbery, no state witnesses placing him at the scene, and no physical evidence such as fingerprints. The Court characterized the trial court’s factual findings as not supported by competent evidence and identified the alleged confession as the principal, indeed only, direct proof tying Galit to the crime—thus meriting close scrutiny.

Constitutional and Procedural Safeguards in Custodial Investigation

Relying on Morales v. Ponce Enrile, the Court recited the procedural safeguards required during arrest and custodial interrogation: the arrested person must be informed of the reason for arrest and shown the warrant if any; informed of constitutional rights to remain silent and to counsel; permitted to communicate with counsel, relatives, or others by the most expedient means; custodial investigation shall not be conducted unless in the presence of counsel (engaged, privately provided, or court‑appointed upon petition); a waiver of the right to counsel must be made with assistance of counsel; and any statement obtained in violation of these rules is inadmissible.

Specific Deficiencies in the Taking of the Confession

The Court identified multiple defects in the manner the salaysay was obtained. The form of the advisement was a long question followed by a monosyllabic affirmative answer, which the Court found inadequate because each right should be explained in short, clear questions and in a language understood by the accused. The record did not show that Galit—who was from Samar—understood Tagalog. He was not allowed to communicate with a lawyer, relative, or friend; his relatives did not know of his NBI detention until about two weeks after the salaysay; there was no written or recorded waiver of counsel; and he was not assisted by counsel during the investigation or the reenactment. These constitute gross violations of the procedural safeguards.

Legal Effect: Inadmissibility of Confession and Reen

Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 51770)

Procedural Posture and Case Overview

Case Title: The People of the Philippines vs. Francisco Galit; G.R. No. L-51770; Decision promulgated March 20, 1985, En Banc.
Nature of review: Mandatory review by the Supreme Court (En Banc) of a death sentence imposed by the Circuit Criminal Court of Pasig, Rizal (Crim. Case No. CCC-VII-2589).
Trial court disposition: Found accused Francisco Galit guilty as charged of Robbery with Homicide; sentenced to suffer the death penalty; ordered to indemnify heirs of the victim in the sum of P110,000.00; to pay costs. Trial judge dictated decision in open court on August 11, 1978 immediately after the accused had terminated his presentation of evidence.
Supreme Court disposition: Trial court judgment set aside; accused acquitted of the crime charged; ordered released from custody unless held on other charges; costs de oficio.
Instruction to the Minister of Justice: A copy of the decision to be furnished to the Minister of Justice for any action deemed proper against investigating officers.

Facts — Victim, Death, and Crime Scene

Victim: Mrs. Natividad Fernando, a widow, 70 years old, described as in the twilight of her life.
Date and place of death: Morning of August 23, 1977; found dead in the bedroom of her house located at Barrio Geronimo, Montalban, Rizal.
Cause and nature of injuries: Victim suffered no less than seven (7) stab wounds inflicted upon different parts of her body by a blunt instrument; there was massive cerebral hemorrhage; cause of death: shock and hemorrhage as evidenced by the Medico-Legal Necropsy Report (Exhs. "C" and "C-2") and photographs (Exhs. "E", "E-1", "E-2").

Arrest, Transfer and Investigation Timeline

More than two weeks after the killing (victim died August 23, 1977), police authorities of Montalban picked up the accused Francisco Galit, an ordinary construction worker (pion) living in Marikina, Rizal, on suspicion of the murder.
September 8, 1977: Case referred to the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) for further investigation due to alleged limited facilities of the Montalban police station; the accused was brought to the NBI.
At the NBI, investigation was conducted by a team headed by NBI Agent Carlos Flores.
September 9, 1977: The accused voluntarily executed a Salaysay admitting participation and implicating Juling Dulay and Pabling Dulay as companions in the crime (Exh. "F").
Relatives’ access: Accused’s relatives (sisters and others) did not know he had been brought to the NBI; they were allowed to visit him only about two weeks after he executed the salaysay.

Allegations of Maltreatment and Circumstances of Confession

The record describes repeated physical maltreatment and torture by investigating officers intended to extort a confession:
- The accused was detained and interrogated almost continuously for five days.
- Investigating officers began to maul and physically torture him after initial interrogation produced no confession.
- Continued maltreatment and beatings were inflicted to break his will.
- Officers covered the accused’s face with a rag and pushed his face into a toilet bowl full of human waste.
- After his will was broken, he admitted what the investigating officers wanted and signed the confession they prepared.
- Later, against his will, he posed for pictures as directed by investigators, purportedly as a reenactment.
The Court’s characterization: The maltreatment described is contrasted to atrocities of foreign historical regimes, emphasizing the severity and that it occurred in the Philippines and before the Court.

Contents and Form of the Salaysay (Extra-Judicial Confession)

The Salaysay (confession) begins with a long admonition in Tagalog, including warning of rights and offering an NBI-appointed lawyer if he could not pay one; it ends with a short affirmative "Opo."
The specific introductory admonition quoted in the record: the long Tagalog question informing the accused of constitutional rights, right to remain silent, right to counsel, that any statement could be used against him, and that an NBI lawyer could be provided; concluding: "Now and knowing these are ready, are you willing to give a voluntary statement in this interrogation?"
The Court noted that such a long question followed by a monosyllabic answer does not meet statutory and constitutional requirements for informing suspects of rights: should be several short and clear questions with every right explained in simple words in a dialect or language known to the person under investigation.
There is no showing the accused, who is from Samar, understood Tagalog; no waiver of counsel in the statement; the accused was not permitted to communicate with a lawyer, relative or friend at arrest and during investigation.

Re-enactment Photographs and Procedure

After the written Salaysay, the accused was photographed as directed by investigators, purportedly as a reenactment, but this was done against his will and without counsel.
The Court found the photographs of the supposed re-enactment inadmissible because obtained in a manner contrary to law.

Information / Formal Charge

Charge filed: Robbery with Homicide.
Allegation in the Information (as pleaded): On or about August 23, 1977 in Montalban, Rizal, the accused, conspiring with Juling Doe and Pabling Doe, three of them mutually helping one another, with intent of gain and by means of force, intimidation and violence, stole cash money belonging to Natividad Fernando; by reason or on the occasion of said robbery and to enable them to take the cash, with intent to kill, they attacked and stabbed the victim with a dagger in different parts of her body, inflicting multiple injuries which directly caused her death, and total amount of loss is P10,000.00 including valuables and cash.
Allegation of conspiracy, entry through the back wall, use of a bolo and stabbing/hacking of the sleeping victim are detailed in the Information and in the trial court’s factual summary.

Principal Prosecution Witness — Florentino Valentino: Testimony Summary and Court’s View

Valentino lived in a room adjoining that of the accused; h