Republic of the Philippines

Province of Misamis Oriental

Municipality of TAGOLOAN
TAGOLOAN COMMUNITY COLLEGE
Baluarte, Tagoloan, Misamis Oriental
COLLEGE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND PUBLIC SAFETY
Member: Association of Local Colleges and Universities (ALCU)
Member: Association of Local Colleges and Universities
Commission on Accreditation (ALCUCOA)

POSITION PAPER
I, Hasnor B. Laguindab, 21 yrs. old, single, Filipino, resident

of Zone 8, Sihayon, Sta. Cruz, Jasaan, Misamis Oriental and a

Criminology Student 2C of Tagoloan Community College,

Baluarte, Tagoloan, hereby depose and state;

PREFATORY STATEMENT

Post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms may start within one

month of a traumatic event, but sometimes symptoms may not
appear until years after the event. These symptoms cause
significant problems in social or work situations and in
relationships. They can also interfere with your ability to go about
your normal daily tasks.

Most people who go through traumatic events may have

temporary difficulty adjusting and coping, but with time and good
self-care, they usually get better. If the symptoms get worse, last
for months or even years, and interfere with your day-to-day
functioning, you may have PTSD.

1
PTSD symptoms are generally grouped into four types: intrusive
memories, avoidance, negative changes in thinking and mood,
and changes in physical and emotional reactions. Symptoms can
vary over time or vary from person to person.

Being a (PTSD) is justifiable for him to act such manner because

of his suffering PTSD. Because in the first place he is one of the
victim of this called PTSD. And some people with PTSD may not
always have control over their behavior so by that he didn’t know
what manner wound he do if it is good or bad due to his
experience he can act some manners, that is different from his
old manners. He cannot recognize the old he is because of the
PTSD.

And also this person with PTSD they will always feel vulnerable
and and safe, this can lead to danger, irritability, depression,
mistrust, and some. But the guidelines is concern with the care
people

THE PARTIES

The Quezon City (QC) Police and the heirs of Army Cpl. Winston
Ragos filed homicide charges against Police MSgt. Daniel Florendo
Jr. for the fatal shooting of the 34-year-old soldier who was
retired due to post-traumatic stress disorder contracted while on
military duty.

2
Ragos was accorded military honors, including a 21-gun salute,
during his burial on April 26 at the heroes’ cemetery, the Libingan
ng mga Bayani.

Draped over his casket was a Philippine flag which was folded and
handed to his grieving mother at the end of the ceremony.

Media reported that Ragos was sipping soda outside his home in
QC when five policemen accosted him for violating lockdown
rules. Allegedly, he raised his hands in surrender but the cops,
suspecting he was armed, ordered him to drop to the ground.

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

The Quezon City Police District (QCPD) filed a homicide complaint

against Master Sergeant Daniel Florendo Jr, the cop who killed
former soldier Winston Ragos.

This was established to Rappler by QCPD chief Brigadier General

Ronnie Montejo in a text message on Friday, April 24. They filed
the complaint the same day.

The QCPD filed the case after Florendo shot dead Ragos near a
quarantine control point in Barangay Pasong Putik on Tuesday,
April 21.

Florendo and Ragos engaged in an argument in the area.

Florendo ordered Ragos to surrender for allegedly violating
quarantine rules.

3
Ragos raised his hands and turned his back on the cops.
However, Florendo and the police trainees who were with him at
the control point did not cuff him.

The two continued to argue, until Ragos tried to reach into a

sling bag he wore. This led to Florendo shooting Ragos twice
which led to his death.

The killing of Ragos ignited fierce exchanges on social media

whether the killing was justified.

People have varying opinions, but it is clear in existing laws and

jurisprudence, including relevant sections of the Philippine
National Police (PNP) manuals, that Ragos’ killing is unjustifiable
and therefore illegal.

Rule No. 8 of the PNP Operations Manual under "Use of Firearm

When Justified" states that:

“The use of firearm is justified if the offender poses imminent

danger of causing death or injury to the police officer or other
persons. The use of firearm is also justified under the doctrines of
self-defense, defense of a relative, and defense of a stranger.
However, one who resorts to self-defense must face a real threat
on his life and peril sought to be avoided must be actual,
imminent and real. Unlawful aggression should be present for
self-defense to be considered as a justifying circumstance.”

THE FACTS

4
 The Philippine Army ordered an investigation into the killing of ex
corporal Winston Ragos in an altercation with police in Quezon
City last Tuesday, April 21, Army spokesperson Colonel Ramon
Zagala said in a statement on Thursday, April 23.

