CASE DIGEST: People v. Genosa, GR No.

135981
Title: People v. Genosa, GR No. 135981

Subject Matter: Applications of the provisions of Art. 11(1) and Art. 14 of

the Revised Penal Code

Facts:
Marivic Genosa, the appellant, on November 15, 1995, attacked and wounded his husband
which ultimately led to his death. According to the appellant, she did not provoke her
husband when she got home that night and it was her husband who began the provocation.
The appellant said she was frightened that her husband would hurt her and she wanted to
make sure she would deliver her baby safely.

The appellant testified that during her marriage she had tried to leave her husband at least
five times, but that Ben would always follow her and they would reconcile. The appellant
said that the reason why Ben was violent and abusive towards her that night was because
he was crazy about his recent girlfriend, Lulu Rubillos. The appellant, after being
interviewed by specialist, has been shown to be suffering from Battered Woman Syndrome.
The appellant with a plea of self-defense admitted the killing of her husband. She was found
guilty of the crime of parricide, with the aggravating circumstance of treachery, for the
husband was attacked while asleep.

Issues:
(1) Whether or not appellant acted in self-defense.
(2) Whether or not treachery attended the killing.

Held:
For the first issue, the SC held that the defense failed to establish all the elements of self-
defense arising from battered woman syndrome, to wit: (a) Each of the phases of the cycle
of violence must be proven to have characterized at least two battering episodes between
the appellant and her intimated partner; (b) The final acute battering episode preceding the
killing of the batterer must have produced in the battered person’s mind an actual fear of an
imminent harm from her batterer and an honest belief that she needed to use force in order
to save her life, and; (c) At the time of the killing, the batterer must have posed probable –
not necessarily immediate and actual – grave harm to the accused based on the history of
violence perpetuated by the former against the latter.

For the second issue, the SC ruled out treachery as an aggravating circumstance because
the quarrel or argument that preceded the killing must have forewarned the victim of the
assailant’s aggression.
Landmark Case: People vs. Genosa, G.R. No. 135981.
January 15, 2004 (Digested Case)
People vs. Genosa, G.R. No. 135981. January 15, 2004
Case Digest / Digested Case Version
A Landmark Case decided by the Supreme Court of the Philippines

Story: The Battered Woman Syndrome

The wife had suffered maltreatment from her husband for over eight years. She was 8 months
pregnant when, one evening, her husband came home drunk and started to batter her. Shouting that
his wife "might as well be killed so there will be nobody to nag" him, he dragged her towards a drawer
where he kept a gun, but was not able to open the drawer because it was locked. So he got out a
cutter from his wallet, but dropped it. She was able to hit his arm with a pipe and escape into
another room. The wife, thinking of all the suffering that her husband had been inflicting on her, and
thinking that he might really kill her and her unborn child, distorted the drawer and got the gun. She
shot her husband, who was by then asleep on the bed. She was tried and convicted for parricide,
which is punishable by reclusion perpetua (20 years and 1 day to 40 years) to death. On appeal, she
alleged "battered woman syndrome" as a form of self-defense. (For Full Case, just click here.

FACTS:

That Marivic Genosa, the Appellant on the 15November1995, attacked and wounded his husband, which
ultimately led to his death. According to the appellant she did not provoke her husband when she got
home that night it was her husband who began the provocation. The Appellant said she was frightened
that her husband would hurt her and she wanted to make sure she would deliver her baby safely. In
fact, The Appelant had to be admitted later at the Rizal Medical Centre as she was suffering from
eclampsia and hypertension, and the baby was born prematurely on December 1, 1995.

The Appellant testified that during her marriage she had tried to leave her husband at least five (5)
times, but that Ben would always follow her and they would reconcile. The Apellant said that the
reason why Ben was violent and abusive towards her that night was because 'he was crazy about his
recent girlfriend, Lulu Rubillos.

The Appellant after being interviewed by specialists, has been shown to be suffering from Battered
Woman Syndrome.
The appellant with a plea of self defense admitted the killing of her husband, she was then found
guilty of Parricide, with the aggravating circumstance of treachery, for the husband was attacked while
asleep.

ISSUES:

Can Marivic Genosa be granted the Justifying circumstance of Self-defense, and can she be held
liable for the aggravating circumstance of treachery?

No, Since self- defense since the existence of Battered woman syndrome, which the appellant has been
shown to be suffering in the relationship does not in itself establish the legal right of the woman to
kill her abusive partner. Evidence must still be considered in the context of self-defense.
In the present case, however, according to the testimony of the appellant there was a sufficient time
interval between the unlawful aggression of the husband and her fatal attack upon him. She had
already been able to withdraw from his violent behavior and escape to their children's bedroom. During
that time, he apparently ceased his attack and went to bed. The reality or even the imminence of the
danger he posed had ended altogether. He was no longer in a position that presented an actual threat
on her life or safety.

Without continuous aggression there can be no self-defense. And absence of aggression does not
warrant complete or incomplete self-defense.

No, There is treachery when one commits any of the crimes against persons by employing means,
methods or forms in the execution thereof without risk to oneself arising from the defense that the
offended party might make.

The circumstances must be shown as indubitably as the killing itself; they cannot be deduced from
mere inferences, or conjectures, which have no place in the appreciation of evidence. Besides, equally
axiomatic is the rule that when a killing is preceded by an argument or a quarrel, treachery cannot be
appreciated as a qualifying circumstance, because the deceased may be said to have been forewarned
and to have anticipated aggression from the assailant.

In the present case, however it was not conclusively shown, that the appellant intentionally chose a
specific means of successfully attacking her husband without any risk to herself from any retaliatory
act that he might make. To the contrary, it appears that the thought of using the gun occurred to her
only at about the same moment when she decided to kill her spouse. In the absence of any convincing
proof that she consciously and deliberately employed the method by which she committed the crime in
order to ensure its execution, the doubt should be resolved in her favor.

HELD:

The conviction of Appellant Marivic Genosa for parricide is hereby AFFIRMED. However, there being two
(2) mitigating circumstances and no aggravating circumstance attending her commission of the offense,
her penalty is REDUCED to six (6) years and one (1) day of prision mayor as minimum; to 14 years, 8
months and 1 day of reclusion temporal as maximum.

ADDENDUM:

When can BWS (Battered Woman Syndrome) as self defense be appreciated?

SECTION 26. Battered Woman Syndrome as a Defense. – Victim-survivors

who are found by the courts to be suffering from battered woman syndrome
do not incur any criminal and civil liability notwithstanding the absence of
any of the elements for justifying circumstances of self-defense under the
Revised Penal Code.
In the determination of the state of mind of the woman who was suffering
from battered woman syndrome at the time of the commission of the crime,
the courts shall be assisted by expert psychiatrists/ psychologists.