Professional Documents
Culture Documents
102 PP v. ANDAN
102 PP v. ANDAN
SYLLABUS
DECISION
PER CURIAM : p
The prosecution established that on February 19, 1994 at about 4:00 P.M., in
Concepcion Subdivision, Baliuag, Bulacan, Marianne Guevarra, twenty years of age and a
second-year student at the Fatima School of Nursing, left her home for her school
dormitory in Valenzuela, Metro Manila. She was to prepare for her nal examinations on
February 21, 1994. Marianne wore a striped blouse and faded denim pants and brought
with her two bags containing her school uniforms, some personal effects and more than
P2,000.00 in cash.
Marianne was walking along the subdivision when appellant invited her inside his
house. He used the pretext that the blood pressure of his wife's grandmother should be
taken. Marianne agreed to take her blood pressure as the old woman was her distant
relative. She did not know that nobody was inside the house. Appellant then punched her in
the abdomen, brought her to the kitchen and raped her. His lust sated, appellant dragged
the unconscious girl to an old toilet at the back of the house and left her there until dark.
Night came and appellant pulled Marianne, who was still unconscious, to their backyard.
The yard had a pigpen bordered on one side by a six-foot high concrete fence. On the other
side was a vacant lot. Appellant stood on a bench beside the pigpen and then lifted and
draped the girl's body over the fence to transfer it to the vacant lot. When the girl moved,
he hit her head with a piece of concrete block. He heard her moan and hit her again on the
face. After silence reigned, he pulled her body to the other side of the fence, dragged it
towards a shallow portion of the lot and abandoned it. 2
At 11:00 A.M. of the following day, February 20, 1994, the body of Marianne was
discovered. She was naked from the chest down with her brassiere and T-shirt pulled
toward her neck. Nearby was found a panty with a sanitary napkin.
The autopsy conducted by Dr. Alberto Bondoc revealed that Marianne died of
"traumatic injuries" sustained as follows:
"1. Abrasions:
2. Abrasions/contusions:
3. Hematoma:
4. Lacerated wounds:
4.2 face, from right cheek below the zygoma to midline lower
jaw, 4 inches.
5. Fractures:
7. External genitalia
Marianne's gruesome death drew public attention and prompted Mayor Cornelio
Trinidad of Baliuag to form a crack team of police o cers to look for the criminal.
Searching the place where Marianne's body was found, the policemen recovered a broken
piece of concrete block stained with what appeared to be blood. They also found a pair of
denim pants and a pair of shoes which were identified as Marianne's. 4
Appellant's nearby house was also searched by the police who found bloodstains on
the wall of the pigpen in the backyard. They interviewed the occupants of the house and
learned from Romano Calma, the stepbrother of appellant's wife, that accused-appellant
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com
also lived there but that he, his wife and son left without a word. Calma surrendered to the
police several articles consisting of pornographic pictures, a pair of wet short pants with
some reddish brown stain, a towel also with the stain, and a wet T-shirt. The clothes were
found in the laundry hamper inside the house and allegedly belonged to appellant. 5
The police tried to locate appellant and learned that his parents live in Barangay
Tangos, Baliuag, Bulacan. On February 24 at 11:00 P.M., a police team led by Mayor
Trinidad traced appellant in his parents' house. They took him aboard the patrol jeep and
brought him to the police headquarters where he was interrogated. Initially, appellant
denied any knowledge of Marianne's death. However, when the police confronted him with
the concrete block, the victim's clothes and the bloodstains found in the pigpen, appellant
relented and said that his neighbors, Gilbert Larin and Reynaldo Dizon, killed Marianne and
that he was merely a lookout. He also said that he knew where Larin and Dizon hid the two
bags of Marianne. 6 Immediately, the police took appellant to his house. Larin and Dizon,
who were rounded up earlier, were likewise brought there by the police. Appellant went to
an old toilet at the back of the house, leaned over a ower pot and retrieved from a canal
under the pot, two bags which were later identi ed as belonging to Marianne. Thereafter,
photographs were taken of appellant and the two other suspects holding the bags. 7
Appellant and the two suspects were brought back to the police headquarters. The
following day, February 25, a physical examination was conducted on the suspects by the
