Republic of the Philippines

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

FIRST JUDICIAL REGION
BRANCH 8
La Trinidad, Benguet

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff,
CRIM. CASE NO. 13-CR-9468

-versusLEANDRO ELIS TIAGO,

Accused.
x----------------------------------x

For: Homicide

TRANSCRIPT
Of stenographic notes of the
Proceedings held on
December 4, 2013

PRESENT:
Hon. MARYBELLE L. DEMOT MARIAS- Presiding Judge
Ms. Angelina C. Ambiguez ---------------- Legal Researcher
Mr. Daniel Celino --------------------------- Interpreter
Ms. Susan F. Londob ---------------------- Stenographer
APPEARANCES:
For the Prosecution:
Pros. Alipio George Bayubay, Jr.
Provincial Prosecutors Office
La Trinidad, Benguet

For the Defense:

Atty. Oliver Jhones Sergio
PAO, Department of Justice
Justice Hill, Justice Hall
La Trinidad, Benguet
TRANSCRIPT
Crim. Case No. 13-CR-9468
December 4, 2013
Page 2
Dr. John L. Tinoyan
===========================================================

Calling the case

PROS. BAYUBAY:
For the prosecution, Your Honor.
Honor. The doctor is here.

We are ready, Your

ATTY. SERGIO:
For the accused, Your Honor.
COURT:
Ready?
PROS. BAYUBAY:
Yes, Your Honor.
COURT:
Present your witness.
PROS. BAYUBAY:
May we call to the witness stand Dr. Tinoyan, Your
Honor?
COURT:

Swear in the witness.

INTERPRETER:
Please raise your right hand. Do you swear to tell this
court nothing but the whole truth in your testimony?
WITNESS:
I do, Your Honor.

TRANSCRIPT
Crim. Case No. 13-CR-9468
December 4, 2013
Page 3
Dr. John L. Tinoyan
===========================================================

INTERPRETER:
Please sit down. State your name.
WITNESS:
John Tinoyan.
INTERPRETER:
q.
a.

Age.
60 years old.

q.
a.

Status.
Married.

q.
a.

Occupation.
Physician.

q.
a.

Residence.
A-808 Lubas, La Trinidad, Benguet.

Your witness, sir.

PROS. BAYUBAY:
With your indulgence, Your Honor.
The witness will testify in his official capacity as a
physician of the Health Service Office, City of Baguio; he
will testify on the result of the autopsy he conducted on
the person of the deceased Roy Laoyan Florencio and the
procedures he conducted and other related matters. He
will also identify the Autopsy Report and its attachments,
Your Honor.
COURT:
Atty. Sergio, do you admit his qualifications as a
physician?
TRANSCRIPT
Crim. Case No. 13-CR-9468
December 4, 2013
Page 4
Dr. John L. Tinoyan
===========================================================

ATTY. SERGIO:
Yes, Your Honor.
COURT:
So he will just testify then on the matter at hand.
PROS. BAYUBAY:
Yes, Your Honor.
COURT:
Proceed.

DIRECT EXAMINATION OF WITNESS

Dr. JOHN TINOYAN BY:
PROS. BAYUBAY:
q.

Mr. witness, you mentioned that you are a physician

employed at the office of the Health Service, Baguio
City?

WITNES:
a. Yes, sir.
q.
a.

What is your position there?

Im assigned at the Medico-Legal Office, sir, since
1989 up to the present, sir.

q.

Could you enlighten us on some of your functions

then as

COURT:
Medico-legal. Go to the next.

TRANSCRIPT
Crim. Case No. 13-CR-9468
December 4, 2013
Page 5
Dr. John L. Tinoyan
===========================================================

PROS. BAYUBAY:
Okay, Your Honor.
q.
Mr. witness, do you remember having conducted an
autopsy on the cadaver of one Roy Laoyan
Florencio?
WITNESS:
a.

Yes, sir.

q.
a.

When did you conduct the autopsy?

I conducted it on April 2, 2013, sir.

q.

And why was it that it was to your office who

conducted the autopsy?
Since the victim died at the Pines Hospital, it is still
under my coverage that I have to do autopsy of all
cases that died in the City of Baguio, sir.

a.

q.
a.

Do you know when the deceased died?

The deceased died April 2, 5 oclock p.m., as
indicated.

COURT:
Wait. Let me ask.
q.
Is the conduct of autopsy automatic or only when
requested?
a.
Upon request, Your Honor.
q.
a.

q.
a.

