Lejano v.

People
G.R. No. 176389, 14 December 2010; Abad, J.
Digest prepared by Jeane Yaneza
Topic: Documented Alibi (Discussed in the second issue)

I. Facts
 An Information for rape with homicide was filed against Hubert Webb, et al. They were charged with the killing of
Estrellita Vizconde and her daughters, Jeniffer and Carmela, who was raped, at their home in Paranaque on June 30, 1991.
 Prosecution - Testimony of Star Witness Jessica Alfaro (The other witnesses presented corroborated Alfaro’s testimony.)
1. On June 29, 1991 at around 8:30 in the evening, Jessica Alfaro and her boyfriend went to the Ayala Alabang
Commercial Center (AACC) parking lot to buy shabu from Ventura.  There, Ventura introduced her to Webb and his
friends. As Alfaro smoked her shabu, Webb approached and requested her to relay a message for him to Carmela
Vizconde. Alfaro agreed.  After using up their shabu, the group drove to Carmela's house.
2. Alfaro had met Carmela twice before in Jan. 1991.  When Carmela came out, Alfaro gave her Webb's message that he
was just around.  Carmela replied that she could not go out yet since she had just arrived home. She told Alfaro to
return after twenty minutes.  Alfaro relayed this to Webb who then told the group to drive back to the AACC.
3. The group had another shabu session.  After sometime, they drove back but only Alfaro proceeded to Carmela’s
house. Carmela was at their garden.  She approached Alfaro and told the latter that she (Carmela) had to leave the
house for a while.  Carmela requested Alfaro to return before midnight and she would leave the pedestrian gate, the
iron grills that led to the kitchen, and the kitchen door unlocked. Carmela also told Alfaro to blink her car's headlights
twice when she approached the pedestrian gate so Carmela would know that she had arrived.
4. Alfaro returned to her car but waited for Carmela to drive out of the house in her own car.  Alfaro trailed Carmela up
to Aguirre Avenue where she dropped off a man whom Alfaro believed was Carmela's boyfriend.  Alfaro looked for
her group, found them, and relayed Carmela's instructions to Webb.
5. They then all went back to AACC.  At the parking lot, Alfaro told the group about her talk with Carmela.  When she
told Webb of Carmela's male companion, Webb's mood changed for the rest of the evening ("bad trip").
6. Webb gave out free cocaine.  They all used it and some shabu, too.  After about 40 to 45 minutes, Webb decided that
it was time for them to leave.  He said, "Pipilahan natin siya [Carmela] at ako ang mauuna." Lejano said, "Ako ang
susunod" and the others responded "Okay, okay."  They arrived at Carmela's house shortly before midnight.
7. When Webb, Lejano, and Ventura were already before the house, Webb told the others again that they would line up
for Carmela but he would be the first.  The others replied, "O sige, dito lang kami, magbabantay lang kami."
8. Alfaro was the first to pass through the pedestrian gate that had been left open. Carmela opened the aluminum
screen door of the kitchen for them.  She and Webb looked each other in the eyes for a moment and, together,
headed for the dining area.
9. After sitting in the car for about ten minutes, Alfaro returned to the Vizconde house, using the same route.  Unable to
open the main door, Alfaro returned to the kitchen.  Out of curiosity, she approached the master's bedroom from
where a static noise came, opened the door a little, and peeked inside.  As she walked in, she saw Webb on top of
Carmela while she lay with her back on the floor.  Two bloodied bodies lay on the bed.  Carmela was gagged,
moaning, and in tears while Webb raped her, his bare buttocks exposed.
10. Webb gave Alfaro a meaningful look and she immediately left the room.  She met Ventura at the dining area.  He told
her, "Prepare an escape.  Aalis na tayo." 
11. A "blaming session" later took place.  It was here that Alfaro learned of what happened.  The first to be killed was
Carmela's mother, then Jennifer, and finally, Carmella.  Ventura blamed Webb, telling him, "Bakit naman pati yung
bata?"  Webb replied that the girl woke up and on seeing him molesting Carmela, she jumped on him, bit his
shoulders, and pulled his hair.  Webb got mad, grabbed the girl, pushed her to the wall, and repeatedly stabbed her. 

