Title
Supreme Court
People vs. Gregorio y Amar
Case
G.R. No. 194235
Decision Date
Jun 8, 2016
Jimmy Ting y Sy, a corporate executive, was kidnapped for ransom by armed men posing as NBI agents. After six days, he was rescued, and the kidnappers were convicted of kidnapping for ransom, sentenced to life imprisonment, and ordered to pay damages.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 203974)

The Antecedents

The case's foundation lies in the Information filed on October 21, 2002, accusing the five individuals and a still unidentified accomplice (John Doe) of kidnapping for ransom. The allegation specifies the unlawful capture of Jimmy Ting by armed men under threats of violence, ultimately demanding a ransom of P50 million, of which P1.78 million was reportedly paid. Additionally, three other Informations also charged some of the accused with illegal possession of firearms, although they were later acquitted of these charges by the Regional Trial Court (RTC).

Version of the Prosecution

The testimony of various witnesses, including the victim, family members, and law enforcement, constructed a compelling narrative. On October 8, 2002, while leaving work, Jimmy experienced a flat tire incident, during which he was abducted by armed men who portrayed themselves as authorities. The prosecution established timelines and actions taken during Jimmy's captivity, confirming that the kidnappers made multiple ransom demands and that communication with the victim's family was constant, until the rescue effort culminated on October 14, 2002.

Version of the Defense

The defense arguments relied heavily on the assertion that the accused were misled into believing they were merely assisting with the transport of a VIP for a vacation. They characterized the primary orchestrator of the kidnapping as Jojo Salazar and claimed ignorance of the criminal nature of their actions. Accused-appellants asserted that inconsistencies and lack of corroborative testimonies from other individuals present during the abduction supported their claims of innocence.

Ruling of the RTC

The RTC, after evaluating the presented evidence, ruled in favor of the prosecution on October 10, 2005. The court determined that the prosecution had established beyond reasonable doubt the guilt of the three principal accused for kidnapping for ransom and held the remaining two as accomplices. Each was sentenced to penalties reflective of their roles, with moral damages awarded to the victim and a clear finding of insufficient evidence to support the firearms charge against some of the accused.

Ruling of the Court of Appeals

On appeal, the Court of Appeals, ruling on May 27, 2010, affirmed the trial court’s verdict with modification. The appellate court concluded that there was sufficient evidence of conspiracy among all five accused, thus, altering their liability categorization from merely accomplices to principals. The court imposed the penalty of reclusion perpetua instead of the death penalty due to subsequent legislative changes prohibiting such measures. Additionally, it ordered the payment of further damages to the victim.

The Present Appeal

Accused-appellants subsequently appealed the ruling, contesting the sufficiency of evidence and questioning the credibility of the prosecution witnesses. They claimed a lack of direct culpability, arguing that their actions were mischaracterized and that they acted under a misguided belief.

Ruling of the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, finding no merit in the claims of the accused. It upheld t

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.