In this case, who made the request that you

conduct an autopsy?
I received one request from the Tublay Municipal
Police Station signed by the Police Senior Inspector.
It was then addressed to the Regional Office but
they were not available(interrupted).
And it was referred to you.
It was referred to me, Your Honor.

Okay continue.
TRANSCRIPT
Crim. Case No. 13-CR-9468
December 4, 2013
Page 6
Dr. John L. Tinoyan
===========================================================

PROS. BAYUBAY:
q.

What was your purpose in conducting the autopsy,

Doctor?

WITNESS:
a.

To really know the exact cause of death of the

victim, sir.

q.

And where did you conduct your autopsy in this

case?
At Paz Funeral service morgue, sir.

a.
COURT:
q.
a.

What was that?

La Paz along Naguilian road, Your Honor.

PROS. BAYUBAY:
q.
a.

q.
a.

And by conducting autopsy, what did you actually

do?
Of course, we have to see the external findings and
then proceed to the internal findings by opening up
the victim, sir.
What were your external findings then in this case,
Doctor?
There are contusion hematoma right here temporoparietal area.

COURT:
Witness pointing to the back of his head.
PROS. BAYUBAY:
To the left side temporo-parietal.
q.
Then?
a. And then there is another contusion hematoma
found here at the right parietal area.
TRANSCRIPT
Crim. Case No. 13-CR-9468
December 4, 2013
Page 7
Dr. John L. Tinoyan
===========================================================

INTERPRETER:
Witness pointing to the right side of his head.
parietal area.

Right

PROS. BAYUBAY:
q.
a.

What was again your description of this hematoma?

Contusion hematoma, sir.

q.
a.

What could have caused these injuries?

By in contact with hard blunt object, sir.

q.

What part of the body could be classified as a blunt

or object?
It could be by mauling like fist blow.

a.

ATTY. SERGIO:
We have to object on that, Your Honor. What part?
PROS. BAYUBAY:
The witness has already answered, Your Honor.
COURT:
Already answered.
PROS. BAYUBAY:
q.

By the way, Doctor, what was the condition of the

cadaver at that time you conducted this
examination?

COURT:
q.

What do you mean condition? His death?

PROS. BAYUBAY:

Rigor mortis or the stage of

TRANSCRIPT
Crim. Case No. 13-CR-9468
December 4, 2013
Page 8
Dr. John L. Tinoyan
===========================================================

WITNESS:
a. The victim has just died in the hospital at least
within 8 hours that is just starting rigor mortis and
also lividity, sir.
PROS. BAYUBAY:
q.
a.

Now, you also mentioned of internal findings. What

did you do to come up with these internal findings?
We have to open up

COURT:
Wait.
q.
So those were the only external findings. The
contusion hematoma at the temporo-parietal and at
the right side? Thats it?
a.
Yes, Your Honor.
Okay.
PROS. BAYUBAY:
May we have the question read back, Your Honor?
STENOGRAPHER:
q.
a.

Now, you also mentioned of internal findings. What

did you do to come up with these internal findings?
I opened up the head of the victim and see the
internal findings, sir.

PROS. BAYUBAY:

q.
a.

COURT:
q.

And what did you find?

First of all there is a linear close fracture found on
the parietal area.

What was the term, Doctor?

TRANSCRIPT
Crim. Case No. 13-CR-9468
December 4, 2013
Page 9
Dr. John L. Tinoyan
===========================================================

WITNESS:
a.

Linear Close Fracture and then extending down to

the posterior brain at the sphenoid wing entering
the basal skull meaning at the back of the skull.
Those are the fractures of the skull that have been
noted, Your Honor.

COURT:
q.
a.

When you say a close fracture, what does it mean?

No depression, Your Honor.

q.
a.

So there was just a crack in the skull?

Yes, Your Honor.

PROS. BAYUBAY:
q.
a.

COURT:

What was the effect of this crack on the brain?

That could be explained by possible contre coup of
injury when you hit this side and the victim may fall
on the surface it might be a hard object or like
cemented object that hit the other side so there is
contre coup of injury it will cause the skull fracture.

q.

a.

Are you saying that if it were just being hit by a

blunt object it would not necessarily result to a
linear fracture?
Yes, Your Honor. There was a hard hidden possibly
in the other side, hard blunt object or the pavement,
Your Honor.

Continue.
PROS. BAYUBAY:
q.

