Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 106 views

    PEOPLE v. MANUEL MACAL Y BOLASCO

    Uploaded by

    Candelaria Quezon
    The Supreme Court of the Philippines ruled on a case of parricide involving Manuel Macal y Bolasco. According to witness testimony, Bolasco stabbed his wife Auria to death in their bedroom during an altercation. The court found that the prosecution had established beyond reasonable doubt that: 1) Auria was killed; 2) she was killed by Bolasco, her husband; and 3) she was Bolasco's legitimate spouse. Both the marriage certificate and witness testimony confirmed the spousal relationship between Auria and Bolasco. The court affirmed the lower court's finding of guilt for the crime of parricide.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    PEOPLE v. MANUEL MACAL Y BOLASCO

    Uploaded by

    Candelaria Quezon
    106 views2 pages
    The Supreme Court of the Philippines ruled on a case of parricide involving Manuel Macal y Bolasco. According to witness testimony, Bolasco stabbed his wife Auria to death in their bedroom during an altercation. The court found that the prosecution had established beyond reasonable doubt that: 1) Auria was killed; 2) she was killed by Bolasco, her husband; and 3) she was Bolasco's legitimate spouse. Both the marriage certificate and witness testimony confirmed the spousal relationship between Auria and Bolasco. The court affirmed the lower court's finding of guilt for the crime of parricide.

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court of the Philippines ruled on a case of parricide involving Manuel Macal y Bolasco. According to witness testimony, Bolasco stabbed his wife Auria to death in their bedroom during an altercation. The court found that the prosecution had established beyond reasonable doubt that: 1) Auria was killed; 2) she was killed by Bolasco, her husband; and 3) she was Bolasco's legitimate spouse. Both the marriage certificate and witness testimony confirmed the spousal relationship between Auria and Bolasco. The court affirmed the lower court's finding of guilt for the crime of parricide.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    106 views2 pages

    PEOPLE v. MANUEL MACAL Y BOLASCO

    Uploaded by

    Candelaria Quezon
    The Supreme Court of the Philippines ruled on a case of parricide involving Manuel Macal y Bolasco. According to witness testimony, Bolasco stabbed his wife Auria to death in their bedroom during an altercation. The court found that the prosecution had established beyond reasonable doubt that: 1) Auria was killed; 2) she was killed by Bolasco, her husband; and 3) she was Bolasco's legitimate spouse. Both the marriage certificate and witness testimony confirmed the spousal relationship between Auria and Bolasco. The court affirmed the lower court's finding of guilt for the crime of parricide.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    PEOPLE v. MANUEL MACAL Y BOLASCO, GR No.

    211062, 2016-01-13
    Facts:
    Angeles, the mother of Auria, narrated that Auria and the accused-appellant got married in March
    2000 and that out of their union, they begot two (2) children. Angeles claimed that, at the time of the
    incident, they were all living together in a house located in V & G Subdivision, Tacloban City. The
    said house was entrusted to Angeles by her brother, Quirino Ragub, who was then residing in
    Canada.Angeles testified that at around 1:20 in the morning of February 12, 2003, she, her children
    Catherine, Jessica, Auria and Arvin were walking home after playing bingo at a local peryahan.
    Some friends tagged along with them so that they could all feast on the leftover food prepared for the
    fiesta that was celebrated the previous day. Along the way, Angeles and her group met Auria's
    husband, the accused appellant. The latter joined them in walking back to their house.When they
    arrived at the house, the group proceeded to the living room except for Auria and the accused-
    appellant who went straight to their bedroom, about four (4) meters away from the living room.
    Shortly thereafter, Angeles heard her daughter Auria shouting, "mother help me I am going to be
    killed."[6] Upon hearing Auria's plea for help, Angeles and the rest of her companions raced towards
    the bedroom but they found the door of the room locked. Arvin kicked open the door of the bedroom
    and there they all saw a bloodied Auria on one side of the room. Next to Auria was the accused-
    appellant who was then trying to stab himself with the use of an improvised bladed weapon (belt
    buckle). Auria was immediately taken to a hospital, on board a vehicle owned by a neighbor, but was
    pronounced dead on arrival. Angeles declared that the accused-appellant jumped over the fence and
    managed to escape before the policemen could reach the crime scene.
    Issues:
    The principal issue before the Court is whether the court a quo erred in finding the accused-appellant
    guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of parricide.
    Ruling:
    All the Essential Elements of Parricide Duly Established and Proven by the ProsecutionParricide is
    committed when: (1) a person is killed; (2) the deceased is killed by the accused; (3) the deceased is
    the father, mother, or child, whether legitimate or illegitimate, or a legitimate other ascendants or
    other descendants, or the legitimate spouse of the accused.[13]Among the three requisites, the
    relationship between the offender and the victim is the most crucial.[14] This relationship is what
    actually distinguishes the crime of parricide from homicide.[15] In parricide involving spouses, the
    best proof of the relationship between the offender and victim is their marriage certificate.[16] Oral
    evidence may also be considered in proving the relationship between the two as long as such proof is
    not contested.[17]In this case, the spousal relationship between Auria and the accused-appellant is
    beyond dispute. As previously stated, the defense already admitted that Auria was the legitimate wife
    of the accused-appellant during the pre-trial conference. Such admission was even reiterated by the
    accused-appellant in the course of trial of the case. Nevertheless, the prosecution produced a copy of
    the couple's marriage certificate which the defense admitted to be a genuine and faithful reproduction
    of the original.[18] Hence, the key element that qualifies the killing to parricide was satisfactorily
    demonstrated in this case.Just like the marital relationship between Auria and the accused-appellant,
    the fact of Auria's death is incontestable. Witnesses, from both the prosecution and defense, were in
    agreement that Auria expired on February 12, 2003. As additional proof of her demise, the
    prosecution presented Auria's Certificate of Death which was admitted by the RTC and the defense
    did not object to its admissibility.
    Principles:

    You might also like