"Lieutenant General Gilbert Gapay, commanding general of the

Philippine Army, ordered an investigation to be conducted by the
Army Judge Advocate in coordination with the Philippine National
Police in order that justice be given to the death of Ragos,"
Zagala said.

At around 2:30 pm on Tuesday, Ragos angered cops at a

checkpoint along Maligaya Drive in Barangay Pasong Putik,
Quezon City, for being outdoors despite the coronavirus
lockdown.

Although raising his arms in surrender, Ragos defied the cops'

orders to drop on the ground. When he turned to face them and
appeared to be reaching for something in his sling bag, Police
Master Sergeant Daniel Florendo Jr shot him twice in the torso.
Ragos was then brought to the Commonwealth Hospital where he
was declared dead at 5:57 pm.

Witnesses had insisted to the cops that Ragos was mentally ill.
The military confirmed this on Thursday, saying the former
corporal had post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

Calls for justice for a retired soldier was launched online after a

Quezon City cop shot him dead for allegedly violating quarantine
rules, videos of which circulated and were criticized online. 

A former soldier Private First-Class Winston Ragos was gunned

down at 2:30 pm on Tuesday in Barangay Pasong Putik, Quezon
5
City by a police officer identified as Police Master Sergeant Daniel
Florendo Jr. 

The Philippine Army verified that Ragos previously served in the

military but was given a disability discharge in November 2017
after being diagnosed with a mental disorder.

Ragos’ family specified that he suffered from post-traumatic

stress disorder after being assigned at the Marawi Siege in 2017.

When the news and videos of shooting incident broke, the QC

cop’s move to shoot Ragos dead drew mixed reactions on social
media. Some Filipinos supported the police officer’s

actions to defend himself. Others, however, denounced the

killing, saying that it was unnecessary to shoot Ragos dead. 

Human rights group Karapatan pointed out that based on the

available footage, there was enough time to disarm or neutralize
Ragos during the confrontation. Instead, the local police officer
chose to kill him.

“Footage from the incident clearly show that the police had ample
time, opportunity and personnel to de-escalate and even
potentially disarm the retired soldier without disproportionately
resorting to the use of lethal force; instead, they shot him not
only once, but twice,” the group said.

ISSUES
I
6
 Whether or not the action of PMSG Florendo, is in
accordance of the PNP Police Operational Procedure

II
Whether or not, PMSG Florendo had made a good
judgment call in shooting Ragos

III
Whether or not the doctrine of self-defense under
Article 11 of the Revise Penal Code is present on this
particular
situation?

IV
Whether or not the elements of Self-defense are
totally present on this situation

V
Whether or not the doctrine of lawful performance of
a duty under Article 11 of the Revised Penal Code is
present on this particular situation

VI
Whether or not an imminent danger was present
during the incident that would justify the killing of
Ragos.

VII
If you are in the position of PMSG Florendo, what will be
your course of action? Would you do same as what
PMSG Florendo did to defend your life or would you
shoot Winston Ragos on the non-fatal of his body to see
to it that lives are saved including of Ragos.

ARGUMENT AND DISCUSSION

7
 I
Whether or not the action of PMSG Florendo, is in
accordance of the PNP Police Operational Procedure

Under the PNP Guidebook on Human Rights-based policing, the

incident could fall into the category in which the Ex-soldier,
corporal Winston ragos, was assaultive and that the use of lethal
firearm is “necessary and lawful.” And to support my answer
there are jurisprudence below.

THE incident at a checkpoint in Quezon City, where PMSg. Daniel

Florendo shot dead former Army Cpl. Winston Ragos, continues to
create controversy among the citizenry.

The citizens are divided equally on both sides — whether Florendo

was justified or not in shooting Ragos.

Some netizens said there were several uniformed policemen at

the checkpoint and they could have overpowered Ragos. But of
the uniformed cops at the checkpoint, only Florendo had a gun as
the others were on-the-job-training rookies and were unarmed.

Now, tell me: if you’re an unarmed policeman and you think that
the person you’re about to arrest has a weapon, will you get near
him or keep at a distance?

The video showed that Ragos was reaching for something in his
waist, prompting Florendo to shoot him.

The video also showed that before Ragos was shot, Florendo had
ordered him to lie flat on the ground, but the order was

8
disobeyed. Many netizens, mostly armchair legal experts, said
Ragos should have been tackled and not shot.

As a former reporter who covered the police beat for many years,
I say again without batting an eyelash that the policeman was
justified in shooting the ex-soldier.

As to whether Ragos was armed or unarmed is out of the

question.