What was the condition of the brain particularly on

the side where the close fracture was?

TRANSCRIPT
Crim. Case No. 13-CR-9468
December 4, 2013
Page 10
Dr. John L. Tinoyan
===========================================================

WITNESS:
a.

There is massive internal hemorrhage. There are

blood clots on the right temporo-parietal area, intracranium; there is basal skull fracture which caused
the leaking of the cerebral spinal fluid on the
external auditory miatus. That means that there is
an injury in the brainstem.

PROS. BAYUBAY:
q.
a.

Without opening the brain, how could this injury

manifest on the body of the victim?
There is fast loss of consciousness and immediate
death could ensure right after, sir, because the
pressure inside where there is a buildup of blood
clots and hemorrhages could press the brain down
so it would cause uncal herniation and this there
will be cardio respiratory arrest which caused the
death of the victim, sir.

COURT:
q.

a.

q.
a.
q.

Doctor, by conducting the autopsy, would you be

able to know when the incident happened? When
the victim was hit with a blunt object?
We cannot really tell when but right after death we
could estimate, Your Honor.
So he died on April 2 and you conducted the
autopsy on the same day. Correct?
Yes, Your Honor.

a.

Would your findings show when more or less he was

hit?
The exact hour, Your Honor?

q.
a.

Yes.
It looks like we cannot determine, Your Honor.

q.
a.

So not even the exact date?

Yes, Your Honor.

TRANSCRIPT
Crim. Case No. 13-CR-9468
December 4, 2013
Page 11
Dr. John L. Tinoyan
===========================================================

COURT:
q.

Were you aware how long he stayed in the hospital

before his death or no?

WITNESS:
a.

I did not try to see the details, Your Honor.

q.

So all you know was that he died on April 2 and you

did the autopsy on the same day?
Yes, Your Honor.

a.

Continue.

PROS. BAYUBAY:
q.

a.

q.

Could you determine from the autopsy that you

conducted how long the day that lapsed from the
time that he incurred or sustained that injury up to
the time of death?
With the injury that has been exposed right on
opening of the victim, it appears like the injuries
like the hematoma, the hemorrhages might have
happened within a day up to the time of autopsy.
You are saying, Doctor, from your testimony that the
injuries that the deceased sustained could have
caused spontaneous death?

ATTY. SERGIO:
May we be clarified what injury because we are talking of
external injury and internal injury.
PROS. BAYUBAY:
No we are talking of.
COURT:
Because the external gave way to the internal.
TRANSCRIPT
Crim. Case No. 13-CR-9468
December 4, 2013
Page 12
Dr. John L. Tinoyan
===========================================================

ATTY. SERGIO:
Yes, Your Honor.
COURT:
Witness may answer.
PROS. BAYUBAY:

We just reform the question, Your Honor?

q.
Mr. witness, from your findings then both external
and internal findings, could you now give the cause
of death of this deceased?
a.
Massive traumatic head injury, sir.
q.
a.
q.

Do you remember if you have reduced this report in

writing, Doctor?
Yes, sir.

a.

And what report did you issue in connection with

the autopsy that you conducted?
Sketch and also the written report, sir.

q.
a.

Do you have it with you, Doctor?

Yes, sir.

q.

Could you present this to this court and identify the

documents for the record?

PROS. BAYUBAY:
The witness produce two documents one is a back to
back sketch and an Autopsy Report, Your Honor.
ATTY. SERGIO:
Manifestation, Your Honor.
COURT:
Yes.
TRANSCRIPT
Crim. Case No. 13-CR-9468
December 4, 2013
Page 13
Dr. John L. Tinoyan
===========================================================

ATTY. SERGIO:

The autopsy report is not listed as one of the

documentary evidence for the prosecution, Your Honor.
COURT:
Certificate of Death.
Death?

Who issued the Certificate of

PROS. BAYUBAY:
I think it was
COURT:
Probably its there, anyway. Why dont you use the
Certificate of Death?
q.
Are you the one who issued then the Certificate of
Death, Doctor?
a.
It was issued at the hospital by Dr. Nigos, Your
Honor, because the victim was alive still.
ATTY. SERGIO:
The Medical Certificate was issued by Dr. Jesus Nigos,
Your Honor.
COURT:
Page 53.
WITNESS:
He entered also there the cause of death in the Certificate
of Death, Your Honor.
COURT:
q.
a.

He also entered the cause of death in the Death

Certificate?
Yes, Your Honor.