Municipal Health Officer, Dr. Orpha Patawaran. 8 Appellant was found to sustain:
"HEENT: with multiple scratches on the neck Rt side. Chest and back: with
abrasions (scratches at the back). Extremities: freshly-healed wound along index
finger 1.5 cm. in size Lt." 9
By this time, people and media representatives were already gathered at the police
headquarters awaiting the results of the investigation. Mayor Trinidad arrived and
proceeded to the investigation room. Upon seeing the mayor, appellant approached him
and whispered a request that they talk privately. The mayor led appellant to the o ce of
the Chief of Police and there, appellant broke down and said "Mayor, patawarin mo ako! I
will tell you the truth. I am the one who killed Marianne." The mayor opened the door of the
room to let the public and media representatives witness the confession. The mayor rst
asked for a lawyer to assist appellant but since no lawyer was available he ordered the
proceedings photographed and videotaped. 1 0 In the presence of the mayor, the police,
representatives of the media and appellant's own wife and son, appellant confessed his
guilt. He disclosed how he killed Marianne and volunteered to show them the place where
he hid her bags. He asked for forgiveness from Larin and Dizon whom he falsely implicated
saying he did it because of ill-feelings against them. 1 1 He also said that the devil entered
his mind because of the pornographic magazines and tabloid he read almost everyday. 1 2
After his confession, appellant hugged his wife and son and asked the mayor to help him.
1 3 His confession was captured on videotape and covered by the media nationwide. 1 4
Appellant was detained at the police headquarters. The next two days, February 26
and 27, more newspaper, radio and television reporters came. Appellant was again
interviewed and he affirmed his confession to the mayor and reenacted the crime. 1 5
On arraignment, however, appellant entered a plea of "not guilty." He testi ed that in
the afternoon of February 19, 1994 he was at his parent's house in Barangay Tangos
attending the birthday party of his nephew. He, his wife and son went home after 5:00 P.M.
His wife cooked dinner while he watched their one-year old son. They all slept at 8:00 P.M.
and woke up the next day at 6:00 in the morning. His wife went to Manila to collect some
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com
debts while he and his son went to his parents' house where he helped his father cement
the oor of the house. His wife joined them in the afternoon and they stayed there until
February 24, 1994 when he was picked up by the police. 1 6
Appellant was brought by the police to a hotel at Bagong Nayon, Baliuag. In one of
the rooms, the policemen covered his face with a bedsheet and kicked him repeatedly.
They coerced him to confess that he raped and killed Marianne. When he refused, they
pushed his head into a toilet bowl and injected something into his buttocks. Weakened,
appellant confessed to the crime. Thereafter, appellant was taken to his house where he
saw two of his neighbors, Larin and Dizon. He was ordered by the police to go to the old
toilet at the back of the house and get two bags from under the ower pot. Fearing for his
life, appellant did as he was told. 17 cdt
In a decision dated August 4, 1994, the trial court convicted appellant and
sentenced him to death pursuant to Republic Act No. 7659. The trial court also ordered
appellant to pay the victim's heirs P50,000.00 as death indemnity, P71,000.00 as actual
burial expenses and P100,000.00 as moral damages, thus:
"WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, Pablito Andan y Hernandez alias
"Bobby" is found guilty by proof beyond a scintilla of doubt of the crime charged
in the Information (Rape with Homicide) and penalized in accordance with R.A.
No. 7659 (Death Penalty Law) Sec. 11, Par. 8, classifying this offense as one of
the heinous crimes and hereby sentences him to suffer the penalty of DEATH; to
indemnify the family of Marianne Guevarra the amount of P50,000.00 for the
death of Marianne Guevarra and P71,000.00 as actual burial and incidental
expenses and P100,000.00 as moral damages. After automatic review of this
case and the decision becomes final and executory, the sentence be carried out.
SO ORDERED." 1 8
The trial court based its decision convicting appellant on the testimonies of the
three policemen of the investigating team, the mayor of Baliuag and four news reporters to
whom appellant gave his extrajudicial oral confessions. It was also based on photographs
and video footages of appellant's confessions and reenactments of the commission of the
crime.
(2) ...
(4) . . ."