My experience in the police beat tells me that the .38 caliber

revolver “found” in Ragos could have been “planted” after the
cops saw that he was unarmed.

The .38 caliber crude, homemade revolver is the police’s favorite

planting weapon, again, based on my experience in the police
beat. Here’s my other take on why the revolver found on Ragos
was planted: a soldier’s favorite handgun is a .45 caliber pistol
because he’s used to carrying it.

But after saying the above, I still think that Florendo was justified
in shooting Ragos because he based his assumption that the ex-
soldier was armed on the latter’s act of reaching for something in
his waist.

Florendo also did not know that Ragos was an ex-soldier and
suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

As I said in the last column, the Armed Forces of the Philippines

(AFP) is to blame for not confining Ragos at the V. Luna Hospital
or the Veterans Memorial Hospital when it knew that he was
suffering from shell shock.

The Army said he was never assigned in Marawi City during the
siege, but fought New People’s Army guerrillas in Bicol. It added

9
that Ragos was honorably discharged after he was found to be
suffering from PTSD.

Then, why was he not confined in a military hospital and released

only after he was cured?

The military has a lot of explaining to do on why Ragos and

others like him are not being treated for PTSD in the United
States, war veterans are released from military hospitals only
after they are cured of PTSD. Let Ragos’ death be a wake-up call
for the AFP and the Philippine National Police to take care of their
battle-scarred personnel and veterans.

II
Whether or not, PMSG Florendo had made a good
judgment call in shooting Ragos

At the time there was no need for warning shot and our police
acted in accordance with the people operational procedure. We
can see that gave verbal command, repeatedly warned but still
provoked the suspect motion. The incident was called a
judgement call based on our police finding that his life was in
danger and the suspect was shot him. And to support my answer
again there are jurisprudence or statement below.

A Quezon City policeman who shot dead a "mentally challenged"

quarantine violator is facing criminal and administrative probes,
the Quezon City Police District (QCPD) said on Wednesday, April
22.

10
Police Master Sergeant Daniel Florendo Jr gunned down a certain
Winston Ragos on Tuesday, April 21, at around 2:30 pm near a
quarantine control point along Maligaya Drive in Barangay Pasong
Putik, Quezon City.

Cops said Ragos "approached... and started shouting and uttering

intimidating words" against Florendo and police trainees with him
at the checkpoint. The law enforcers then told Ragos to go home.

Ragos allegedly "ignored" the cops and identified himself as a

former soldier. Cops said Ragos carried a loaded caliber 38
revolver inside his sling bag, and Florendo "cautiously approached
Ragos."

A video of the incident was obtained by Rappler, showing

Florendo shouting at Ragos, telling him to yield. Ragos raised his
arms and turned his back. But Ragos double backed to face
Florendo while reaching for something in his sling bag. It turned
out, Ragos was about to pull out a pistol in the bag, police said.

Florendo then shot Ragos twice, causing him to stagger. Ragos

stood up, limped for a few seconds, before falling to the ground
Cops brought Ragos to the Commonwealth Hospital but he was
declared dead at 5:57 pm.

In a text message to Rappler, Florendo's commander, Lieutenant

Colonel Jeffrey Bilaro said Ragos was "mentally challenged," but
they "belatedly found out." It was unclear what mental illness
affected Ragos.

Police confirmed that Ragos was formerly enlisted with the Army.
Bilaro said Ragos was discharged through "compulsory
retirement" due to "war shock."

11
"We can say that what he (Florendo) did was a 'judgment call.'
Still, we will investigate the incident," QCPD chief Brigadier
General Ronnie Montejo said in a statement.

Under police rules, cops should "neutralize" suspects who

threaten their lives. This could mean disabling the suspects, or in
less ideal situations, killing them. President Rodrigo Duterte said
in an earlier speech to "shoot dead" unruly violators, particularly
those who threaten a cop's life.

According to the Philippine National Police's manual on

operational procedures, in the event of a confrontation with an
armed offender, cops should only apply "necessary and
reasonable force to overcome resistance put up by the offender;
subdue the clear and imminent danger posed by him; or to justify
the force/act under the principles of self-defense, defense of
relative, or defense of stranger."

This has taken on a new meaning under the Duterte

administration, specifically since the beginning of the anti-drug
campaign, where cops have been advised to "neutralize" suspects
who threaten their lives. This could mean disabling the suspects,
or in less ideal situations, killing them.

Duterte took this further by saying in an earlier speech to "shoot

dead" unruly violators, particularly those who threaten a cop's life

III
Whether or not the doctrine of self-defense under
Article 11 of the Revise Penal Code is present on this
particular situation?

