Bernardo, a mayoralty candidate of Osram City, wanted to eliminate Yori, his political opponent. Yori announced his intention to run for mayor of the same city. A month before the filing of candidacy, Bernardo and Benjamin met at a hotel and discussed their plan to kill Yori on the day when he would file his certificate of candidacy. Based on their agreement, Bernardo would provide the guns and the money, while Benjamin would provide the personnel to cordon off all roads leading to the COMELEC’s local office. On the day of the execution of the plan, however, Benjamin flew to Manila to avoid being involved in the planned killing of Yori. Bernardo, determined to kill Yori, convened his own armed group and laid out a new plan to kill Yori, and in accordance with it, his armed group patrolled all the roads leading to the COMELEC’s local office. Bernardo remained in his house and monitored the execution of the plan from there. As soon as Yori and his supporters passed by the main road at around 2:00 p.m., Bernardo’s armed group opened fire at them. Yori was unharmed as he was inside a bulletproof vehicle, but ten of his supporters were killed. Bernardo, the members of his armed group, and Benjamin were later charged with ten counts of Murder for the death of Yori’s supporters and one count of Attempted Murder of Yori. Discuss the criminal liability for the crimes charged against each of the following: (i) Bernardo, (ii) the members of Bernardo’s armed group, and (iii) Benjamin. Explain briefly. (5 points)
Suggested answer only. Not an official answer and not legal advice.
(i) Bernardo and (ii) his armed group are liable for ten counts of Murder and one count of Attempted Murder, while (iii) Benjamin incurs no liability.
Under the Revised Penal Code, conspirators are liable for murder when treachery attends the ambush, including unintended deaths under aberratio ictus. An instigator is a principal by inducement, while executioners are principals by direct participation. Desisting before an overt act negates liability, as conspiracy alone is not a crime.
Here, Bernardo induced and conspired with his armed group to ambush Yori's convoy with treachery. Bernardo and his gunmen are liable as principals for Attempted Murder of Yori and ten counts of Murder for the supporters. Benjamin flew to Manila before any overt act, desisting from the conspiracy.
Consequently, Bernardo and his armed group are liable as charged, whereas Benjamin is exempt from liability.
This is not an official scoring system and carries no weight with the Supreme Court or any bar review provider. It measures how much of the suggested answer's wording your response covers, not whether your reasoning is correct. For practice only.
Quick check
Why is Benjamin exempt from criminal liability despite initially agreeing to help kill Yori?
Spontaneous desistance before any overt act of execution is committed negates criminal liability for the conspiracy.
Under Article 4(1) of the Revised Penal Code, what doctrine applies when gunmen shoot at a target but kill bystanders instead?
Aberratio ictus applies when an offender directs a firearm at an intended target but accidentally hits unintended victims.
What is the criminal liability of Bernardo who planned the ambush, hired gunmen, and monitored the crime from his house?
A mastermind who provides money, instructions, and armed men to commit a crime is a principal by inducement.
How many counts of Murder are Bernardo and his armed group liable for regarding Yori's supporters?
The treacherous killing of ten supporters gives rise to ten separate counts of murder.
What crime was committed against Yori when his convoy was ambushed but he survived inside a bulletproof vehicle?
Commencing the execution of murder directly by overt acts without performing all acts of execution constitutes attempted murder.
Learn more about these topics
1. Conspiracy and Desistance
Under Article 8 of the Revised Penal Code, conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it. As a general rule, conspiracy is not punishable as an independent offense unless specifically provided by statute. A co-conspirator who abandons the conspiracy and desists before any overt act of execution is performed incurs no criminal liability. By removing himself before the execution phase, the desisting participant effectively severs his legal link to the subsequent criminal acts of his former associates.
2. Aberratio Ictus
Under Article 4, paragraph 1 of the Revised Penal Code, criminal liability is incurred by any person committing a felony although the wrongful act done be different from that which he intended. Aberratio Ictus, or mistake in the blow, occurs when an offender directs a felonious act toward a targeted victim but accidentally strikes and kills bystanders instead. The perpetrator and his co-conspirators remain criminally liable for the attempted killing of the intended target as well as separate counts of murder for each bystander killed.
3. Principals by Inducement
Under Article 17, paragraph 2 of the Revised Penal Code, principals by inducement are those who directly force or induce others to commit a crime. To be held liable as a principal by inducement, the master planner must exercise a powerful influence or command over the direct executioners and provide the essential means or instructions for committing the offense. Even if the mastermind remains inside his residence during the execution of the ambush, he is fully liable as a principal for all resulting crimes.