#1 People vs. Judith Ponce

CRIMINAL LAW II
TOPIC Article 267. Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention AUTHOR

#1 Babar
CASE TITLE People of the Philippines vs. Judith Jatulan Y.Ponce GR NO G.R no.
171653
TICKLER Shraider toy DATE April 24, 2007
DOCTRINE Elements of Kidnapping or Serious Illegal Detention
FACTS
On 20 February 1995, in the RTC of Antipolo City, an Information 2 for KIDNAPPING
for RANSOM under Article 267 of the Revised Penal Code was filed against herein
appellant JUDITH JATULAN y PONCE @ "Lito" and three others, namely: Paul Liporada y onorio, Meil
Liporada y Honorio and Gilbert Denyega y Musico.
On February 13,1995, Karwin Amado who was the 5 years old was approached by accused Judith
“Lito” Jatulan in fron of their house in Antipolo,Rizal. Lito told
the child he will give him a "shaider" toy but they have to go to the mountain to
get it. The child then went with Lito. At about �ve (5) o'clock in the afternoon,
Karwin's mother, Teresita Amado arrived from work and looked for Karwin. They looked for Karwin
until dark but still did not find him. At about eight (8) o'clock in the evening, she reported the matter
to the police authorities.
The following morning, February 14, 1995, the family of Karwin received a
sealed envelope with a ransom note inside, which was left at their gate it contained instructions that
the sister of Kerwin will bring the money at the designated place in exchange of Kerwin. Because she
had no money for ransom, Karwin's mother sought help from the Presidential Anti-Crime
Commission (PACC).
On February 15,1995 on the day of the exchange, Paul and Glenbert were arrested while accused
Lito and Meil ran away. Meil was apprehended later by policemen at his house at around six (6)
o'clock in the evening. The three (3) boys were brought to PACC and being minors, they were
detained first at Camp Crame in Quezon City for three (3) months and thereafter at the National
Training School for Boys (Boy's Town).
On February 16, 1995, after a follow-up operation by the PACC Task Force Habagat, Jatulan was
arrested in an old nipa hut in a mountainous area at Cogeo, Antipolo, Rizal, where they also rescued
the kidnapped child, Karwin. The alleged mastermind, a certain Benjamin Ponce, Jr., alias "Onyok", a
cousin of Jatulan, remained at large.
ISSUE/S Substantive
1. Whether or not the accuse is guilty of Article 267.
RULING/S Substantive
1. Yes. For appellant to be convicted of kidnapping or serious illegal detention under the
aforequoted provision, the prosecution is burdened to prove beyond reasonable doubt the
following elements of the crime, namely: (1) the offender is a private individual who is not
1
CRIMINAL LAW II
any of the parents of the victim nor a female; (2) he kidnaps or detains another, or in any
manner deprives the latter of his liberty; (3) the act of detention or kidnapping must be
illegal; and (4) in the commission of the crime, any of the following circumstances is
present: (a) the kidnapping or detention lasts for more than three days; (b) it is committed
by simulating public authority; (c) any serious physical injuries are inflicted upon the
person kidnapped or detained or threats to kill him are made; or (d) the person kidnapped
or detained is a minor, female or a public o�cial. If the victim of kidnapping and serious
illegal detention is a minor, the duration of his detention is immaterial. Likewise, if the
victim is kidnapped and illegally detained for the purpose of extorting ransom, the duration
of his detention is also of no moment and the crime is quali�ed and becomes punishable
by death even if none of the circumstances mentioned in paragraphs 1 to 4 of Article 267
is present.
The essence of the crime of kidnapping is the actual deprivation of the victim's liberty
coupled with the intent of the accused to effect it. Appellant insists that there was no
deprivation of liberty in this case because Karwin voluntarily went with him to the
mountainous area of Mayamot to get the promised "Shaider" toy, and that during the
period that Karwin was with him, the boy was always left alone at the hut where he could
do anything he wished, including escaping. The argument does not persuade. There is
deprivation of liberty even if the victim went voluntarily with the accused where the
voluntary action was induced by the accused's false inducement without which the victim
would not have gone with him.
Appellant was charged with the crime of kidnapping for ransom. Ransom means money,
price or consideration paid or demanded for the redemption of a captured person that
would release him from captivity. No specific form of ransom is required to consummate
the felony of kidnapping for ransom as long as the ransom was intended as a bargaining
chip in exchange for the victim's freedom. Whether or not the ransom is actually paid to or
received by the perpetrator is of no moment.
NOTES

#1 People vs. Judith Ponce

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

#1 People vs. Judith Ponce

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CRIMINAL LAW II

TOPIC Article 267. Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention AUTHOR

DOCTRINE Elements of Kidnapping or Serious Illegal Detention

You might also like