This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2008-09-17 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| In People v. Javier,[25] the defense asked this Court to discount the fact that the attack on the victim was executed treacherously, considering that the victim would have been able to see the approach of his would-be attackers. In refusing to discount the fact that treachery attended the crime, we reasoned that while a victim may have been warned of a possible danger to his person, in treachery, what is decisive is that the attack was executed in such a manner as to make it impossible for the victim to retaliate.[26] The case at bar presents a similar scenario, for while the victim might have been able to look around after Balais stabbed him, still the victim had no opportunity to defend himself. In fact, he had no inkling that he would be the target of five to six persons who waited for him at a place where he would be utterly defenseless when he left Brgy. Picas. As testified to by eyewitness Roman Garsain, they were merely on their way to Brgy. Roosevelt when they were waylaid and attacked. Clearly, they were in a helpless position.[27] | |||||