TRANSCRIPT
Crim. Case No. 13-CR-9468
December 4, 2013
Page 14
Dr. John L. Tinoyan
===========================================================

COURT:
q.

What was his cause of death in the Death

Certificate?

WITNESS:
a.

It is written here severe traumatic brain injury,

acute subdural hematoma, Your Honor.

q.

So would his cause of death be more or less

sustains also your autopsy findings?
Yes, Your Honor.

a.

PROS. BAYUBAY:
q.

a.
q.
a.

Earlier you mentioned of the hematoma you found

on the head of the victim Roy Laoyan Florencio. Did
you reduce that into writing your external findings?
Yes, sir.
And what findings did you issue in connection with
that one?
This one, sir.

PROS. BAYUBAY:
The documents that the doctor identified were not
available at the time of the pre-trial, Your Honor.
ATTY. SERGIO:
This Information was amended to reflect the true
status
COURT:

To reflect that the victim died.

TRANSCRIPT
Crim. Case No. 13-CR-9468
December 4, 2013
Page 15
Dr. John L. Tinoyan
===========================================================

PROS. BAYUBAY:
Yes. Can we attach the Death Certificate attesting to this
fact? It was only after that pre-trial that we were
informed that an autopsy was conducted on the
deceased. Thats precisely the reason why we called on
Dr. Tinoyan to testify because the Information was only
relayed by the mother of the complainant after the
ATTY. SERGIO:
Your Honor, the pre-trial was conducted on October 22,
2013. The autopsy examination was conducted on April
2, 2013 that was much before.
PROS. BAYUBAY:
Yes.
COURT:
Anyway, is there an issue as to the cause of death?
PROS. BAYUBAY:
None, Your Honor.
COURT:

Why are we belaboring ourselves with this when there is

no issue as to the cause of death? He said his autopsy
findings as well as the Certificate of Death issued by the
hospital doctor more or less are the same.
PROS. BAYUBAY:
Yes. We are just asking that we may be allowed to mark
this one because
COURT:
If you want then sub-mark it under the certificate of
death because its the same just the same. Correct?
TRANSCRIPT
Crim. Case No. 13-CR-9468
December 4, 2013
Page 16
Dr. John L. Tinoyan
===========================================================

PROS. BAYUBAY:
Yes, Your Honor.
The Certificate of Death was marked as Exhibit A. May
we pray that the Autopsy Sketch made by the doctor
dated April 2, 2013 be marked as Exhibit A-1?
COURT:
Mark it.
PROS. BAYUBAY:
The copy presented by the Doctor for the record is a
carbon original, Your Honor.
COURT:
Okay.
ATTY. SERGIO:

We would just like to register our objection, Your Honor.

We have just seen this document.
COURT:
Anyway, you will conduct your cross.
ATTY. SERGIO:
Yes, Your Honor.
PROS. BAYUBAY:
May we pray, Your Honor please, that the sketch at the
dorsal portion of Exhibit A-1 with the marking
contusion hematoma be bracketed and be marked as
Exhibit A-2?
COURT:
Mark it.
TRANSCRIPT
Crim. Case No. 13-CR-9468
December 4, 2013
Page 17
Dr. John L. Tinoyan
===========================================================

PROS. BAYUBAY:
q.
There is a signature on the dorsal portion of Exhibit
A-1. Whose signature is that Mr. witness?
WITNESS:
a.

Thats my signature, sir.

May we pray that the signature of the witness on the

dorsal portion of Exhibit A-1 be marked as Exhibit A3?
q.

You mentioned of the Report and when asked of this

report you handed to this representation an
Autopsy Report.
Is this the report that you
mentioned that contains the result of your autopsy?

a.

Yes, sir.

We pray that the Autopsy Report in this case be marked

as Exhibit A-4?
COURT:
Mark it.
PROS. BAYUBAY:
q.
a.

Where in this report is your finding as to the cause

of death?
Here, sir. Massive traumatic head injury.

We pray that the cause of death as appearing in this

report be marked as Exhibit A-5.
COURT:
Mark it.
PROS. BAYUBAY:
q.
There is a name and a signature on this Autopsy
Report A-4, above the typewritten name John L.
Tinoyan, MD. MPH, Medico-Legal officer. Whose
signature is this?
TRANSCRIPT
Crim. Case No. 13-CR-9468
December 4, 2013
Page 18
Dr. John L. Tinoyan
===========================================================

WITNESS:
a.

