PEOPLE v STEPHEN MARK WHISENHUNT

G. R. No. 123819 | NOVEMBER 14, 2001

TICKER: Murder, Art. 248, par 6 of RPC

FACTS:

WITNESS:

The accused, Stephen Mark Whisenhunt, was the lover of Elsa “Elsie” Santos-Castillo. They both work
in Apex Motor Corporation in which they met each other. They were both married but are estranged to
their respective spouses. The victim decided to quit from her job as an Assistant Personnel Manager of
the company in order to avoid the nasty rumors of her affair with the accused. Their relationship still
continues even after she resigned.

Demetrio Ravelo, company driver of the accused, after reporting for work in the accused condominium
unit in Platinum Condominium, Annapolis St., Greenhills, San Juan, was asked by the accused to fetch
Elsa to her parent’s house in Blumentritt. He stated that the victim was wearing a violet-colored blouse
with floral prints, carrying 3 paper bags, violet Giordano bag, and a brown leather bag with a trademark
of “Mitsubishi”. He then latter on brought the victim to the condominium unit. Later on, he was asked by
the victim to bring the paper bags to Apex and give it to Amy Serrano in which he obliged. He then after
went back to the condo and was told by the accused to stay and wait for Elsa so he could bring her home
at about 10:00pm. However, he was not able to bring Elsa back home after 10:00pm had passed and he
heard nothing from his boss.

The next day, Lucy, the housemaid, asked if he saw the kitchen knife because it was missing. The
accused said that the knife was in his bedroom and later on gave it to her. Demetrio was then asked to
buy cigarettes and was then relieved from his duty. On September 25, 1993, Demetrio reported to the
condominium. He was then allowed to go to Apex and follow up his salary. He was then asked by Amy
Serrano if the victim was still staying at the accused condo. He answered ‘yes’ even though he did not
saw her there. Amy then gave her black plastic garbage bags which he gave to the accused. He was
then gave Lucy a ride going to Cubao and then he went home to get some clothes for they are going to
Bagac, Bataan.

The following day, Demetrio reported for duty. The accused asked the condition of the fuel gauge
and told him to use the gas slip from Apex and gas up. He then returned to the condo unit and stayed at
the servant’s quarters when the accused arrived. The accused talked to Demetrio and asked him how
long does he plan to work for him in which he answered that he was willing to work for him forever. The
accused then shed tears and told him that Elsa was dead. Demetrio then asked why did he killed her in
which the accused replied that he did not kill Elsa and died of “bangungot”. Demetrio suggested that the
body be autopsied but the accused said that he beheaded her. The two of them then went to Shoppesville
at the Greenhills Shopping Center and bought big bags with zipper and roller, colored black and gray.

When they returned to the condominium, Demetrio help the accused to wrap the body in the bags
they bought. He then lifted the head and saw the face of the victim and recognized it as Elsa. They then
loaded the bags in the trunk of the car and went to their destination. They went to Batangas and Tagaytay
City as per request of the accused. They entered SLEX and headed to Sta. Rosa, Laguna and when they
were near Puting Kahoy and Silangan, the accused told Demetrio to turn into the narrow road then stop
the car. They then alighted the car, dumped the bag by the roadside, boarded the car, and went straight
to Bataan. Before reaching Bagac, the accused asked Demetrio to stop the car on top of a bridge. The
accused get off and threw a bag into the river. They then passed another bridge and then the accused
threw Elsa’s clothes. The accused also took something from the bag tore into pieces and threw it out of
the window. The accused also threw the Giordano bag in Pilar, Bataan and when they reached the
boundary of Bagac, the accused threw the short-sleeved dress of the victim on a grassy lot.
 They arrived at the mansion about 11:00 am. The following morning the accused ordered Demetrio
to clean the trunk of the car. In the afternoon they went back to Manila. Along the way, the accused take
out an ATMM card, burned the middle, twisted and threw it out of the window. When they arrived home,
the accused told Demetrio to go on a vacation with his family. The accused gave him Php. 50.00 to go
home. When Demetrio got home, he told what happened to his family. His wife told him to report the
incident to Fiscal Joey Diaz in which he obliged.