Plainly, any person under investigation for the commission of an offense shall have
the right (1) to remain silent; (2) to have competent and independent counsel preferably of
his own choice; and (3) to be informed of such rights. These rights cannot be waived
except in writing and in the presence of counsel. 2 0 Any confession or admission obtained
in violation of this provision is inadmissible in evidence against him. 2 1 The exclusionary
rule is premised on the presumption that the defendant is thrust into an unfamiliar
atmosphere and runs through menacing police interrogation procedures where the
potentiality for compulsion, physical and psychological, is forcefully apparent. 2 2 The
incommunicado character of custodial interrogation or investigation also obscures a later
judicial determination of what really transpired. 2 3
It should be stressed that the rights under Section 12 are accorded to "[a]ny person
under investigation for the commission of an offense." An investigation begins when it is
no longer a general inquiry into an unsolved crime but starts to focus on a particular
person as a suspect, i.e., when the police investigator starts interrogating or exacting a
confession from the suspect in connection with an alleged offense. 24 As intended by the
1971 Constitutional Convention, this covers "investigation conducted by police authorities
which will include investigations conducted by the municipal police, the PC and the NBI and
such other police agencies in our government." 25
When the police arrested appellant, they were no longer engaged in a general inquiry
about the death of Marianne. Indeed, appellant was already a prime suspect even before
the police found him at his parents' house. This is clear from the testimony of SPO4 Danilo
S. Bugay, the police chief investigator of the crime, viz:
"COURT How did you come about in concluding that it was accused who did this
act?
WITNESS First, the place where Marianne was last found is at the backyard of the
house of the accused. Second, there were blood stains at the pigpen, and
third, when we asked Romano Calma who were his other companions in
the house, he said that, it was Pablito Andan who cannot be found at that
time and whose whereabouts were unknown, sir.
A Yes, sir.
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com
Q You went looking for Pablito Andan?
A Yes, sir.
A At the police station, sir, he told us that he hid the two (2) bags beneath the
canal of the toilet.
Q In other words, you were given information where these two (2) bags were
located?
A Yes, sir.
Q And upon being informed where the two (2) bags could be located what
did you do?
Q And did you see actually those two (2) bags before the accused pointed to
the place where the bags were located?
A After he removed the broken pots with which he covered the canal, he really
showed where the bags were hidden underneath the canal, sir." 2 8
The victim's bags were the fruits of appellant's uncounselled confession to the
police. They are tainted evidence, hence also inadmissible. 2 9
The police detained appellant after his initial confession. The following day, Mayor
Trinidad visited the appellant. Appellant approached the mayor and requested for a private
talk. They went inside a room and appellant confessed that he alone committed the crime.
He pleaded for forgiveness. Mayor Trinidad testified, viz:
"Mayor Trinidad: . . . During the investigation when there were already many
people from the media, Andan whispered something to me and requested
that he be able to talk to me alone, so what I did was that, I brought him
inside the office of the chief of police.
Private Prosecutor Principe: And so what happened inside the o ce of the Chief
of Police, mayor?
Q During that time that Pablito Andan whispered to you that he will tell you
something and then you responded by bringing him inside the o ce of the
Chief of Police and you stated that he admitted that he killed Marianne . . .
Court: He said to you the following words . . .
Atty. Principe: He said to you the following words "Mayor, patawarin mo ako! Ako
ang pumatay kay Marianne," was that the only admission that he told you?
A The admission was made twice. The rst one was, when we were alone
and the second one was before the media people, sir.
Q What else did he tell you when you were inside the room of the Chief of
Police?
A These were the only things that he told me, sir. I stopped him from making
further admissions because I wanted the media people to hear what he
was going to say, sir." 3 1
A The uncle was there including the barangay captain whose name I cannot
recall anymore. A barangay captain of the place, I don't know if it is the
place of the crime scene or in the place where Marianne Guevarra resides
but . . . All throughout the scene inside the o ce of the Station
Commander, there was no air of any force or any threatening nature of
investigation that was being done on the suspect, that is why, I was able to
talk to him freely and in a voluntary manner he admitted to me that he was
the one who raped and killed, so we went to the next stage of
accompanying me to the scene of the crime where the reenactment and
everything that transpired during the killing of Marianne Guevarra.
Q Before you started that interview, did you inform or ask permission from
the accused Pablito Andan that you were going to interview him?
A Yes, sir.
xxx xxx xxx
A Yes, sir.
Q At this time, did you see the wife of the accused, Pablito Andan?