Thats my signature, sir.

We pray that the name and signature of the witness be

marked as Exhibit A-6.
We are submitting these documents to be attached to the
record, Your Honor.

COURT:
Noted. Cross?
ATTY. SERGIO:
Yes, Your Honor. With the permission of the Honorable
Court.
COURT:
Proceed.
CROSS EXAMINATION OF WITNESS
Dr. JOHN TINOYAN BY:
ATTY. SERGIO:
q.
a.
q.
a.
q.

On April 2, 2013, you conducted your autopsy on

the cadaver of Mr. Florencio. Is it not?
Yes, sir.
And before opening the cadaver, you noted the
injuries apparent in his body?
Yes, sir.

a.

And there were two noted injuries.

temporo-parietal area.
Yes, sir.

q.
a.

And the right parietal area.

Yes, sir.

First, the

TRANSCRIPT
Crim. Case No. 13-CR-9468
December 4, 2013
Page 19
Dr. John L. Tinoyan
===========================================================

ATTY. SERGIO:
q.

How about on the face? Are there no injuries on the

face?

WITNESS:
a.

I did not note any other injuries on the face, sir.

q.

I would like to show you the first page of Exhibit A1. There is a red mark on the ear of the drawing.
Cerebral spinal fluid coming out from the ears, sir.

a.
q.
a.

So on the facial area were there any injury at the

time of autopsy?
I did not see any injury on the face.

q.
a.

On the face.
Yes, sir.

q.

You stated that the injuries on the temporo-parietal

area and the right parietal area could be caused by
contact with the pavement.

PROS. BAYUBAY:
Misleading, Your Honor.
second injury

He merely stated that the

COURT:
Could have.
ATTY. SERGIO:
Could have.
COURT:
Could have fallen and his head hitting a hard object like
a pavement. That was the words.
TRANSCRIPT
Crim. Case No. 13-CR-9468
December 4, 2013
Page 20

Dr. John L. Tinoyan

===========================================================

PROS. BAYUBAY:
But he was referring to the crack on the
COURT:
To the linear fracture.
PROS. BAYUBAY:
Yes.
ATTY. SERGIO:
To the linear fracture.
q.
Would that contact to the pavement bring about
these two injuries at the same time specifically the
temporo-parietal area and the right parietal area?
a.
It appears like they are on contrary locations so one
must have been hitting the pavement with a high
probability on the right side and the mauling could
be possibly on the left side, sir.
q.
a.

q.
a.

q.

What made you conclude that there was mauling,

Mr. witness?
Because of the hard blunt injury that are noted in
the body of the victim, sir.
Is it because in the history of the patient there was
a mentioned of alleged mauling incident?
Not necessarily because the nature of the injury like
the presence of contusion hematoma, the
arrangement there in the group appears to be fist
size and this would have point out the possible
mauling if it should have been some other
instrument it would show.
Would it also be possible that the injury be
produced by the fact that before contact to the

pavement the person banged his head to a wall

before contact to the pavement?
TRANSCRIPT
Crim. Case No. 13-CR-9468
December 4, 2013
Page 21
Dr. John L. Tinoyan
===========================================================

COURT:
Wait. Do not use pavement because hard object like
pavement.
ATTY. SERGIO:
Yes, Your Honor.
q.
Before falling to a hard object like the pavement it is
possible that the victim hit his head to the wall.
PROS. BAYUBAY:
Self inflicted.
ATTY. SERGIO:
Possibilities.
a.
Nothing happen when he hit his head on the wall
there is no impact as compared to falling down to
the pavement with hard object has a full impact so
the possibility of hitting it just on a wall
q.

a.

q.

Okay. For clarification. In these external injuries,

what could have caused as you said by a fist blow,
the injury on the temporo-parietal area or the injury
on the right parietal area.
The left temporo-parietal area is more or less is like
caused by mauling, the right injury it appears like
caused by falling to a pavement or hard object, sir.
The injury on the left temporo-parietal area could it
be caused by the fact that the victim hit his head to
a wall? Is it possible?

a.

Left over head.

Is that for accident or what?
Because you cannot just hit your head
unnecessarily.

q.

