Facts: At around 9PM on February 14, 1987, the victim Hugo Callao was invited by one Rolly Brendia to have a drink at the back of a store owned by Balaito, where the accused Cunaguran, Bolivar, Soberano, Balbon and Barrion, were already having a drinking spree in a small hut. The group of the accused left after a while but at around 11:30, a spray of bullets hit the small hut, four of the bullets found their mark on the different part of the body of the victim, resulting in his death. Cunaguran was identified as the hitman while accused Barrion was pinpointed as the mastermind when he allegedly induced Cunaguran to kill Callao on account of the latter’s son impregnating Barrion’s niece. The witness overheard Barrion telling Cunaguran to kill Callao to which the latter responded that he will try.
Issue: Whether the statements overheard by the witness are sufficient to prove that Barrion is a principal by inducement.
Held: There was no evidence of force, fear, price, promise or reward exerted over or offered to Cunaguran by Barrion which impelled the former to kill Callao. It was therefore incumbent upon the prosecution to prove that Barrion had an influence over Cunaguran so great, that such inducement would be the determining cause of the commission of the crime by the material executor. It does not follow by inference that the order of Barrion was effective and motivated Cunaguran to shoot Callao. The inciting words must have great dominance and influence over the person incited; so direct and efficacious for it to be as powerful as physical or moral coercion.
0 comments:
Post a Comment