1. The identity of appellant Pedro del Castillo, Sr. was clearly testified to by Virgilio Palencia who, at the time, was walking with Castromayor and the victim Sedesias del Castillo. Thus — têñ.£îhqwâ£
Q While you were walking on your way do you remember if there was anything unusual that happened?
A Yes, sir.
Q Please tell us what it was.
A There was a jeep approaching from the rear with bright headlights.
Q Then what happened?
A Decias del Castillo said: "Go to the side. That is the jeep of Nong Preking."
Q After that what happened?
A When I saw the jeep when I turned to look, I saw that the jeep was approaching us. I jumped to the canal.
Q Then what happened?
A Sedecias del Castillo was bumped by the jeep.
Q And then what happened after this Decias del Castillo was bumped by the jeep?
A After he was bumped by the jeep, that was simultaneous with my flashing of my Flashlight.
Q What did you see?
A I saw a person jump.
Q What did that person do?
A He jumped towards Sedecias and hit him.
Q Where did that man come from?
A From the jeep.
Q That same jeep that bumped Sedecias del Castillo?
A Yes, sir.
Q What did that man then do after he hit Sedecias del Castillo?
A After hitting him, he turned the body and stabbed him.
Q Were you able to see the body after it was hit by a jeep?
A Yes, sir.
Q What was its position?
A Face down.
Q That man who jumped from the jeep and hit Sedecias del Castillo and later stabbed him, do you know that man?
A Yes, sir.
Q Who is that man?
A Pedro del Castillo, Sr.
Q If that Pedro del Castillo, Sr. is in this courtroom, will you please point to him?
A (Witness pointing to the accused Pedro del Castillo, Sr.)
Q After Sedecias was stabbed by Pedro del Castillo, Sr., what happened?
A They ran after Fernando Castromayor.
Q Before Pedro del Castillo Sr. ran after Fernando Castromayor, was there any conversation between them?
A No, sir.
Q By the way, that jeep, where did that go?
A It turned about face.
Q And did you find out who was driving that jeep?
A Yes, sir.
Q Who was driving that jeep?
A Pedro del Castillo, Jr.
Q If that Pedro del Castillo, Jr. is inside this courtroom will you please point to him?
A (Witness pointing to Pedro del Castillo, Jr.)
Q After the jeep turned what happened?
A I faced this Pedro del Castillo, Jr. and told him, 'why did you not pity Toto Decias?'
Q What did he tell you?
A He said, 'Why, was it Uncle Decias?'
Q Then what happened?
A Then he said, 'If it is Uncle Decias, you help me, because I am going to bring him to the poblacion.'
Q So what did you do?
A So we helped the body of Sedecias, together with Rizalino Patanao.
Q Where did you bring the body?
A In the house of Nong Jose del Castillo.
Q In what place?
A In Sara, Iloilo, in front of the primary school.
Q Later, in the house of Jose del Castillo did you see any of the accused.
A Yes, sir.
Q Whom did you see?
A Pedro del Castillo, Jr., and Sr.
Q Do you remember if there was any conversation between either of the accused and you while in the house of Jose del Castillo?
A No, sir.
Q And when you saw Pedro del Castillo, Sr. in the house of Jose del Castillo, did you notice his appearance?
A Yes, sir. (tsn., pp. 8-10, June 14, 1967 hearing)
2. In that argument and fight between Castromayor and Pedro Sr., the shirt of the former was torn. Sedesias del Castillo offered his own T-shirt to Castromayor and the latter accepted it.ℒαwρhi৷ Thus, while they were on their way home, the deceased Sedesias del Castillo was mistaken by Pedro del Castillo, Sr., to be Fernando Castromayor and the vengeance of appellant was brought to bear upon his own cousin Sedesias.
3. There was conspiracy between appellants father and son to commit the crime as shown by the circumstance that immediately, after Pedro Jr. had bumped the deceased with the jeep he was driving, appellant-father jumped from the jeep and with a blunt instrument stabbed his victim twice on the neck. And, considering that appellants employed means which tended directly to especially ensure its commission without risk to themselves, the killing of the victim was qualified by treachery which whenever present in the commission of the crime should be taken into account whether or not the victim was or was not the same person whom they have intended to kill.
However, the trial court erred in considering nighttime as a generic aggravating circumstance. It is necessarily included or absorbed in the qualifying circumstance of treachery.
4. Under paragraph 20, Article 14 of the Revised Penal Code, motor vehicle would be an aggravating circumstance if the crime was committed by means thereof. There is no question that in this case this aggravating circumstance should be appreciated since the defendants used a jeep and it facilitated the commission of the crime. Therefore, the proper penalty should be death. But for lack of necessary votes, We have to impose the penalty of reclusion perpetua.