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com
A Yes, sir, I saw her at the place where the body of Guevarra was recovered.
Q How many relatives of accused Pablito Andan were present, more or less?
A There were many, sir, because there were many wailing, weeping and
crying at that time when he was already taken in the patrol jeep of the
Baliuag police, sir.
Q Now, Mr. Mauricio, upon reaching the scene of the crime in Concepcion,
Baliuag, Bulacan, what transpired?
A Yes, sir. 3 9
A The people present before the crowd that included the mayor, the deputy
chief of police, several of the policemen, the group of Inday Badiday and
several other persons. I asked the suspect after the mayor presented the
suspect to us and after the suspect admitted that he was the one who
killed Marianne. I reiterated the question to the suspect. Are you aware that
this offense which is murder with . . . rape with murder is a capital offense?
And you could be sentenced to death of this? And he said, Yes. So do you
really admit that you were the one who did it and he repeated it, I mean, say
the affirmative answer.
Q And that was in the presence of the crowd that you mentioned a while
ago?
A Yes, yes, sir. And if I remember it right, as I took my camera to take some
pictures of the suspect, the mayor, the policemen and several others, I
heard the group of Inday Badiday asking the same questions from the
suspect and the suspect answered the same.
Q Also in the presence of so many people that you mentioned?
A I asked him the question, after asking him the question, "Ikaw ba talaga
and gumawa ng pagpatay at pag-rape sa kay Marianne?" Ang sagot nya,
"Oo." "Alam mo ba itong kasalanang ito, kamatayan ang hatol, inaamin mo
pa ba na ikaw ang gumawa sa pagpatay at pag-rape kay Marianne?"
Sagot pa rin siya ng "Oo."
xxx xxx xxx
A I asked him, your Honor and the reason he told me was because a devil
gripped his mind and because of that according to him, your Honor, were
the pornographic magazines, pornographic tabloids which he, according to
him, reads almost everyday before the crime.
Atty. Principe: At the time of your interview, Mr. Reporter, will you tell the court and
the public what was the physical condition of accused Pablito Andan?
A As I observed him that time there was no sign on his body that he was
really down physically and I think he was in good condition.
Court: So he was not happy about the incident?
A As I observed, your Honor, the tears were only apparent but there was no
tear that fell on his face.
Court: Was he feeling remorseful?
A The rst person that I saw there was Mayor Trinidad, policemen from
Baliuag, the chief investigator, SPO4 Bugay, and since Katipunan, the chief
of police was suspended, it was the deputy who was there, sir.
A There were many people there, sir. The place was crowded with people.
There were people from the PNP and people from Baliuag, sir.
A Roy Reyes, Orlan Mauricio arrived but he arrived late and there were people
from the radio and from TV Channel 9.
A They came late. I was the one who got the scoop first, sir.
Q You stated that the accused allowed you to interview him, was his wife
also present?
A Yes, sir, and even the son was there but I am not very sure if she was really
the wife but they were hugging each other and she was crying and from
the questions that I asked from the people there they told me that she is
the wife, sir.
Q How about the other members of the family of the accused, were they
around?
A I do not know the others, sir, but there were many people there, sir.
Q Now, according to you, you made a news item about the interview. May we
know what question did you ask and the answer.
A My first question was, is he Pablito Andan and his answer was "Yes."
A I asked him how he did the crime and he said that, he saw the victim
aboard a tricycle. He called her up. She entered the house and he boxed her
on the stomach.
Q What was the next question that you asked him?
A He also said that he raped her and he said that the reason why he killed the
victim was because he was afraid that the incident might be discovered,
sir.
Q Now, after the interview, are we correct to say that you made a news item
on that?
A Yes, sir.
Q "Ano iyon?"
A He said that he threw the cadaver to the other side of the fence, sir.
Q Did he mention how he threw the cadaver of Marianne to the other side of
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com
the fence?
Q But can you produce the news item based on that interview?
Clearly, appellant's confessions to the news reporters were given free from any
undue in uence from the police authorities. The news reporters acted as news reporters
when they interviewed appellant. 44 They were not acting under the direction and control of
the police. They were there to check appellant's confession to the mayor. They did not
force appellant to grant them an interview and reenact the commission of the crime. 45 In
fact, they asked his permission before interviewing him. They interviewed him on separate
days not once did appellant protest his innocence. Instead, he repeatedly confessed his
guilt to them. He even supplied all the details in the commission of the crime, and
consented to its reenactment. All his confessions to the news reporters were witnessed
by his family and other relatives. There was no coercive atmosphere in the interview of
appellant by the news reporters.