 Defense - Hubert Webb’s Alibi (From the Ratio)

A. Travel Preparations
1. In 1991, Webb’s parents decided to send him to the US to learn the value of independence, hard work, and
money. He was accompanied by his Aunt Gloria. Rajah Tours booked their flight to San Francisco via United
Airlines. Josefina Nolasco of Rajah Tours confirmed that Webb and his aunt used their plane tickets.
2. Before he left, he told his neighbors about his travel plans and he had a despedida party the day before he left.
B. The two immigration checks
1. On March 9, 1991, Webb and his aunt United Airlines Flight 808. Before boarding his plane, Webb passed through
the Philippine Immigration booth at the airport to have his passport cleared and stamped. Immigration Officer,
 Sampol checked Webb's visa, stamped, and initialed his passport, and let him pass through. He was listed on the
United Airlines Flight's Passenger Manifest.
2. On arrival at San Francisco, Webb went through the U.S. Immigration where his entry into the country was
recorded. Thus, the U.S. Immigration Naturalization Service, checking with its Non-immigrant Information
System, confirmed Webb's entry into the U.S. on March 9, 1991. Webb presented at the trial the INS Certification
issued by the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service, the computer-generated print-out of the US-INS
indicating Webb's entry, and the US-INS Certification dated August 31, 1995, authenticated by the Philippine DFA,
correcting an earlier August 10, 1995 Certification.
C. Details of U.S. sojourn
1. Webb stayed at his aunt’s house in Daly City, California.
2. May 1991: He moved to Anaheim Hills, California with the Brottmans. During his stay there, he played basketball
and worked at his cousin-in-law's pest control company. Webb presented the company's logbook showing the
tasks he performed, his paycheck, his ID, and other employment papers.
3. June 14, 1991: He applied for a driver's license and wrote letters to his friend Jennifer Cabrera.
4. On June 28, 1991, Webb's parents visited him at Anaheim and stayed with the Brottmans. On the following day,
Webb bought a car. To prove the purchase, Webb presented the Public Records of California Department of
Motor Vehicle and a car plate "LEW WEBB." In using the car in the U.S., Webb even received traffic citations.
5. On June 30, 1991 [When the massacre took place], Webb bought a bicycle at Orange Cycle Center. The Center
issued Webb a receipt dated June 30, 1991.
6. Webb stayed with the Brottmans until mid July and rented a place for less than a month.
7. August 1991: He left for Longwood, Florida, to stay with the spouses Rodriguez.
8. In November 1991, Webb met Gary Valenciano, who was invited for a dinner at the Rodriguez's house.
9. He left the Rodriguez's home in August 1992, returned to Anaheim and stayed there until he left for the
Philippines on October 26, 1992.
D. The second immigration checks
1. Webb also went through both the U.S. and Philippine immigrations on his return trip. Thus, his departure from
the U.S. was confirmed by the same certifications that confirmed his entry. Furthermore, a Diplomatic Note of
the U.S. Department of State with enclosed letter from Acting Director Debora A. Farmer of the Records
Operations, Office of Records of the US-INS stated that the Certification dated August 31, 1995 is a true and
accurate statement. And when he boarded his plane, the Passenger Manifest of Philippine Airlines Flight No. 103,
certified by Agnes Tabuena confirmed his return trip.
2. When he arrived in Manila, Webb again went through the Philippine Immigration. In fact, the arrival stamp and
initial on his passport indicated his return to Manila on October 27, 1992. This was authenticated by the
immigration officer who processed Webb's reentry.
 RTC - Convicted Webb and his co-accused. The RTC noted Alfaro's categorical and straightforward, testimony,
undamaged by cross-examinations. The denials and alibis of Webb et al. paled in comparison to Alfaro's testimony that
other witnesses and the physical evidence corroborated. CA - Affirmed the RTC
 Webb filed with the SC a request to submit for DNA analysis the semen specimen taken from Carmela's cadaver, which
was under the safekeeping of the NBI. The SC granted the request pursuant to Sec. 4 of the Rule on DNA Evidence.
However, the NBI informed the Court that it no longer has custody of the specimen. It was turned over to the RTC but it
was not among the object evidence that the prosecution offered in evidence.
 Thus, Webb filed an urgent motion to acquit on the ground that the government's failure to preserve such vital evidence
has resulted in the denial of his right to due process.

