Dying declaration

This is another case of killing a person which is usually committed without any witness. In this case, the seriously wounded victim himself was able to make a statement before he died, in the presence of several persons, including the Justice of the Peace, regarding the cause of his wound and the one who caused it. The issue here is  whether such statement of witnesses who heard it, which are corroborated by other evidence showing the guilt of the accused, are admissible as evidence. Also resolved here is whether the person who merely wounded the victim is liable for the subsequent death of the victim despite his physical condition, state of health and temperament.

The incident happened one evening in a pueblo when the screams of a person crying out “murder” and calling for help was heard by Roger who is a resident therein. Responding to the cry for help and upon arrival at the place, Roger found his only neighbor Jerry lying on the ground and telling him that he was wounded by his Ninong Abel whom Roger really saw at the place of the crime. Jerry then begged Roger to take him to the municipal building which Roger did.

At the time of the occurrence, two policemen off duty happened to be going along the same road. They heard the screams of “murder” and then saw Abel rushing toward them then turning toward an alley. The two policemen ordered Abel to halt and asked him what had happened. Abel paid no attention to them and hastened his steps, with the policemen pursuing him. When they were about to catch up with him, Abel faced them and warned them not to come nearer as he showed them the dagger in his hand stained with blood. Then Abel continued to run along the street headed toward some land planted with nipa-palms to which he entered. As the two policemen were off duty and unarmed, they called some other officers and proceeded to the municipal building. On the way, they advised the three policemen who had responded, to watch the place where Abel had entered. The responding policemen however were not able to find Abel.

Meanwhile when the wounded Jerry arrived at the municipal bldg. the justice of the peace immediately took his sworn written statement in view of his serious condition. He told them that he had been wounded by Abel  in the abdomen and the left hand and was about to die. This sworn statement was made by Jerry in the presence of people in the building and was also heard by the two policemen who also went there for the purpose of getting their arms.

After examination by a physician, Jerry was found to sustain wounds in the upper hypogastric region (abdomen) produced by a sharp-pointed, cutting instrument with complications which might ensue on account of its proximity to his vital organs. On the night of the following day Jerry indeed died as a result of the wound in the abdomen.

After the preliminary investigation by the provincial fiscal, Abel was charged with the crime of murder and was arrested four months later. At the trial, Roger and the two policemen as well as Ella the wife of Jerry, testified on the events that happened as above narrated. Abel on the other hand claimed that he was not guilty and said that on the night of the incident he was at the house of his brother which is far therefrom. But his alibi was not corroborated by his brother and two relatives who were allegedly there.

So after trial, the lower court found Abel guilty of homicide and sentenced him to imprisonment of 14 years, eight months and one day of reclusion temporal and to pay indemnity to the heirs of Jerry.

This decision was affirmed by the Supreme Court (SC). According to the SC, the statement made by one seriously wounded like Jerry before several persons, including the Justice of Peace, relative to the origin of his wound, his imminent death without hope of living, the naming of Abel as his  assailant, and the narration of the circumstances of the assault made upon him is admissible and worthy of belief. The same rule applies, to the testimonies of the witnesses who heard such statement especially when such testimonies appear to be corroborated by other evidence showing the guilt of Abel. The lack of identification to the assault upon Jerry who was found lying seriously in the street, and the determination of the assailant Abel only through his statements prove that the crime committed is only homicide because of lack of proof of circumstance/s  qualifying the crime as murder. And even if the stabbing only wounded Jerry, Abel is still responsible for all the consequences of his act notwithstanding the physical condition, state of health and temperament of Jerry. The gravity of the injury is measured by the result it produces. So if the wound inflicted upon Jerry was the cause of his subsequent death, Abel is liable for the crime of homicide (US vs. Ramos, G.R. L-7900, Oct. 18, 1912)

*      *      *

Email: [email protected]