People vs Janjalani

Principle:
Extrajudicial confessions- may be given in evidence against the
confessant but not against his co-accused as they are deprived of the
opportunity to cross-examine him.

Judicial confession- admissible against the declarant's co-accused since

the latter are afforded opportunity to cross-examine the former.

Bar Q:
Accused A, B, C and D were charged with multiple murder and
multiple frustrated murders due to a bombing of a bus along Ayala
Avenue. A and B, in separate exclusive interviews with XYZ Network,
confessed their guilt on national television. Additionally, B an accused-
turned-state witness admitted their guilt before the court. Rule on the
admissibility of Bs confession.

Answer:
Bs confession is admissible as provided for by Sec. 30 of Rule 130,
The act or declaration of a conspirator relating to the conspiracy and
during its existence, may be given in evidence against the co-conspirator
after the conspiracy is shown by evidence other than such act of
declaration.

Long digest

Facts:
On February 14, 2005, as the RRCG bus was along EDSA, two men
were running after the bus and insisted on riding it. The conductor, Elmer
Andales, obliged and allowed the two to ride the vehicle. However,
Andales noticed that the two men were acting very suspicious as they
were sitting separately. One of the two men sat at the back of the bus,
despite it not being full, and seemed to be tinkering with something under
the seat. Both men also kept on asking Andales whether the bus would
stop at Ayala Avenue. When the bus eventually did, the two hurriedly
alighted despite the objection of the bus driver and conductor as there
was a Makati ordinance against such. Moments later, Elmer Andales felt
an explosion and realized that it was the RRCG bus.

Shortly thereafter, the Abu Sayyaf Group claimed responsibility over

the bombing and members of the group were charged with multiple
murder and multiple frustrated murder. Those who were caught were here
in accused-appellants Gamal B. Baharan a.k.a. Tapay, Angelo Trinidad
a.k.a. Abu Khalil, and Rohmat Abdurrohim a.k.a. Abu Jackie or Zaky,
accused-appellants.

Subsequently, accused Trinidad gave ABS-CBN News Network an

exclusive interview some time after the incident, confessing his
participation in the Valentine's Day bombing incident. In another exclusive
interview on the network, accused Baharan likewise admitted his role in
the bombing incident. Finally, accused Asali gave a television interview,
confessing that he had supplied the explosive devices for the 14 February
2005 bombing. The bus conductor identified the accused Baharan and
Trinidad, and confirmed that they were the two men who had entered the
RRCG bus on the evening of 14 February.

The accused-appellants pleaded guilty to the multiple murder

charge but pleaded not guilty to the multiple frustrated murder. However,
eventually both withdrew their plea of not guilty and pleaded their guilt on
all the charges against them. The lower court founded their guilt upon the
testimony of Andales, the conductor, and their extrajudicial confession on
national tv.

Issue:
Whether or not the extrajudicial confessions made by the accused-
appellants are sufficient to establish their guilt beyond reasonable doubt?

Ruling:

Yes.
The accused-appellants assert that guilt was not proven beyond
reasonable doubt. They pointed out that the testimony of the conductor
was merely circumstantial, while that of Asali as to the conspiracy was
insufficient. Insofar as accused-appellants Baharan and Trinidad are
concerned, the evidence for the prosecution, in addition to that which can
be drawn from the stipulation of facts, primarily consisted of the
testimonies of the bus conductor, Elmer Andales, and of the accused-
turned-state-witness, Asali. Andales positively identified accused Baharan
and Trinidad as the two men who had acted suspiciously while inside the
bus; On the other hand, Asali testified that he had given accused Baharan
and Trinidad the TNT used in the bombing incident in Makati City. The guilt
of the accused Baharan and Trinidad was sufficiently established by these
corroborating testimonies, coupled with their respective judicial
admissions (pretrial stipulations) and extrajudicial confessions (exclusive
television interviews, as they both stipulated during pretrial) that they
were indeed the perpetrators of the Valentine's Day bombing.
Accused contend that the testimony of Asali is inadmissible pursuant to
Sec. 30, Rule 130 of the Rules of Court. It is true that under the rule,
statements made by a conspirator against a co-conspirator are admissible
only when made during the existence of the conspiracy. However, as the
Court ruled in People v. Buntag, if the declarant repeats the statement in
court, his extrajudicial confession becomes a judicial admission, making
the testimony admissible as to both conspirators.