II. Issues/Held
1. Whether or not Alfaro's testimony as eyewitness, describing the crime and identifying Webb is entitled to belief – No.
2. Whether or not Webb presented sufficient evidence to prove his alibi and rebut Alfaro's testimony that he led the others
in committing the crime – Yes. Webb and his other co-accused are ACQUITTED.

III. Ratio
1. Whether or not Alfaro's testimony as eyewitness, describing the crime and identifying Webb is entitled to belief – No.
 Quality of the Witness: Alfaro was not an ordinary subdivision girl. She was, at the time she revealed her story, working
for the NBI as an "asset," a stool pigeon, one who earned her living by fraternizing with criminals so she could squeal on
them to her NBI handlers.
 It was possible for Alfaro to lie with such abundant details some of which even tallied with the physical evidence at the
scene of the crime.
 o The Vizconde massacre had been reported in the media with dizzying details. Everybody was talking about what
the police found at the crime scene and there were lots of speculations about them.
o The police had arrested some "akyat-bahay" group in Parañaque and charged them with the crime. Alfaro's NBI
handlers who were doing their own investigation knew of these details as well. Since Alfaro hung out at the NBI
offices and practically lived there, it was not too difficult for her to hear of these evidentiary details and gain
access to the documents.
o Alfaro was the NBI's star witness, their badge of excellent investigative work. After claiming that they had solved
the crime of the decade, the NBI people had a stake in making her sound credible and, obviously, they gave her
all the preparations she needed for the job of becoming a fairly good substitute witness. She was their "darling"
of an asset.
 Quality of the Testimony: Her story lacks sense or suffers from inherent inconsistencies.
o In her desire to implicate the other co-accused, Alfaro made it a point to testify that Webb proposed twice to his
friends the gang-rape of Carmela who had hurt him. But when they got to Carmela's house, not all of the co-
accused entered the house.
o Ventura, Alfaro's dope supplier, introduced her for the first time in her life to Webb and his friends in a parking
lot by a mall. So why would she agree to act as Webb's messenger, using her gas, to bring his message to Carmela
at her home. More inexplicably, what motivated Alfaro to stick it out the whole night with Webb and his friends?
They were practically strangers to her and her boyfriend Estrada.
o Alfaro's trailing Carmela to spy on her unfaithfulness to Webb did not make sense since she was on limited
errand. But, as a critical witness, Alfaro had to provide a reason for Webb to freak out and decide to come with
his friends and harm Carmela.
o Why would Alfaro, a woman, a stranger to Webb before that night, and obviously with no role to play in the gang-
rape of Carmela, lead him and the others into her house? It made no sense. It would only make sense if Alfaro
wanted to feign being a witness to something she did not see.
 Missing corroboration: The prosecution's core theory that Carmela and Webb had been sweethearts, that she had been
unfaithful to him, and that it was for this reason that Webb brought his friends to her house to gang-rape her is totally
uncorroborated!
o Normally, if Webb, a Congressman's son, courted the young Carmela, that would be news among her circle of
friends if not around town. But, here, none of her friends or even those who knew either of them came forward
to affirm this.
o Except for Alfaro, the NBI asset, no one among Carmela's friends or her friends' friends would testify ever hearing
of such relationship or ever seeing them together in some popular hangouts in Parañaque or Makati.
o Alfaro testified that she saw Carmela drive out of her house with a male passenger, Mr. X, whom Alfaro thought
the way it looked was also Carmela's lover. This was the all-important reason Webb supposedly had for wanting
to harm her. Again, none of Carmela's relatives, friends, or people who knew her ever testified about the
existence of Mr.X in her life. Obviously, Mr. X did not exist, a mere ghost of the imagination of Alfaro, the woman
who made a living informing on criminals.

