Action speaks louder

Losing your temper may land you in jail. This is what Ron learned in his case which all started one afternoon at about 4 p.m. Ron and his friend Sito were then drinking at a store owned by Sito’s son. At that time another drinking party was going on in the nearby house of Nesty. Later on Nesty came out drunk and inquired from several people what happened to two of his guests who were allegedly mauled. Among those confronted by Nesty was Ron’s son Raymond. So Ron butted in and replied, “Bakit kasama ka ba roon?” Then a scuffle ensued with Sito joining the fray. Nesty’s wife, Lily who saw the entire incident tried to pacify the two from mauling her husband but was unsuccessful. So Nesty was forced to run to his house followed by Lily. At around 6 p.m., Nesty told his wife to report the boxing incident to the barangay authorities.

Lily then proceeded to the barangay hall at around 7:30 pm accompanied by her son. On their way, at the alley near her house, she encountered Ron who blocked her way and confronted her with a gun poked at her head saying “Saan ka pupunta, gusto mo ito?” Despite this fearful encounter, Lily was still able to hurriedly proceed to the barangay hall where she reported only the gun poking incident and forgot about the mauling of her husband in her excitement and confusion.

After proper investigations, criminal Information for slight physical injuries was filed against Ron and Sito for the mauling of Nesty and another one for Grave Threats against Ron only for unlawfully and feloniously threatening Lily with infliction on her person of a harm amounting to a crime. The prosecution presented Nesty and Lily as witnesses who narrated the above events.

On the other hand Ron and Sito and a barbecue vendor testified for the defense not only to deny and debunk the version of Nesty and Lily but also to positively show that it was the drunk and troublesome Nesty who boxed Ron first and the latter only punched back until they were pacified, with Nesty still pursuing and punching Ron anew and even shouting invectives.

The Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) however believed Nesty and Lily’s version and concluded that Ron and Sito lost control of their temper due to Nesty’s unruly and drunken behavior. It also noted that Lily wasted no time in reporting to the barangay authorities what happened to her regarding the gun-poking incident and even forgot to report the mauling of her husband. The MeTC was convinced that the negative assertions of the defense witnesses cannot prevail over such straightforward and seemingly natural assertions of Nesty and Lily. Hence it convicted Ron and Sito of slight physical injuries and sentenced them to fines of P200 and censure. Ron was also convicted of grave threats and sentenced to 2 months imprisonment and fined P200.

Ron questioned the said decision. He insisted that their defense were not mere denials as he was able to present the barbecue vendor an independent and impartial witness who positively testified on what happened and supported their version. He also argued that his act of poking a gun was not Grave Threats but only “Other Light Threats” under Article 285 par. 1 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC) which punishes “any person who shall threaten another with a weapon or draw such weapon in a quarrel, unless it is in lawful self defense”. Was Ron correct?

No. As found by the Regional Trial Court (RTC) and the Court of Appeals (CA) which affirmed the MeTC decision, the positive testimonies of Nesty and Lily were straightforward and in accord with the natural course of things. There could be no doubt that Ron and Sito lost their temper as Ron himself admitted that he got annoyed by Nesty’s unruly behavior. Likewise, the gun-poking incident also happened since Lily lost no time in reporting what happened to her instead of reporting about the mauling of her husband, which she forgot in her hurry excitement and confusion. The barbecue vendor’s testimony cannot be given more weight than their straightforward and credible statements. They had no reason to concoct stories to pin down Ron on any criminal act.

Under the RPC there are three kinds of threats: grave, light and other light threats. Grave threats are committed by any person who shall threaten another with infliction of a wrong amounting to a crime. In light threats the wrong threatened does not amount to a crime but is accompanied by a condition. In other light threat, the wrong threatened does not amount to a crime and without any condition.

In this case, considering what transpired earlier between Ron and Lily’s husband Nesty, Ron’s act of pointing a gun at Lily’s head clearly indicates a threat to kill or to inflict serious physical injury on her person. Actions speak louder than words. Taken in the context of surrounding circumstances, the uttered words are consistent with the threat to kill or to inflict serious physical injury evinced by Ron’s accompanying act of poking a gun (Caluag vs. People, G.R. 171511, March 4, 2009).

Note: Books containing compilation of my articles on Labor Law and Criminal Law (Vols. I and II) are now available. Call tel. 7249445.

*      *      *

E-mail at: [email protected]