Demetrio gave his statement to Atty. Artemio Sacaquing, head of the Anti-Organized Crime Division
of NBI. At first, Atty. Sacaquing thought that Demetrio was exaggerating the crime and did not believe
him until he dispatched a team to investigate. The NBI team verified the crime upon arriving at Brg.,
Polong, Sta. Cruz., Sta. Rosa, Laguna, wherein they found a crowd of people gathered around the
mutilated paarts of a human body along the road which was discovered by tricycle driveres. The body
parts were brought to a funeral parlor. Two NBI agents together with Demetrio, went to the relatives of
Elsa and inform them of her death. The sisters of Elsa, Amelia Villadiego and Elida Santos, identified the
body as Elsa.

On September 28, 1993, the accused was arrested by the NBI in the parking space at Apex Motor
Corporation. His car was also impounded as it was mentioned by Demetrio’s statement and at the time
they arrested the accused, the compartment of the car emitted a foul smell and they found blood stains.
The accused was asked to undergo a medico-legal in which they found contusions in the parts of the
accused. He was then detained at the NBI after moving for a preliminary investigation to be conducted.

NBI agents were able to search the condo unit of the accused and found hair strands in the
bathroom, bloodstains over the bedspread and covers, pair of topsider shoes with bloodstains, bottle of
Vicks Formula 44 cough syrup, and hair strands on the lampshade. The NBI also retrace the route in
which Demetrio and the accused took the night they disposed the body. They recover the other items
which was thrown by the accused and was identified by the sisters of Elsa to be hers. The hair strands
matched with the hair samples taken from the dead body as well as the blood stains found by the NBI.
The body was also autopsied and the result shows that Elsa died of stab wounds.

DEFENSE:

The accused stated that on September 23, 1993, he stayed home for he is not feeling well. He
denied that he asked Demetrio to fetch Elsa and that he denied the statement Demetrio of seeing him at
any time in the afternoon of September 24, 1993. On September 24, 1993, the accused felt better and
decide to leave for Bagac, Bataan. The accused went straight to the kitchen of the family house where
he was greeted by his mother, father, aunt and grandmother. Demetrio then asked if he could take the
car to the town which he allowed.

Mrs. Nieves Whisenhunt also told hat she saw his son arrived wearing a beach attire and they had
lunch together that day and that Demetrio had left already when they come back from the clubhouse.
This was supported by the accused’s aunt. The accused also stated that he got his injury from an accident
in a jet-ski which lose control and that he accidentally slipped and fell while going down the stairs.

Accused said that he first learned of Elsa’s death when he was arrested. He also said that he
received 2 anonymous mails which threatened him. The mails were ignored by him but made Elsa
worried.

The aunt of the accused also testified that on September 23, 1993, she went together with the
accused’s mother to visit him in the condo unit. She was able to get inside his room and stated that she
did not see anyone else inside. It was the same with the bathroom located inside the bedroom which was
left open the time she went to visit her nephew.
The accused’s sister-in-law also gave her statement and said that between Dec. 21, 1991 and
January 15, 1992 and in April, 1992 to May 15, 1992, she slept in the bedroom of the condo unit and has
her menstruation and that her blood type is “B”.
ISSUE:

Accused-appellant interposed an appeal from the adverse decision of the trial court, alleging that:

I. THE LOWER COURT ERRED IN CONVICTING ACCUSED OF THE CRIME CHARGED;

II. THE LOWER COURT ERRED IN FINDING THAT THE PROSECUTION WAS ABLE TO PRESENT
ENOUGH CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE CONCLUSION THAT THE ACCUSED
IS GUILTY OF THE CRIME CHARGED;

III THE LOWER COURT ERRED IN REJECTING, DISREGARDING AND/OR NOT GIVING CREDENCE
TO THE DEFENSE OF THE ACCUSED.

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT:

Regional Trial Court of Pasig City, Branch 152, in Criminal Case No. 102687, the dispositive portion of
which states:

WHEREFORE, finding the accused Stephen Mark Whisenhunt guilty beyond reasonable doubt of murder
defined and penalized under Art. 248, Revised Penal Code, he is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty
of reclusion perpetua, with the accessory penalties provided for by law, to pay the heirs of the deceased
the amount of P100,000.00 representing actual expenses for the funeral services and wake for 5 days,
P3,000,000.00 by way of moral damages, exemplary damages in the amount of P1,000,000.00 and
attorney’s fees in the amount of P150,000.00.