We rule that appellant's verbal confessions to the newsmen are not covered by
Section 12 (1) and (3) of Article III of the Constitution. The Bill of Rights does not concern
itself with the relation between a private individual and another individual. 46 It governs the
relationship between the individual and the State. The prohibitions therein are primarily
addressed to the State and its agents. They con rm that certain rights of the individual
exist without need of any governmental grant, rights that may not be taken away by
government, rights that government has the duty to protect. 47 Governmental power is not
unlimited and the Bill of Rights lays down these limitations to protect the individual against
aggression and unwarranted interference by any department of government and its
agencies. 48 cdt
In his second assigned error, appellant questions the su ciency of the medical
evidence against him. Dr. Alberto Bondoc, a Medical Specialist with the Provincial Health
O ce, conducted the rst autopsy and found no spermatozoa and no recent physical
injuries in the hymen. 4 9 Allegedly, the minimal blood found in her vagina could have been
caused by her menstruation. 5 0
We are unpersuaded. A second autopsy was conducted on March 1, 1994 by Dr.
Dominic L. Aguda, a medico-legal o cer of the National Bureau of Investigation. His
ndings a rmed the absence of spermatozoa but revealed that the victim 's hymen had
lacerations, thus:
"Hymen — contracted, tall, thin with fresh lacerations with clotted blood at
6 and 3 o'clock positions corresponding to the walls of the clock." 5 1
Dr. Aguda testi ed that the lacerations were fresh and that they may have been
caused by an object forcibly inserted into the vagina when the victim was still alive,
indicating the possibility of penetration. 5 2 His testimony is as follows:
"Witness: When I exposed the hymen, I found lacerations in this 3 o'clock and 6
o'clock position corresponding to the walls of the clock. . . .
A Yes, sir.
Q Could it not be, doctor, that these injuries you found in the vagina could
have been sustained on account of the dilation of the previous autopsy?
A Well, we presumed that if the rst doctor conducted the autopsy on the
victim which was already dead, no amount of injury or no amount of
lacerated wounds could produce blood because there is no more
circulation, the circulation had already stopped. So, I presumed that when
the doctor examined the victim with the use of forceps or retractor, vaginal
retractor, then I assumed that the victim was already dead. So it is
impossible that the lacerated wounds on the hymen were caused by those
instruments because the victim was already dead and usually in a dead
person we do not produce any bleeding.
Q What you would like to tell the Court is this: that the lacerations with
clotted blood at 6 and 3 o'clock positions corresponding to the walls of the
clock could have been in icted or could have been sustained while the
victim was alive?
A Yes, sir.
Q This clotted blood, according to you, found at the edges of the lacerated
wounds, now will you kindly go over the sketch you have just drawn and
indicate the edges of the lacerated wounds where you found the clotted
blood?
A This is the lacerated wound at 3 o'clock and this is the lacerated wound at
6 o'clock. I found the blood clot at this stage. The clotted blood are found
on the edges of the lacerated wounds, sir.
4. TSN of April 19, 1994, pp. 47-51; TSN of April 20, 1994, pp. 45, 55-56; Exhibits "A," "C" and "I."
5. Exhibits "J," "K," "L," and "N."
11. TSN of May 2, 1994, p. 88; TSN of May 20, 1994, pp. 13, 50.
12. TSN of May 13, 1994, pp. 78-82.
20. This provision was taken from Section 20, Article IV of the 1973 Constitution which adopted
the ruling in Miranda v. Arizona , 384 U.S. 436, 16 L. Ed. 2d 694 [1966] and Escobedo v.
Illinois, 378 U.S. 478, 12 L. ed. 2d 977 [1964].
21. People v. Enrile , 222 SCRA 586 [1993]; Sampaga v. People , 215 SCRA 839 [1992]; People v.
Penero, 213 SCRA 536 [1992].
22. Bernas, The 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines: A Commentary, p. 410
[1996]; Miranda v. Arizona, supra, at 457.
