The Element of Surprise: Understanding Treachery in Murder Cases

G.R. No. 107802, July 31, 1997

Imagine attending a wedding party, a celebration of love and new beginnings, only to witness a brutal act of violence. This is the grim reality that unfolded in People v. Naredo, a case that underscores the importance of understanding treachery as a qualifying circumstance for murder under Philippine law. This case serves as a stark reminder that the element of surprise can transform a simple homicide into a more serious offense, carrying a heavier penalty.

Defining Treachery: The Legal Framework

Treachery, or alevosia, is defined under Article 14, paragraph 16 of the Revised Penal Code as the employment of means, methods, or forms in the execution of a crime that tend directly and specially to ensure its execution, without risk to the offender arising from the defense which the offended party might make. In simpler terms, it means attacking someone in a way that they have no chance to defend themselves.

The essence of treachery is the sudden and unexpected attack, depriving the victim of any opportunity to resist or evade the assault. The Supreme Court has consistently held that for treachery to be considered, two elements must be present:

• At the time of the attack, the victim was not in a position to defend himself.
• The offender consciously adopted the particular means, method, or form of attack employed.

In many cases, treachery is evident when the victim is sleeping, drunk, or otherwise incapacitated. However, the mere fact that the victim was defenseless is not sufficient; it must also be proven that the accused deliberately chose a mode of attack that would ensure the commission of the crime without risk to themselves. The Supreme Court emphasizes that the manner of attack must have been consciously adopted.

Revised Penal Code, Article 14, paragraph 16: “That the act be committed with treachery (alevosia). There is treachery when the offender commits any of the crimes against the person, employing means, methods, or forms in the execution thereof which tend directly and specially to insure its execution, without risk to himself arising from the defense which the offended party might make.”

The Case of People vs. Naredo: A Gruesome Wedding Party

The case of People v. Naredo revolves around the killing of Bayani Sumadsad, who was stabbed to death while attending a wedding party. The prosecution’s key witness, Delfin Talavera, testified that he saw Jason Naredo and Estelito Eseo stab Sumadsad while the latter was drunk and resting his head on a fallen coconut tree. Sumadsad sustained ten stab and hack wounds, three of which were fatal.

Naredo denied involvement, claiming he was present at the party but did not participate in the killing. He alleged that he saw Sumadsad in a fist fight with Eseo earlier, and later saw Eseo with blood-stained knives claiming to have killed Sumadsad and forcing Naredo to come with him.

The Regional Trial Court found Naredo guilty of murder, ruling that the attack was committed with treachery. The court emphasized that Sumadsad was drunk and defenseless when he was stabbed by Naredo and Eseo, giving him no opportunity to defend himself. The Supreme Court affirmed this decision.

Here’s a breakdown of the case’s journey:

1. Initial Incident: Bayani Sumadsad attended a wedding party and became intoxicated.
2. The Attack: While Sumadsad rested, Jason Naredo and Estelito Eseo allegedly stabbed him multiple times.
3. Trial Court Decision: The Regional Trial Court found Naredo guilty of murder.
4. Supreme Court Appeal: Naredo appealed, but the Supreme Court upheld the lower court’s decision.

The Supreme Court highlighted Talavera’s positive identification of Naredo as one of the assailants. The Court also dismissed Naredo’s defense of alibi, finding it inconsistent with the evidence presented. The Court noted that the sudden attack on the victim while he was asleep, drunk, and unable to defend himself constitutes treachery. “The assailants were afforded an opportunity to commit the crime without risk to themselves.“

The Supreme Court emphasized the credibility of the eyewitness testimony, stating, “He had no motive to testify falsely against accused-appellant and impute to the latter the commission of a serious crime if what he declared under oath was not the truth.“

Practical Implications: What This Case Means for You

People v. Naredo reinforces the principle that treachery significantly elevates the severity of a crime. This case has implications for both criminal law practitioners and the general public.

For lawyers, it’s a reminder of the importance of thoroughly examining the circumstances surrounding an attack to determine whether treachery is present. For individuals, it highlights the need to be aware of situations where they might be vulnerable to attack and to take precautions to protect themselves.

Key Lessons:

• Treachery Matters: Proving treachery can increase the penalty for a crime.
• Be Aware: Recognizing vulnerable situations can help prevent attacks.
• Seek Legal Advice: If you are involved in a case involving violence, consult with a lawyer to understand your rights and options.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: What is the difference between homicide and murder?

A: Homicide is the unlawful killing of another person. Murder is homicide with qualifying circumstances, such as treachery, evident premeditation, or cruelty. The presence of these circumstances increases the penalty.

Q: How does treachery affect the penalty for a crime?

A: If treachery is proven, the crime is elevated to murder, which carries a significantly higher penalty than homicide.

Q: What should I do if I witness a crime?

A: Your safety is paramount. If it is safe to do so, call the police immediately and provide them with as much information as possible. If you are called to testify, be honest and accurate in your account of what you saw.

Q: Can I be charged as an accomplice if I was present during a crime but did not participate?

A: It depends on the circumstances. If you knowingly aided or abetted the commission of the crime, you could be charged as an accomplice. However, mere presence at the scene of a crime is not enough to make you an accomplice.

Q: What is alibi?

A: Alibi is a defense in which the accused attempts to show that they were somewhere else when the crime was committed and therefore could not have committed it. For an alibi to be credible, it must be physically impossible for the accused to have been at the scene of the crime.

ASG Law specializes in criminal law and defense. Contact us or email hello@asglawpartners.com to schedule a consultation.