SUPREME COURT:

The court carefully scrutinized and examined his version of the events alongside with the statement
given by Demetrio as a witness and found that the narrative of the latter is more convincing and
consistent. It was strengthened by the fact that the accused first insured that Demetrio would stand by
his side after learning the incident. The description of Demetrio of the dismembered parts of the victim
matched the actual appearance of the mutilated body. It was also proven by the fact that the items
mentioned by the witness thrown by the accused were recovered by the NBI. The court is convinced that
indeed Demetrio is a credible witness.

The guilt of the accused is further proven of the evidence recovered by the NBI (hair strands and
blood stains) in the condo unit. It was said that the victim died of stabbed wounds and indeed the witness
states that the accused kept a knife within his bedroom. And that even though there was no eyewitness
to the death of Elsa, the confluence of the testimonial and physical evidence creates an unbroken
circumstantial evidence which leads to the conclusion that the accused is the author of the crime.
Circumstantial Evidence may be resorted to in proving the identity of the accused even without direct
evidence. Circumstantial Evidence will be followed when all its requisites are present: (1) there must be
more than one circumstance; (2) the inference must be based on proven facts; and (3) the combination
of all circumstances produces a conviction beyond doubt of the guilt of the accused. All of these were
present in the statement of the witness and is proven by the result of the investigation conducted by the
authorities.

The court also did not favor the alleged cause of death of Elsa as stated by the accused and said
to be in accordance with the result findings of Dr. Brion that the victim diead of “bangungot” or hemorrhage
of the pancreas. The court relied on the testimony of Dr. Mendez who actually conducted the autopsy
and personally examined the corpse up close.
 The court also found that the statement of the accused, implying that Demetrio was the author of
the crime by telling that he previously reprimanded the witness of his discourteous and reckless driving
and asked for his resignation, is without truth. Demetrio’s act of reporting the incident immediately gives
the impression that he seeks justice for Elsa’s death.

The accused’s argument of illegal arrest was not given credit since he raised the issue after he
pleaded guilty of the information which should be done beforehand. The letters received by the accused
will does not justify his act of killing Elsa and will not remove the fact that the victim was last seen in his
condo unit in which there will be no other responsible but the accused himself.

However, the court does not agree with the ruling of the lower court that there was an abuse of
superior strength. Abuse of superiority is present whenever there is inequality of forces between the
victim and the aggressor, assuming a situation of superiority of strength notoriously advantageous for the
aggressor and selected or taken advantage of by him in the commission of the crime. The fact that the
victim was a woman does not qualify it and that there was no witness of the killing which will clearly
establish the said circumstance. There is also no showing that abuse of superior strength was present
based on the statement of Demetrio and that the fact that the accused is of much smaller frame than the
victim.

What qualifies the killing into murder is the fact that the accused decapitation of the victim’s head
which constitutes outraging and scoffing at the corpse of the victim. The manner of disposing the body
made it more revolting and horrifying. This is under the Art. 248, par 6 of RPC, that “outraging or scoffing
at the person or corpse” qualifies the crime into murder and is present because of the dismembered part
of the dead body. This justifies the imposition of penalty of reclusion perpetua by the lower court. The
damages awarded was reduced to Php 50, 000.00 for it was not properly proven to be equivalent to the
previous finding of the lower court but the moral damage is justified yet the amount is reduced to Php.
1,000,000.00 for being excessive of the previous amount. Award of attorney’s fee is proven and the grant
of indemnification which need not have proof in cases of murder.

DECISION:

WHEREFORE, the decision of the Regional Trial Court of Pasig City, Branch 152, in Criminal Case No.
102687, finding accused-appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of murder, and sentencing him to
suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua, is AFFIRMED with the following MODIFICATIONS: Accused-
appellant is ORDERED to pay the heirs of Elsa Santos Castillo actual damages in the amount of
P50,000.00; civil indemnity in the amount of P50,000.00; moral damages in the amount of P1,000,000.00;
exemplary damages in the amount of P1,000,000.00; and attorney’s fees in the amount of P150,000.00.
Costs against accused-appellant.

SO ORDERED.