People of the Philippines vs. Alberto Lase alias Bert o No improper motive was shown or attributable to Pangantihon.

G.R. No. 97957; 5 March 1993  R130 S27 expressly provides that in criminal cases, an offer of compromise by
the accused may be received in evidence as an implied admission of guilty,
FACTS: except in those cases involving criminal negligence or those allowed by law to
 Lase and Sayson were walking. Lase then stabbed Huelva while the latter was be compromised.
urinating at the roadside. Sayson came to his aid and bought him to the hospital.  Murder is not among those criminal cases which may be compromised.
Huelva died. Sayson told his Huelva’s mother that he was stabbed by Lase.  The Court had a brief discussion about some confusion caused by the trial court’s
 Sayson positively identify Las during a police line-up. decision which missed the word treachery when it quoted the Information. OSG
 Lase’s version: He was drinking at a friend’s house when they were fetched by failed to exercise due care in preparing the Appellee’s Brief while Lase’s counsel
Mrs. Andueza who told them that something happened. On their way home, unjustly took advantage of the inadvertence by questioning the application of the
they passed by a clinic to visit Huelva who was already dead when they arrived. qualifying circumstance. But yeah, may treachery since Huelva had no
 A complaint for murder was filed against Lase. (treachery as qualifying opportunity to defend himself.
circumstance)
 The Judge asked Huelva’s companion and Huelva’s mother searching questions.
 Warrant of arrest was issued. Lase was arrested but released after posting bond. Note: Yan lang talaga sabi sa case about S27.
 He failed to submit his counter-affidavit for prelim investigation. So, the MCTC
deemed it as a waiver of the second stage of prelim inv.
 His case was reinvestigated upon request and thereafter dismissed for
insufficiency of evidence. However, the SoJ reversed the resolution and directed
the Provincial Fiscal to file the information with the RTC.
 Huelva’s mother testified that Lase offered to settle the case for 10k. The
latter denied making the offer but insinuated that he could offer a higher
amount of 50k. (LOL rk)
 The defense sough to discredit the testimony of the witnesses: Police capt
Mitra, Sayson, Huelva’s mother- and even Pangantihon (brgy official), who saw
Lase and Sayson before Heulva was stabbed, because he testified only months
later and only after Sayson failed to do so.
 RTC found Lase guilty for Murder, qualified by treachery.

ISSUE: Was he guilty of murder?

RATIO:

 Credibility of witnesses:
o This matter is appropriately addressed to the trial court because it is in a
better position to decide the matter as it heard the witnesses and observed
their manner of testifying.
o The trial court’s finding can only be disturbed on appeal if there is showing
that it overlooked, misunderstood or misapplied some circumstances.
o Pangantihon’s failure to immediately report the incident does not detract
from his credibility. Sabi ni court it is a sad reality that not all in our society,
including public officials, are imbued with the highest sense of civic duty.
o It is also common for witnesses to be reluctant in getting involved with
criminal investigations.