People vs Navarro / Navarro vs CA G.R. No. 121087, August
26, 1999
P: Mendoza, J.
FACTS: Jalbuena and Lingan, reporters a radio station went
to the joint that is showing the nude dancers. A dancer began to perform a
strip act and she removed her brassieres, Jalbuena took a picture. The floor
manager, Liquin, with a security guard, Sioco, approached Jalbuena and demanded
to know why he took a picture. Sioco
pushed Jalbuena towards the table as he warned the latter that he would kill
him. When Jalbuena saw that Sioco was about to pull out his gun, he ran
out of the joint. Jalbuena and others went to the police station to report the
matter. 3 of the policeman including Navarro, were having drinks in front of
the police station. Jalbuena went to the desk officer, Sgt. Añonuevo, to report
the incident.
Navarro, a member of the Police, assaulted Lingan
inside the police headquarters by boxing the Lingan in the head with the butt
of a gun, the victim fell banging his head which directly caused his death. Unknown
to Navarro, Jalbuena, the companion of Lingan, was able to record on tape the
exchange between Navarro and the deceased. Navarro claims that it was the
deceased who tried to hit him but he was able to duck, and that Lingan was so
drunk he fell on the floor hitting his head on the concrete.
RTC finds that the evidence for the prosecution is
the more credible, concrete and sufficient to create that moral certainty in
the mind of the court that Navarro is criminally responsible. The defense's
evidence which consists of outright denial could not under the circumstance
overturn the strength of the prosecution's evidence. That the prosecution
witnesses, Jalbuena, lacked any motive to make false accusation, distort the
truth, testify falsehood or cause accusation of one who had neither brought him
harm or injury. CA affirmed.
ISSUE: Whether or the the tape recording by Jalbuane is admissible
as evidence
HELD: Yes. Sec. 1 of RA 4200 prohibits the overhearing,
intercepting, or recording of private communications. Since the exchange
between Navarro and Lingan was not private, its tape recording is not
prohibited.
Nor is there any question that it was duly
authenticated. A voice recording is authenticated by the testimony of a witness
(1) that he personally recorded the conversations; (2) that the tape played in
the court was the one he recorded; and (3) that the voices on the tape are
those of the persons such are claimed to belong. In the instant case,
Jalbuena testified that he personally made the voice recording; that the
tape played in the court was the one he recorded; and that the speakers on
the tape were Navarro and Lingan. A sufficient foundation was thus laid
for the authentication of the tape presented by the prosecution.
The voice recording made by Jalbuena established: (1)
that there was a heated exchange between petitioner Navarro and Lingan on the
placing in the police blotter of an entry against him and Jalbuena; and (2)
that some form of violence occurred involving petitioner Navarro and Lingan,
with the latter getting the worst of it.
The testimony
of Dr. Yamamoto, who performed the autopsy clearly supports the claim of
Jalbuena that petitioner Navarro hit Lingan with the handle of his pistol above
the left eyebrow and struck him on the forehead with his fist. Navarro is
hereby SENTENCED to suffer a prison terms of 18 years of prision mayor,
as minimum, to 14 years and 8 months of reclusion temporal, as
maximum.
No comments:
Post a Comment