Accused in killing of The Freeman photographer freed

CEBU, Philippines - Nearly four years after the Regional Trial Court sentenced him to death for killing The Freeman photographer Alan Dizon, accused Edgar “Dodong” Belandres, 46, was set free after the appellate court acquitted him of charges.

In a 13 -page decision handed down by the 12th Division of Court of Appeals in Cebu, Associate Justices Agnes Reyes-Carpio, Samuel H. Gaerlan and Socorro B. Inting were convinced that the prosecution failed to “establish the guilt beyond reasonable doubt” that Belandres is guilty of the crime.

They also ordered to set aside the decision of Judge Ireneo Lee Gako of RTC Branch 5.

The appellate court decision was promulgated on March 15, 2010 and Belandres was reportedly released last Friday. Belandres was reportedly seen in barangay Lorega - San Miguel, according to Dizon’s wife Amy.

“Ambot naglutaw pa gyud ko ron. Wa ko kahibawo kun unsay akong buhaton. Nakalitan gyud ko aning desisyon sa Court of Appeals. Nagtuo ko nga rumors ra niabot nako nga nakit-an daw si Belandres pero tinuod gyud diay,” a teary-eyed Amy told ABS-CBN’s TV Patrol Central Visayas.

Belandres was sentenced to death on January 19, 2006 for Dizon’s murder. Gako convicted him following the testimonies of three prosecution witnesses who were reportedly along Soriano Street at that time Dizon was shot on November 27, 2004.

Jeepney dispatchers Justiniano Doller, Epifanio Barcoma and Alma Maraviles operating near SM mall told the court that they saw Belandres take off his helmet before shooting Dizon.

However, the appellate court ruled otherwise, saying there was no reasonable doubt to convict Belandres.

“In the light of the prosecution’s evidence or the lack thereof, this court is not convinced that the guilt of the appellant has been proved beyond reasonable doubt. The rule is clear that the guilt of the accused must be proved beyond reasonable doubt and the prosecution, on its part, must rely on the strength of its own evidence and must not simply depend on the weakness of the defense,” the Court of Appeals said.

The appellate court added it is the right of the appellant to be freed and it is the Constitutional duty of the court to acquit him.

The appellate court also noted that the trial court failed to consider the testimonies of Barcoma and Maraviles who claimed that after Belandres first shot the victim, Dizon tried to stand and said, “Don’t parts, we are neighbors,” which reportedly contradicts information made during trial, which states “it was established that the shooter was wearing a helmet totally covering the face and it was already dark at that time, making it impossible for anyone to identify someone, especially when he is wearing a helmet.”

“It is worth noting that appellant’s defense of alibi is inherently weak and, generally, cannot prevail over the positive identification of the accused by prosecution witnesses. However, considering that the evidence for the prosecution, in the first place, is anchored on shaky foundation, appellant’s defense of alibi takes a stronger stand,” the appellate court said.

In his decision, Gako noted that the prosecution witnesses narrated the incident spontaneously and straightforwardly.

But the appellate court noted that the shooter was wearing a helmet, which totally covered the face and “it was already dark at that time, making it impossible for anyone to identify someone especially when he is wearing a helmet.”

The Court of Appeals also noted that the entrances of the gunshot wounds were all located at the back of the victims’ body, which reportedly further belies the testimonies of the three prosecution witnesses that “the appellant was waiting for the victim and while the latter was approaching him, appellant suddenly shot him thrice.”

“For if their testimonies are really true, the entrance of even just one of the three gunshot wounds would have been located at the front part of the victim’s body,” the Court of Appeals said. – Ramil V. Ayuman/JMO   FREEMAN NEWS)