Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 62 views

    7 Sabang Vs People

    Uploaded by

    Cyres Jane
    Nilo Sabang was convicted of homicide for shooting and killing Nicanor Butad. Sabang claimed he acted in defense of his son when Butad threatened to shoot his son during a drinking session. However, the court denied Sabang's claim of a justifying circumstance. Witnesses disagreed on whether Butad aimed his gun at Sabang's son. Additionally, Sabang was previously quoted dismissing Butad's threat, and the four gunshot wounds indicated a determined effort to kill rather than a justified act of defense. Even if Butad initiated aggression, Sabang became the unlawful aggressor by continuing to shoot the now defenseless Butad.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    7 Sabang Vs People

    Uploaded by

    Cyres Jane
    62 views3 pages
    Nilo Sabang was convicted of homicide for shooting and killing Nicanor Butad. Sabang claimed he acted in defense of his son when Butad threatened to shoot his son during a drinking session. However, the court denied Sabang's claim of a justifying circumstance. Witnesses disagreed on whether Butad aimed his gun at Sabang's son. Additionally, Sabang was previously quoted dismissing Butad's threat, and the four gunshot wounds indicated a determined effort to kill rather than a justified act of defense. Even if Butad initiated aggression, Sabang became the unlawful aggressor by continuing to shoot the now defenseless Butad.

    Original Title

    7 Sabang vs People

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Nilo Sabang was convicted of homicide for shooting and killing Nicanor Butad. Sabang claimed he acted in defense of his son when Butad threatened to shoot his son during a drinking session. However, the court denied Sabang's claim of a justifying circumstance. Witnesses disagreed on whether Butad aimed his gun at Sabang's son. Additionally, Sabang was previously quoted dismissing Butad's threat, and the four gunshot wounds indicated a determined effort to kill rather than a justified act of defense. Even if Butad initiated aggression, Sabang became the unlawful aggressor by continuing to shoot the now defenseless Butad.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    62 views3 pages

    7 Sabang Vs People

    Uploaded by

    Cyres Jane
    Nilo Sabang was convicted of homicide for shooting and killing Nicanor Butad. Sabang claimed he acted in defense of his son when Butad threatened to shoot his son during a drinking session. However, the court denied Sabang's claim of a justifying circumstance. Witnesses disagreed on whether Butad aimed his gun at Sabang's son. Additionally, Sabang was previously quoted dismissing Butad's threat, and the four gunshot wounds indicated a determined effort to kill rather than a justified act of defense. Even if Butad initiated aggression, Sabang became the unlawful aggressor by continuing to shoot the now defenseless Butad.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 3

    Case #7

    Topic: VI. Circumstances that affect criminal liability


    A. Justifying Circumstance Art 11
    Defense of self, relatives and strangers

    NILO SABANG, Petitioner,
    vs.THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.
    G.R. No. 168818
    March 9, 2007

    Facts:

    1. On the evening of January 17, 1997 during the eve of the fiesta in
    Ormoc City, Nilo Sabang and Nicanor Butad were having drinks
    together with spouses Villamor. Butad, a civilian agent with the
    Philippine National Police, was armed with .38 caliber revolver tucked
    in his holster.

    2. In the middle of the drinking spree, Randy Sabang appeared before


    the group which triggered a negative reaction from Butad. This
    prompted Butad to say “I will shoot you” to Randy Butad. The events
    that followed are still disputed, however a short moment after Butad
    lay dead with 4 gunshot wounds from his own revolver.

    3. Petitioner was charged and later convicted for homicide and admits to
    killing Butad but claims that the shooting was accidental and as a
    means to defend his son.

    4. Witnesses report that Butad was already in a quarrelsome mood when


    he joined the drinking spree, another witness also stated that when
    Butad uttered the words “I will shoot you”, he had his revolver aimed
    at Randy.

    5. Petitioner then claims that he grabbed the arm of Butad attempting to


    twist his body and away from his son, and as they were grappling the
    revolver it was pointed towards the body of the victim. Petitioner
    claimed that he was able to “take the gun” only after he heard the
    gunshots.
    6. Petitioner claims that Butad’s act of aiming a gun at his son while
    uttering the words "I will shoot you" was an aggression of the most
    imminent kind which prompted him to try to wrestle the gun from
    Butad leading to the accidental firing of the fatal shots.

    Issue:

    Whether or not Nilo Sabang’s actions in defense of his son deserves merit as
    a justifying circumstance under Article 11 of the Revised Penal Code.

    Ruling:

    No, the Court denies this petition for its lack of merit.

    In order to successfully claim that he acted in defense of a relative, the


    accused must prove the concurrence of the following requisites: (1) unlawful
    aggression on the part of the person killed or injured; (2) reasonable
    necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel the unlawful
    aggression; and (3) the person defending the relative had no part in
    provoking the assailant, should any provocation been given by the relative
    attacked. Unlawful aggression is a primary and indispensable requisite
    without which defense of relative, whether complete or otherwise, cannot be
    validly invoked.

    Unlawful aggression must be clearly established by the evidence. In this


    case, there is a divergence in the testimonies of the prosecution and defense
    witnesses as to whether Butad aimed a gun at petitioner’s son as he uttered
    the words "I will shoot you." With this conflict emerges the question of
    whether petitioner sensed an imminent threat to his son’s life. The witness
    unequivocally testified that petitioner even dismissed Butad’s utterance
    saying, "Just try to shoot my child because I’ll never fight for him because
    he is a spoiled brat.". This indicates to us that petitioner did not consider
    Butad’s words a threat at all.

    Furthermore, the presence of four (4) gunshot wounds on Butad’s body


    negates the claim that the killing was justified but instead indicates a
    determined effort to kill him. Even assuming that it was Butad who initiated
    the attack, the fact that petitioner was able to wrest the gun from him
    signifies that the aggression which Butad had started already ceased.
    Petitioner became the unlawful aggressor when he continued to shoot Butad
    even as he already lay defenseless on the ground.

    You might also like