2. Whether or not Webb presented sufficient evidence to prove his alibi and rebut Alfaro's testimony that he led the
others in committing the crime – Yes. Webb and his other co-accused are ACQUITTED.

Alibi versus positive identification

RTC and CA: Webb's alibi cannot stand against Alfaro's positive identification of him as the rapist and killer. Because of this,
Webb's denial and alibi were fabricated.

SC:
 Not all denials and alibis should be regarded as fabricated. Indeed, if the accused is truly innocent, he can have no other
defense but denial and alibi. A judge must keep an open mind. He must guard against slipping into hasty conclusion,
often arising from a desire to quickly finish the job of deciding a case. A positive declaration from a witness that he saw
the accused commit the crime should not automatically cancel out the accused's claim that he did not do it. A lying
witness can make as positive an identification as a truthful witness can. The lying witness can also say as forthrightly and
unequivocally, "He did it!" without blinking an eye.
 To be acceptable, the positive identification must meet at least two criteria:
 o First, the positive identification of the offender must come from a credible witness. She is credible who can be
trusted to tell the truth, usually based on past experiences with her. Her word has, to one who knows her, its
weight in gold.
o Second, the witness' story of what she personally saw must be believable, not inherently contrived. A witness
who testifies about something she never saw runs into inconsistencies and makes bewildering claims.
 In the case at bar, Alfaro and her testimony fail to meet the above criteria.
o She did not show up at the NBI as a spontaneous witness bothered by her conscience. She had been hanging
around that agency for sometime as a stool pigeon, one paid for mixing up with criminals and squealing on them.
Police assets are often criminals themselves. She was the prosecution's worst possible choice for a witness.
Indeed, her superior testified that she volunteered to play the role of a witness in the Vizconde killings when she
could not produce a man she promised to the NBI.
o And, although her testimony included details, Alfaro had prior access to the details that the investigators knew of
the case. She took advantage of her familiarity with these details to include in her testimony.
o Her testimony was inherently incredible. Her story that some of the other co-accused agreed to take their turns
raping Carmela is incongruent with their indifference, exemplified by remaining outside the house. Alfaro's story
that she agreed to serve as Webb's messenger to Carmela, using up her gas, and staying with him till the bizarre
end when they were practically strangers, also taxes incredulity.
o To provide basis for Webb's outrage, Alfaro said that she followed Carmela to the main road to watch her let off a
lover on Aguirre Avenue. And, inexplicably, although Alfaro had only played the role of messenger, she claimed
leading Webb, Lejano, and Ventura into the house to gang-rape Carmella, as if Alfaro was establishing a reason
for later on testifying on personal knowledge. Her swing from an emotion of fear when a woman woke up to
their presence in the house and of absolute courage when she nonetheless returned to become the lone witness
to a grim scene is also quite inexplicable.

Documented Alibi
 To establish alibi, the accused must prove by positive, clear, and satisfactory evidence that:
1. He was present at another place at the time of the perpetration of the crime, and
2. That it was physically impossible for him to be at the scene of the crime.

RTC and CA: Webb was actually in Parañaque when the Vizconde killings took place; he was not in the U.S. from March 9,
1991 to October 27, 1992; and if he did leave on March 9, 1991, he actually returned before June 29, 1991, committed the
crime, erased the fact of his return to the Philippines from the records of the U.S. and Philippine Immigrations, smuggled
himself out of the Philippines and into the U.S., and returned the normal way on October 27, 1992.

