phBar.org (Bar Exams Forum-Philippines)

IV.

Manolo revealed to his friend Domeng his desire to kill Cece. He likewise confided to Domeng his desire to borrow his revolver. Domeng lent it. Manolo shot Cece in Manila with Domeng’s revolver. As his gun was used in the killing, Domeng asked Mayor Tan to help him escape. The mayor gave Domeng P5,000 and told him to proceed to Mindanao to hide. Domeng went to Mindanao. The mayor was later charged as an accessory to Cece’s murder.
a) Can he be held liable for the charge? Explain. (4%)
b) Can he be held liable for any other offense? Explain fully. (3%)

a. Mayor Tan cannot be liable as an accesory to ceces' murder.

Art. 19 of RPC provides that in order that Mayor Tan can be charged as an accesory, he harbored, concealed, or assisted in the escape of the principal of the crime, provided the accessory acts with abuse of his public functions or whenever the author of the crime is guilty of treason, parricide, murder, or an attempt to take the life of the Chief Executive, or is known to be habitually guilty of some other crime.

Clearly, in the case at bar, he only helped an accomplice not the principal.

b. Mayor Tan can be charged under the special law of Obstruction of Justice(PD1629). ...elaborate...

You’re right, Law-man.
Let me elaborate. PD 1829 penalizes the act of harboring or concealing, or facilitating the escape of any person he knows or has reasonable ground to believe or suspect, has committed any offense under existing penal laws in order to prevent his arrest, prosecution and conviction. Under this special law, there is no specification of the crime to be committed by the offender for criminal liability to be incurred and the offender is no longer an accessory. He is simply an offender without regard to the crime committed by the person assisted to escape and he is penalized as a principal.

my answer is similar to that of law-man and Atty. Manresa. In (a), i answered that since he is liable under the law on obstruction of justice, he cannot anymore be charged under the RPC as an accessory, assuming that he really is an accessory. an accused chargeable under the law on obstruction of justice precludes his being charged under the RPC. (that's what i can remember being taught to us during our pre-week)

ako... mejo nahilo sa tanong..

ahehe

...

as to the first question...

yes the mayor is liable for assisting in the escape of that person..

domeng was a principal by indispensable cooperation.

he knew all about the design of the killer. he helped by lending his gun that the principal by direct participation had used.

he went to the mayor..

the mayor helped.

o di accessory sha.

tas yung isa..

ang dami kong sinulat ..

lolz.. ayoko pa sanang isulat ang obstruction of justice... actually pang huli ko pang sinulat yun...

buti na lang..

lolz

Domeng's participation is not indispensable because the crime could have been committed even without the cooperation of domeng, manolo could acquire a firearm through some other means. Law-Man I believe is correct in stating that Domeng is only an accomplice.See notes of Dean Ortega regarding the importance of the participation of a person in the commission of a crime so as to make him a principal by indispensable cooperation.

yeah.. i understand that...

but read and look at the facts carefully...

he told his story to domeng... he told domeng he want to kill somebody.. because of that.. he asked domeng to borrow his gun. to which domeng yielded.

in this case...

he became one with the crime. tama yung sinabi mo na pede shang humiram sa iba.. bat naman hindi di ba.. pero... hindi yun ang nangyari. domeng had knowledge already of the plan... the gun became material.

a. no. ( same as law-man)

b. yes, for violation of PD 1928.

a) NO, Domeng not the principal.
b) Obstruction of Justice

same here. Hope we get full points here!

parj!!!!!

my answer was prevaricacion or dereliction of duty. e mas maganda ata ung obstruction of justice.

Kimurdell, pakilala ka po muna sa mga ka-forum. Please post your introduction at Members Lounge: GTKY. Thanks.

the principal originates the crime; the accomplice merely concurs and then decides to go along with the plan. and yes, the accessory assists the principal. so, domeng is an accomplice; and the mayor cannot be an accessory.

my question for the group is, what if it was proven that the mayor believed that Domeng was the principal? what will be the charge?

a) The mayor cannot be held liable as an accessory for the crime. He helped Domeng, not Manolo. Domeng was not the one who killed CeCe, though it was his gun that was used in the commission of the crime. (Atty Salva's view is that Tan is an accomplice. Di bale, he's not the examiner naman e. Hehe)

b) Mayor Tan is liable for violation of Obstruction of Justice.