No. It be accident or it be

COURT:
Well, wasnt that answered already when he said there
was a shape like a fist? Unless you have a wall that is a
fist.
TRANSCRIPT
Crim. Case No. 13-CR-9468
December 4, 2013
Page 22
Dr. John L. Tinoyan
===========================================================

ATTY. SERGIO:
No. Could it be caused by any other object like a wall or
like a stone?
COURT:
Any hard object.
ATTY. SERGIO:
Any hard object like a stone may be. Like the size of a
fist.
a. You are talking of the right side?
q.

The left temporo-parietal area.

COURT:
Where you said that it could have been caused by blow.
a. Because if you use a stone it will mark and the hard
blunt object could go deep into the skull if its
powerful but did not.
q.

So it would show that it was a force exerted by a fist

something like that.

a.

With high possibility, Your Honor.

ATTY. SERGIO:
With high possibility.
q.
Could not that injury be resulted by any other
object hitting the head?
a.
I was thinking of that but there is no similar
instrument that would show. Like for example, if
you use wood the contusion hematoma would be
linear and clean, but it does not show.
q.

What could have been the signature in the injury

that made you conclude that it was a fist?

TRANSCRIPT
Crim. Case No. 13-CR-9468
December 4, 2013
Page 23
Dr. John L. Tinoyan
===========================================================

WITNESS:
a.
Because of the arrangement of the contusion
hematoma you could easily see underneath the
skin, sir.
ATTY. SERGIO:
q.
Was there knuckles imprinted on the injury?
a.
It looks like there are knuckle marking on the soft
tissues underneath the skin. If you open like this
you see the fist like this.
COURT:
q.
a.
q.

If a fist was used, would the impact also have left

skin of the attacker on the head of the deceased?
Thats very probable, Your Honor.
But in the autopsy it was not part of the autopsy
where you tried to remove part of the skin from the

a.

head to show that it belong to somebody else other

than the victim?
The arrangement, Your Honor.

q.
a.

Just the arrangement.

Yes, Your Honor.

ATTY. SERGIO:
q.

a.

q.

With that kind of injury, is it possible that the

person could throw the punch to the victim might
have injured himself also?
Exactly thats what Im telling, sir. Like if there are
injuries on the attacker so that confirms that
No. My question is, would the injury in the left
temporo-parietal area this injury would it also show
that the attacker suffered also injury by that blow?

COURT:
Already answered. He said its possible but the autopsy
does not cover finding pieces of skin on the head.
TRANSCRIPT
Crim. Case No. 13-CR-9468
December 4, 2013
Page 24
Dr. John L. Tinoyan
===========================================================

ATTY. SERGIO:
Yes, Your Honor.
q.
Doctor, the first injury the injury on the left
temporo-parietal area, with this injury alone would
this cause the death of the victim?
WITNESS:
a.

COURT:

It appears that the second injury, sir, caused

massive traumatic injury, sir.

q.
a.

q.

a.

q.
a.
q.
a.

When you say traumatic injury, the act of hitting a

hard object like the pavement.
Yes, Your Honor, which include the fracture of the
skull and down to the base.
Because where the contusion hematoma appears on
the left side of the head, underneath there was no
linear fracture.
Actually, the linear fracture starts from the base
extending like this going towards the left.
Going towards the left but the impact came from the
right.
Came from the right.
But by the blow alone to the left side of the head
would not by itself cause a fracture?
Yes, Your Honor.

ATTY. SERGIO:
q.

a.
q.

So you mean to say, Mr. witness, the internal

hemorrhage the intra-cranial skull fractures were
brought about by the injury to the right parietal
area, the second injury?
With high possibility, sir.
Is it possible that these two injuries were suffered
by the victim in two separate occasions?

TRANSCRIPT
Crim. Case No. 13-CR-9468
December 4, 2013
Page 25
Dr. John L. Tinoyan
===========================================================

WITNESS:
a.

We cannot say that, sir.

ATTY. SERGIO:
q.

But is it possible?

PROS. BAYUBAY:
It is already answered.
Your Honor.

That is argumentative already,

COURT:
He already said we cannot say that.
ATTY. SERGIO:
q.
a.
q.

a.
q.
a.

Why do you say that you cannot say? My question

is why?
Could you rephrase the question, sir? The first.
Okay. The first injury, the left temporo-parietal area
and the second injury or the injury on the right
parietal area could have been suffered by the victim
in two separate occasions.
Is it possible, Mr.
witness?
It looks like its almost in the same occasion.
But is there a possibility?
But trying to separate both injuries thats where I
answered that it is not possible. We cannot

COURT:
Determine.
a. We cannot determine that, Your Honor.
ATTY. SERGIO:
The possibility.
TRANSCRIPT
Crim. Case No. 13-CR-9468
December 4, 2013
Page 26
Dr. John L. Tinoyan
===========================================================

COURT:

q.