23. Miranda v. Arizona, supra, at 445; Cummings v. State, 341 A. 2d 294, 298 [1975].
24. People v. Macam , 238 SCRA 306 [1994]; People v. Bandula , 232 SCRA 566, 575 [1994];
People v. de Guzman, 224 SCRA 93 [1993]; People v. Olvis, 154 SCRA 513 [1987].
25. Bernas, supra, at 411.
29. People v. Alicando, 251 SCRA 293 [1995]; People v. Burgos, 144 SCRA 1, 17-19 [1986].
30. TSN of May 13, 1994, pp. 20-21.
33. Leuschner v. State, 397 A. 2d 622 [1979]; Vines v. State , 394 A. 2d 809 [1978]; Cummings v.
State, 341 A. 2d 294 [1975]; Howell v. State , 247 A. 2d 291 [1968]; Statements made by
defendant while in custody of police o cers but not pursuant to any questioning by
o cers were properly admitted as spontaneously volunteered statements — State v.
Matlock, 289 N.W. 2d 625 [1980]; State v. Red Feather, 289 N.W. 2d 768 [1980].
34. Baysinger v. State , 550 S.W. 2d 445, 447 [1977], where a defendant, not in custody, in
talking with the sheriff wanted the sheriff for a con dant instead of a law enforcement
o cer, his admissions on an incriminating taped conversation did not violate the 4th,
5th and 6th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution and are thus admissible.
35. Aballe v. People , 183 SCRA 196, 205 [1990]; People v. Dy , 158 SCRA 111, 123-124 [1988];
People v. Taylaran, 108 SCRA 373, 378-379 [1981]; see also People v. Rogers , 422 N.Y.S.
18, 48 N.Y. 2d 167, 397 N.E. 2d 709, 714 [1979].
36. People v. Barlis, 231 SCRA 426, 441 [1994]; People v. Layuso, 175 SCRA 47, 53 [1989].
3 7 . People v. Vizcarra , 115 SCRA 743, 752 [1982], the accused, under custody, gave
spontaneous answers to a televised interview by several press reporters in the o ce of
the chief of the CIS.
38. TSN of April 27, 1994, pp. 11, 13-14; Exhibit "S."
4 4 . Navallo v. Sandiganbayan , 234 SCRA 175, 183-184 [1994] — We ruled that an audit
examiner is not a law enforcement officer nor did he, in this case, act as one.
45. cf. People v. Olvis, 154 SCRA 513, 525-526 [1987] where several accused were forced by the
police to reenact the commission of the crime.
47. People v. Maqueda , 242 SCRA 565, 590 [1995]; Quinn v. Buchanan , 298 S.W. 2d 413, 417
[1957], citing Cooley, A Treatise on the Constitutional Limitations 93, 358.
48. 16 C.J.S., Constitutional Law, Sec. 199, pp. 975-976; see also People v. Marti, supra, at 67-
68 where we ruled that the constitutional proscription against unlawful searches and
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2018 cdasiaonline.com
seizures cannot be extended to searches and seizures done by private individuals
without the intervention of police authorities; People v. Maqueda, supra, at 59 where we
held that extrajudicial admissions of an accused to a private person and to a prosecutor
in connection with the accused's plea to be utilized as a state witness were deemed
outside the scope of the provision on custodial investigation.
54. People v. Salomon, 229 SCRA 403 [1994]; People v. Empleo, 226 SCRA 454 [1993]; People v.
Magallanes, 218 SCRA 109 [1993].
55. People v. Rejano, 237 SCRA 627 [1994]; People v. Palicte, 229 SCRA 543 [1994].
56. People v. Fabro , 239 SCRA 146 [1994]; People v. Fortez , 223 SCRA 619 [1993]; People v.
Abiera, 222 SCRA 378 [1993].
57. TSN of May 2, 1994, pp. 78, 95.
58. TSN of May 2, 1994, p. 83; April 25, 1994, p. 38.
59. TSN of April 19, 1994, p. 51; TSN of May 2, 1994, p. 66; Exhibit "I."
60. TSN of May 2, 1994, pp. 53-54.
62. Exhibits "MM" and "NN," Folder of Prosecution Exhibits, pp. 43, 44.
63. Exhibits "LL" and "OO," Folder of Prosecution Exhibits, pp. 42, 45.