This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2000-11-28 |
BELLOSILLO, J. |
||||
| For public position to be appreciated as an aggravating circumstance, the public official must use his influence, prestige and ascendancy which his office gives him in realizing his purpose. If the accused could have perpetrated the crime without occupying his position, then there is no abuse of public position.[35] Hence, that aggravating circumstance cannot be appreciated here. While it may seem that accused-appellants intended to assert their authority as policemen and encourage in the victims' minds the belief that they were part of Operation KapKap when they frisked the victims, both Cogasi and Clemente testified that they never told the investigating officers that their assailants might be policemen. In fact, because the assailants were not in uniform, they believed the latter to be civilians. | |||||
|
2000-03-30 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| Going by accused-appellant's account, the Court likewise finds it odd for accused-appellant's interrogators who picked him up for questioning as he disembarked from a bus at Mataas na Lupa, Lipa City[56] to take a detour by first bringing him to Lodlod, Lipa City at the house of Amelia Quizon[57] where he was bound hand and foot at gun point,[58] loaded on a top down jeep and then brought to the 217th PC Detachment in Rosario, Batangas[59] instead of being forthwith taken to the PC Camp for questioning after being apprehended at the bus stop. Settled is the rule that evidence, to be believed, must not only proceed from the mouth of a credible witness, but must be credible in itself.[60] Suffice it to state in this regard that such circumstances narrated by accused-appellant only tends to underscore the incongruity of his tale of torture. Calrsc | |||||