Concealed crime

When the death penalty was still in force, a brutal crime occurred in a remote barrio of an island province.

The case involved a man named Gino, who had a 14-year-old daughter named Erika. One night around midnight, Gino forced Erika to have sexual intercourse with him. This abuse continued several times over the years until Erika became pregnant.

After about two years, Erika gave birth to a baby girl in their home, with Gino helping in the delivery. About an hour after the birth, Gino took the child, went outside and buried her. To conceal the act, he built a fire over the burial site.

The following day, Erika’s uncle reported the missing baby to the police, which led to Gino’s arrest. He was charged with rape and infanticide. During his arraignment, Gino pleaded guilty to both crimes.

However, the trial court continued the proceedings because of inconsistencies in his statements about whether the baby was alive when buried.

During the trial, Gino admitted to committing the crimes and confirmed his extrajudicial confession. The court found him guilty of rape and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua.

He was also convicted of infanticide and sentenced to death, as the court found aggravating circumstances such as evident premeditation, abuse of superior strength and nighttime, with only one mitigating factor in his guilty plea.

The case was automatically reviewed by the Supreme Court, where Gino’s lawyer argued that the death sentence was improper. The defense claimed the baby was already dead when buried and that Gino had an unstable mind.

The Supreme Court, however, affirmed the trial court’s ruling. It found strong evidence that the baby was alive when buried. Gino himself confessed this, and both the police commander and medico-legal officer confirmed it. The autopsy showed the baby’s lungs contained air, proving she had breathed. Erika also testified that the baby was healthy and crying before Gino took her away.

The Court also agreed that nighttime and abuse of superior strength were aggravating circumstances since the crime was committed at night and against a helpless infant. However, it ruled that evident premeditation was not sufficiently proven because there was no clear evidence that Gino planned the killing beforehand or had enough time to think about his actions. The baby was born at 7 p.m. and buried around 8 p.m., which was not enough time for reflection or planning.

Lastly, the Supreme Court rejected Gino’s claim of insanity or mental incapacity. His actions, such as refusing to call a midwife, helping in the delivery to hide the birth and building a fire to cover the grave, proved that he acted with awareness and intent to conceal his crime.

These showed clear reasoning and deliberate effort, not a loss of mental control. (People vs. Morales, G.R. No. 44096, April 28, 1993)

*      *      *

Email: [email protected]