PRO’s and CON’s:

The death penalty is undoubtedly a deterrent to crime. No criminal who was

executed ever committed another crime. Whether it deters other criminals from
committing crimes is a separate question.

In Britain, they abolished capital punishment in 1964 when there were only 300
murders committed. By 1994, it had risen to 565 and by 2004, it reached to 833. To make
matters worse, 71 of the murders committed were by convicts who had been released
after serving life sentences in the period between 1965 and 1998. During the five years
that capital punishment was suspended, murders that would have merited a death
sentence rose by 125 percent.

In the United States, it is the opposite. During the period of increased use of the
death penalty, the murder rate dropped from 24, 562 in 1933 to 18,209 in 1997, a 26
percent reduction.

Different countries use different methods of imposing the death penalty. Basically, there
are four methods: hanging, lethal injection, shooting and electrocution. In the Philippines,
we use the electric chair.

And all countries have only three options. The first, of course, is not to have the
death penalty. We simply cope with the number of murders and serious crimes that we
presently have by sending those convicted to prison. The other is to have the death
penalty for the very worst criminals meaning those who themselves have taken other
people's lives.

As far as we can tell, there is really no way to tell if capital punishment serves to
deter serious crimes. We believe that better than the death penalty, what would
discourage all forms of crimes is if the wrongdoers were quickly arrested, tried and if found
guilty convicted to serve a term in prison. People commit crimes because they expect to
get away with it.

What we would like to see is the proper training of prisoners. By proper training we
mean they should not only be imprisoned, they should be taught some basic skills so that
they can earn a good living after they are freed. More often than not, people who are
imprisoned come out worse than before they got in. That is because of exposure to more
hardened criminals. Our jails are first of all overcrowded. I find it difficult to figure out how
we could have so many as 1200 convicts supposedly waiting execution. Some believe
that capital punishment serves to deter crime. Others think that it just increases the
number of people killed. What we would like to see are death convicts that are not only
saved from the electric chair but turned to model prisoners.
LEGAL BASIS:

Pursuant to Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code as amended, when rape is
committed by the stepfather of the victim, death penalty may be imposed on the accused
if such relationship is properly alleged in the Information and duly proven in Court. If the
accused however is merely the common law husband of the victim’s mother, will the
sentence still be death? What must be shown to prove that the accused is really the
stepfather of the victim? These are the questions answered in the following case. Also
tackled here is whether the delay in making the criminal accusation will affect the
credibility of the victim’s testimony.

This is the case of tomboyish but obedient girl Jackie, the only surviving child of
Doray with her late husband Mando. When Jackie was only three years old and after the
death of Mando, Doray already started living with Edgar without the benefit of marriage.
Jackie regarded Edgar as her own father and affectionately addressed him as “Papa”. To
support their family, Edgar worked six days a week at a factory while Doray peddled food
and drinks at a dancing hall until late evening.

When Jackie was about 15 years old, during one Saturday evening in the month
of January, Edgar took advantage of Doray’s absence as he embraced Jackie, poked a
knife at her neck and warned her not to shout. Then despite her struggle to free herself,
Edgar was able to satisfy his lusts on Jackie after mashing her breast and tying her legs
on the bedpost. The sexual assault was repeated on two more Saturdays in the month of
March and July. Unable to bear the repeated indignity and seeming indifference of her
mother Doray, Jackie left home for the next three months and worked as a domestic
helper. Later she her employer and wandered from place to place with her peers. Then
she was caught by the police pilfering several packs of cigarette at a market stall.

In the interview conducted by SPO4 Marites, Jackie narrated that she ran away
from their home because Edgar raped her on three occasions although she could not
remember the exact date while her mother Doray seemed to be indifferent to the ordeals
and indignities she suffered. After being entrusted to the care of the Department of Social
Welfare and Development (DSWD), three counts of rape were filed against Edgar before
the Regional Trial Court (RTC) against Edgar, “the stepfather of the offended party by
means of force, violence, threat and intimidation.”

Jackie and a guidance psychologist testified for the prosecution to prove the
charges and to show her schizophrenic personality and why she is suffering from anxiety
and anger because of the hurt and resentment she felt due to her strained relationship
with her mother and Edgar.

For his defense, Edgar denied the charges and claimed that he was at work when
the alleged rapes happened. This was corroborated by a co-worker and by Doray herself
who testified that the alleged rapes never happened as she was with her all those times.

The RTC did not buy the defense of denial and alibi of Edgar and relied more on
the testimony of Jackie. Thus it rendered judgment finding Edgar guilty of triple rapes,
sentencing him to three death penalties plus payment of indemnity and exemplary
damages.

On automatic review by the Supreme Court, Edgar insisted that the charges
against him were mere fabrications of Jackie to get back at him for his heavy handed
method of discipline. He also contended that her choosing to report the rapes to the
authorities more than a year after the occurrence is indicative of a deceitful scheme to
escape from an impending indictment for theft by appealing to the sense of pity of the
police officers.

But the Supreme Court still convicted Edgar of three rapes despite some
inconsistencies in Jackie’s testimony especially as to the date and place where the rapes
happened. It declared that these inconsistencies are not valid and sufficient justification
for totally discarding Jackie’s testimony for they are minor inconsistencies indicative of
unrehearsed account. The exact dates when she was ravished did not lessen the veracity
of her testimony for they are not essential elements in the commission of rapes. The SC
found Jackie’s testimony to be candid and straightforward. The SC said that it is highly
improbable for a girl her age and with a low IQ to concoct an elaborate tale without
wavering in material points.

The SC also said that the delay of Jackie in making the criminal accusation did not
impair her credibility because it was merely due to the fear that her “father” might kill her.
Edgar’s moral ascendancy and his threats against her were enough to intimidate her. And
when she told her mother of the wrong done to her, her mother did not believe her and
even sided with Edgar thus forcing her to run away from home.

But the SC ruled that instead of three death sentences, only reclusion perpetua
should be imposed on Edgar because the three Informations for rapes alleged that Edgar
was the stepfather of Jackie although the prosecution was able to prove that he was a
common-law husband of Doray her mother, as they were never married (People vs.
Magtrayo, G.R. 134480-82, October 4, 2000).

Read more at https://www.philstar.com/opinion/2019/02/20/1895094/right-decision-

wrong-sentence-law-each-day-keeps-trouble-away#z4qxVEQkJITeXlYf.99