Facts: On 28 June 1993, Luis and Rogelio "Boy" Corcolon Approached Eileen Sarmenta and
Facts: On 28 June 1993, Luis and Rogelio "Boy" Corcolon Approached Eileen Sarmenta and
MAYOR
ANTONIO L. SANCHEZ, GEORGE MEDIALDEA, ZIOLO AMA,
BALDWIN BRION, LUIS CORCOLON, ROGELIO CORCOLON,
and PEPITO KAWIT, accused-appellants.
[G.R. No. 121039-45. January 25, 1999]
Facts: On 28 June 1993, Luis and Rogelio "Boy" Corcolon approached Eileen Sarmenta and
Allan Gomez, forcibly took the two and loaded them at the back of the latter's van, which
was parked in front of Café Amalia, Agrix Complex, Los Banos, Laguna. George Medialdea,
Zoilo Ama, Baldwin Brion and Pepito Kawit also boarded the van while Aurelio Centeno
and Vicencio Malabanan, who were also with the group, stayed in the ambulance. Both
vehicles then headed for Erais Farm situated in Barangay Curba, which was owned by
Mayor Antonio Sanchez of Calauan, Laguna.
The two youngsters were then brought inside the resthouse where Eileen was taken to
the Mayor’s room. Allan was badly beaten up by Luis, Boy, Ama and Medialdea and
thereafter thrown out of the resthouse. At around 1:00 a.m. of the next day, a crying
Eileen was dragged out of the resthouse by Luis and Medialdea – her hair disheveled,
mouth covered by a handkerchief, hands still tied and stripped of her shorts. Eileen and
Allan were then loaded in the Tamaraw van by Medialdea, et. al. and headed for Calauan,
followed closely by the ambulance. En route to Calauan, gunfire was heard from the van.
The van pulled over whereupon Kawit dragged Allan, whose head was already drenched
in blood, out of the vehicle onto the road and finished him off with a single gunshot from
his armalite.
The ambulance and van then sped away. Upon reaching a sugarcane field in Sitio Paputok,
Kilometro 74 of Barangay Mabacan, Eileen was gang-raped by Luis Corcolon, Medialdea,
Rogelio Corcolon, Ama, Brion and Kawit. After Kawit’s turn, Luis Corcolon shot Eileen with
his baby armalite. Moments later, all 8 men boarded the ambulance and proceeded to
Calauan, leaving the Tamaraw van with Eileen’s remains behind. Initially, the crime was
attributed to one Kit Alqueza, a son of a feared general (Dictador Alqueza). Luis and
Rogelio Corcolon were also implicated therein. However, further investigation, and
forensic findings, pointed to the group of Mayor Sanchez. Centeno and Malabanan
bolstered the prosecution's theory.
On 11 March 1995, Judge Harriet O. Demetriou of the Regional Trial Court (Pasig City,
Branch 70) found Mayor Sanchez, Medialdea, Ama, Brion, Luis Corcolon, Rogelio Corcolon
and Kawit guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape with homicide, ordering
them to pay Eileen Sarmenta the amount of P50,000 and additionally, the amount of
P700,000.00 to the heirs of Eileen Sarmenta and Allan Gomez as additional indemnity
On 25 January 1999, the Supreme Court, through Justice Martinez, affirmed in toto the
judgment of conviction rendered by the trial court. Antonio Sanchez, Zoilo Ama, Baldwin
Brion and Pepito Kawit seasonably filed their respective motions for reconsideration. The
Office of the Solicitor General filed its Comment on 6 December 1999. Sanchez avers that
he is a victim of trial and conviction by publicity, besides claims that principal witness
Centeno and Malabanan lack credibility, that the testimony of his 13- year old daughter
should have been given full faith and credit, and that the gargantuan damages awarded
have no factual and legal bases. Ama, Brion and Kawit maintain that Centeno and
Malabanan were sufficiently impeached by their inconsistent statements pertain to
material and crucial points of the events at issue, besides that independent and
disinterested witnesses have destroyed the prosecution’s version of events. On 2
February 1999, Justice Martinez retired in accordance with AM 99-8-09. The motions for
reconsideration was assigned to Justice Melo for study and preparation of the
appropriate action on 18 September 2001.
Issue: Whether the publicity of the case impaired the impartiality of the judge handling
the case.
Held: Pervasive publicity is not per se prejudicial to the right of an accused to fair trial.
The mere fact that the trial of Mayor Sanchez, et. al., was given a day-to-day, gavel-to-
gavel coverage does not by itself prove that publicity so permeated the mind of the trial
judge and impaired his impartiality. The right of an accused to a fair trial is not
incompatible to a free press. Responsible reporting enhances an accused's right to a fair
trial. The press does not simply publish information about trials but guards against the
miscarriage of justice by subjecting the police, prosecutors, and judicial processes to
extensive public scrutiny and criticism. Our judges are learned in the law and trained to
disregard off-court evidence and on camera performances of parties to a litigation. Their
mere exposure to publications and publicity stunts does not per se fatally infect their
impartiality. To warrant a finding of prejudicial publicity, there must be allegation and
proof that the judges have been unduly influenced by the barrage of publicity. Records
herein do not show that the trial judge developed actual bias against Mayor Sanchez, et.
al., as a consequence of the extensive media coverage of the pre-trial and trial of his case.
The totality of circumstances of the case does not prove that the trial judge acquired a
fixed position as a result of prejudicial publicity which is incapable of change even by
evidence presented during the trial. Mayor Sanchez, et. al., has the burden to prove this
actual bias and he has not discharged the burden.