So you are saying that the possibility of the incident

occurring in the same occasion is higher than the
possibility of having it occurred or you cannot
determine if it occurred on different occasion.

WITNESS:
a.

Yes, Your Honor.

ATTY. SERGIO:
q.
a.

What made you say that there is a possibility that

they were simultaneously sustained by the victim?
Because of the characteristic of the injury found on
the victim, sir.

q.
a.

What were the characteristics?

The fresh contusion hematoma noted on both
injuries, sir.

q.

But you testified a while ago, Mr. witness, that you

cannot determine the exact date and time when
these injuries were sustained by the victim?

PROS. BAYUBAY:
Argumentative, Your Honor.
ATTY. SERGIO:
Im just confirming, Your Honor.
PROS. BAYUBAY:
They are two different matters. They cannot be
COURT:
Anyway, the testimony is they happened on more or less
the same time. When and where thats out of the
question because he is not aware. So thats already
answered.

TRANSCRIPT
Crim. Case No. 13-CR-9468
December 4, 2013
Page 27
Dr. John L. Tinoyan
===========================================================

ATTY. SERGIO:
May we read back the question for the confirmation of
the prosecutor?
STENOGRAPHER:
q.

But you testified a while ago, Mr. witness, that you

cannot determine the exact date and time when
these injuries were sustained by the victim?

PROS. BAYUBAY:
We object that is already argumentative.
COURT:
Sustained. It was even answered already because he said
that all he did was conduct the autopsy on the day he
died and he could not determine when exactly.
PROS. BAYUBAY:
When the injuries were sustained.
COURT:
Correct. But the fact that they happened on more or less
the same occasion, is possible. There.
ATTY. SERGIO:
q.

The injury on the right parietal area, could it be

caused by say for example the victim trick from his
way and hit his right parietal area on his way. Is it
possible, Mr. witness?

a.

Its least possible because if you just trip the impact

is less but when you have this blow on the left side
and then you dropped on the right side there is very
powerful impact, sir.

TRANSCRIPT
Crim. Case No. 13-CR-9468
December 4, 2013
Page 28
Dr. John L. Tinoyan
===========================================================

ATTY. SERGIO:
q.

Could it be caused by say for example a victim

because of the alcohol that he have taken has a
misbalance on himself and

COURT:
Wait. Did we establish that the victim was filled with
alcohol? There was no statement that the victim had
imbibed alcohol because he was already dead when the
doctor, your findings did not show whether or not the
victim was intoxicated. Did it? At the time of death,
Doctor? It did not include a finding of intoxication at the
time of death.
a. Your Honor, I was not able to determine that
because there is already sanctioning of the stomach
contents where it could show possible positive
alcohol smell but it does not show because it has
already been sanctioned in the hospital, Your
Honor.
ATTY. SERGIO:
q.

The injury to the right parietal area, in your opinion

was it sustained by the victim standing up or lying
down?

PROS. BAYUBAY:

Vague, Your Honor, because the injuries could not be

sustained standing up, Your Honor.
COURT:
What particular injury?
ATTY. SERGIO:
The right parietal area, Your Honor.

TRANSCRIPT
Crim. Case No. 13-CR-9468
December 4, 2013
Page 29
Dr. John L. Tinoyan
===========================================================

COURT:
That one that hit the pavement, the linear fracture.
ATTY. SERGIO:
Yes, Your Honor.
PROS. BAYUBAY:
The question is even vague. May we know if the defense
is asking if you are standing and hit could you get a
COURT:
Get a linear fracture.
PROS. BAYUBAY:
Is it our understanding while standing up?
ATTY. SERGIO:

Our question is, the position of the victim at the time this
injury, the right parietal area injury was sustained, Your
Honor. There was no testimony we are just clarifying.
COURT:
q.

What was the possible position of the person the

victim at that time

PROS. BAYUBAY:
There was already a
COURT:
Let the doctor answer.
q.
At the time that the linear fracture occurred.
a.
Well, we have just answered that it hit the
pavement.
TRANSCRIPT
Crim. Case No. 13-CR-9468
December 4, 2013
Page 30
Dr. John L. Tinoyan
===========================================================

COURT:
q.

So it was the impact of the victim falling.