SC:
 This ruling practically makes the death of Webb and his passage into the next life the only acceptable alibi in the
Philippines. Courts must abandon this unjust and inhuman paradigm.
 If one is cynical about the Philippine system, he could probably claim that Webb, with his father's connections, can
arrange for the local immigration to put a departure and arrival stamp on his passport. However, this is pure speculation
since there had been no indication that such arrangement was made.
o Besides, how could Webb fix a foreign airlines' passenger manifest, officially filed in the Philippines and at the
airport in the U.S. that had his name on them? How could Webb fix with the U.S. Immigration's record system
those two dates in its record of his travels as well as the dates when he supposedly departed in secret from the
U.S. to commit the crime in the Philippines and then return there? No one has come up with a logical and
plausible answer to these questions.
 The CA rejected the evidence of Webb's passport since he did not leave the original to be attached to the record. But,
while the best evidence of a document is the original, this means that the same is exhibited in court for the adverse party
to examine and for the judge to see.
 CA Justice Tagle’s Dissent: The practice when a party does not want to leave an important document with the trial court
is to have a photocopy of it marked as exhibit and stipulated among the parties as a faithful reproduction of the original.
Stipulations in the course of trial are binding on the parties and on the court.
 The U.S. Immigration certification and the computer print-out of Webb's arrival in and departure from that country were
authenticated by the Office of the U.S. Attorney General and the State Department. Still, the CA refused to accept these
documents for the reason that Webb failed to present in court the immigration official who prepared the same. But this
 was unnecessary. Webb's passport is a document issued by the Philippine government, which under international
practice, is the official record of travels of the citizen to whom it is issued. The entries in that passport are presumed true.
 The U.S. Immigration certification and computer print-out, the official certifications of which have been authenticated by
the Philippine DFA, merely validated the arrival and departure stamps of the U.S. Immigration office on Webb's passport.
They have the same evidentiary value. The officers who issued these certifications need not be presented in court to
testify on them. Their trustworthiness arises from the sense of official duty and the penalty attached to a breached duty,
in the routine and disinterested origin of such statement and in the publicity of the record.
 The CA makes capital of the fact that an earlier certification from the U.S. Immigration office said that it had no record of
Webb entering the U.S. But that erroneous first certification was amply explained by the U.S. Government.
o The initial request was merely initiated by BID Commissioner Verceles who directly communicated with the
Philippine Consulate in San Francisco, USA, bypassing the Secretary of Foreign Affairs which is the proper protocol
procedure.
o The acting Chief of the Records Services Board of US-INS Washington D.C. in his letter addressed to Philip
Antweiler, Philippine Desk Officer, State Department, declared the earlier Certification as incorrect and erroneous
as it was "not exhaustive and did not reflect all available information."
o The Co-Director of the Office of Information and privacy, US Department of Justice explained that "the INS
normally does not maintain records on individuals who are entering the country as visitors rather than as
immigrants: and that a notation concerning the entry of a visitor may be made at the Nonimmigrant Information
system.
o Since Webb entered the U.S. on a mere tourist visa, obviously, the initial search could not have produced the
desired result inasmuch as the data base that was looked into contained entries of the names of IMMIGRANTS
and not that of NON-IMMIGRANT visitors of the U.S..
 The RTC and CA expressed marked cynicism over the accuracy of travel documents like the passport as well as the
domestic and foreign records of departures and arrivals from airports. They claim that it would not have been impossible
for Webb to secretly return to the Philippines after he supposedly left it on March 9, 1991, commit the crime, go back to
the U.S., and openly return to the Philippines again on October 26, 1992. Travel between the U.S. and the Philippines,
said the lower courts took only about twelve to fourteen hours.
o If the Court were to subscribe to this extremely skeptical view, it might as well tear the rules of evidence out of
the law books and regard suspicions, surmises, or speculations as reasons for impeaching evidence. It is not that
official records, which carry the presumption of truth of what they state, are immune to attack. They are not.
That presumption can be overcome by evidence.
o Here, however, the prosecution did not bother to present evidence to impeach the entries in Webb's passport
and the certifications of the Philippine and U.S.' immigration services regarding his travel to the U.S. and back.
The prosecution's rebuttal evidence is the fear of the unknown that it planted in the lower court's minds.

Effect of Webb's alibi to others

Webb's documented alibi altogether impeaches Alfaro's testimony with respect to Webb and the other co-accused. If the
Court accepts the proposition that Webb was in the U.S. when the crime took place, Alfaro's testimony will not hold together.
Webb's participation is the anchor of Alfaro's story. Without it, the evidence against the others must necessarily fall.