WITNESS:
a.

Yes, Your Honor.

ATTY. SERGIO:
q.
a.
q.

So probably the injury was sustained by the victim

when he is already lying on the ground?
Yes, sir.
So there is no possibility that he was standing up
when this injury was sustained?

PROS. BAYUBAY:
May we just be clarified as to what injury, Your Honor?
COURT:
Already answered.
ATTY. SERGIO:
That would be all for the witness, Your Honor.
COURT:
Re-direct?
PROS. BAYUBAY:
q.

a.

On cross, Doctor, the defense pointed to a marking

on the ear on this sketch plus CSF marking. What
is this again?
That shows that there is basal skull fracture which
caused the injury to the brainstem that caused the
leak of this fluid coming from the cerebral spinal
fluid.

TRANSCRIPT
Crim. Case No. 13-CR-9468
December 4, 2013
Page 31
Dr. John L. Tinoyan
===========================================================

PROS. BAYUBAY:
q.

What is CSF?

WITNESS:
a.

Cerebral Spinal Fluid.

q.
a.

This fluid was coming out of his?

Ears.

q.
a.

What ear?
Left ear.

q.

It was not mark. Could you make the marking

then, Doctor?
The witness is making the mark on the sketch.
PROS. BAYUBAY:
I think the original marking is correct, Your Honor.
COURT:
Its because you were looking it on a different perspective.
PROS. BAYUBAY:
Yes.
q.
So its on the left?
a.
Yes, sir.
q.

The defense also was asking if the injuries

sustained were self inflicted. Were they? Could it
be possible?

ATTY. SERGIO:
We are not asking that, Your Honor.
COURT:
Hitting himself on the wall. Well use it like that.
TRANSCRIPT
Crim. Case No. 13-CR-9468
December 4, 2013
Page 31
Dr. John L. Tinoyan
===========================================================

PROS. BAYUBAY:
Yes.
COURT:

Because self inflicted could be is susceptible of defense so

use the same words used.
PROS. BAYUBAY:
q.

Could those injuries have been caused by the victim

hitting himself on the wall?

ATTY. SERGI:
What specific injury? We are talking about two injuries.
PROS. BAYUBAY:
Yes. He was referring to the left temporo-parietal area.
a.
No, sir.
No further questions, Your Honor.
COURT:
Re-cross?
ATTY. SERGIO:
Yes, Your Honor.
q.

Mr. witness, are you also trained in the field of

forensic science?

PROS. BAYUBAY:
We object to that, Your Honor.
COURT:
Sustained.
TRANSCRIPT
Crim. Case No. 13-CR-9468
December 4, 2013
Page 33

Dr. John L. Tinoyan

===========================================================

PROS. BAYUBAY:
Because he already admitted his qualification, Your
Honor.
ATTY. SERGIO:
No as a physician but as forensic
COURT:
He is not testifying as forensic scientist.
He was
testifying as a physician. Theres a difference between
the two.
ATTY. SERGIO:
Im just asking if he has background, Your Honor.
COURT:
So dont ask that question because he testified as a
physician.
WITNESS:
It is okay, Your Honor, Im trained on NBI forensic. I have
ID already.
ATTY. SERGIO:
Thats ourbecause he was not qualified as a forensic
expert, Your Honor, a while ago.
COURT:
But his testimony did not cover any forensics. His
testimony only covered the cause of death, the injuries.

ATTY. SERGIO:
Yes, Your Honor, and the conclusions as to what
TRANSCRIPT
Crim. Case No. 13-CR-9468
December 4, 2013
Page 34
Dr. John L. Tinoyan
===========================================================

COURT:
What? The cause of death because of the injuries and
what could have caused the injuries. Thats it.
PROS. BAYUBAY:
It was the question of the defense that covers on a little
bit on forensics, Your Honor. We questioned directly on
the cause of death but it was the counsel who speculated
on the possible positions and thats forensic, Your Honor.
ATTY. SERGIO:
That is not speculations, Your Honor.
COURT:
Okay. Anyway, its all answered. No more?
ATTY. SERGIO:
No more, Your Honor.
COURT:
Thank you, Doctor. You are excused.
WITNESS:
Permission to leave, Your Honor.
COURT:

Okay. You can get your certificate of appearance in the

office.
PROS. BAYUBAY:
Thank you, Doctor. We have another witness, Your
Honor, but I think if we could be accommodated we will
present her but we have another case also.