12
In situation where there is danger, that’s just two things. Your life
or the lives of others when needed, but as much as possible we
really show maximum tolerance. And all PNP have been through
training, and accountable for everything they do. What he has
done is say that those event are through his self-defense instinct.
To support my answer there are article 11 and 12 below.

JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES

AND CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH EXEMPT FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY

Art. 11. Justifying circumstances. — The following do not incur any

criminal liability:

Anyone who acts in defense of his person or rights, provided that

the following circumstances concur;

First. Unlawful aggression. chanrobles virtual law library

Second. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent

or repel it. chanrobles virtual law library

Third. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person

defending himself. Chanrobles virtual law library

Anyone who acts in defense of the person or rights of his spouse,

ascendants, descendants, or legitimate, natural or adopted
brothers or sisters, or his relatives by affinity in the same degrees
and that consanguinity within the fourth civil degree, provided
that the first and second requisites prescribed in the next
preceding circumstance are present, and the further requisite, in
case the revocation was given by the person attacked, that the
one making defense had no part therein. Chanrobles virtual law
library

13
Anyone who acts in defense of the person or rights of a stranger,
provided that the first and second requisites mentioned in the
first circumstance of this Art. are present and that the person
defending be not induced by revenge, resentment, or other evil
motive. Chanrobles virtual law library

Any person who, in order to avoid an evil or injury, does not act
which causes damage to another, provided that the following
requisites are present;

First. That the evil sought to be avoided actually exists;

Second. That the injury feared be greater than that done to avoid
it;

Third. That there be no other practical and less harmful means of

preventing it. chanrobles virtual law library

Any person who acts in the fulfillment of a duty or in the lawful

exercise of a right or office. Chanrobles virtual law library

Any person who acts in obedience to an order issued by a

superior for some lawful purpose. Chanrobles virtual law library

Art. 12. Circumstances which exempt from criminal liability . — the

following are exempt from criminal liability:

An imbecile or an insane person, unless the latter has acted

during a lucid interval. Chanrobles virtual law library

When the imbecile or an insane person has committed an act

which the law defines as a felony (delito), the court shall order
his confinement in one of the hospitals or asylums established for
persons thus afflicted, which he shall not be permitted to leave

14
without first obtaining the permission of the same court.
Chanrobles virtual law library

A person under nine years of age. Chanrobles virtual law library

A person over nine years of age and under fifteen, unless he has
acted with discernment, in which case, such minor shall be
proceeded against in accordance with the provisions of Art. 80 of
this Code. Chanrobles virtual law library

When such minor is adjudged to be criminally irresponsible, the

court, in conformably with the provisions of this and the
preceding paragraph, shall commit him to the care and custody of
his family who shall be charged with his surveillance and
education otherwise, he shall be committed to the care of some
institution or person mentioned in said Art. 80. chanrobles virtual
law library

Any person who, while performing a lawful act with due care,
causes an injury by mere accident without fault or intention of
causing it. chanrobles virtual law library

Any person who act under the compulsion of irresistible force.

Chanrobles virtual law library

Any person who acts under the impulse of an uncontrollable fear

of an equal or greater injury. Chanrobles virtual law library

Any person who fails to perform an act required by law, when

prevented by some lawful insuperable cause.

IV

15
 Whether or not the elements of Self-defense are
totally present on this situation

The element of self-defense is totally present on the incident

because according to the President Rodrigo duterte said
“policemen can shoot dead any violator who creates trouble”, and
President command all PNP if there is trouble or the situation
arises that people fight and your lives are on the line, shoot them
dead. To support may answer again this my statement below.

As stated previously, self-defense is a defense based on

justification. Self-defense can be a defense to assault, battery,
and criminal homicide because it always involves the use of force.
In the majority of states, self-defense is a statutory defense
(Mich. Comp. Laws, 2010). However, it can be modified or expanded
by courts on a case-by-case basis.

Most states have special requirements when the defendant uses

deadly force in self-defense. Deadly force is defined as any force
that could potentially kill. An individual does not have to actually
die for the force to be considered deadly. Examples of deadly
force are the use of a knife, gun, vehicle, or even bare hands
when there is a disparity in size between two individuals.

Self-defense can operate as a perfect or imperfect defense,

depending on the circumstances. Defendants who commit
criminal homicide justified by self-defense can be acquitted, or

16
have a murder charge reduced from first to second or third
degree, or have a charge reduced from murder to manslaughter.
Criminal homicide is discussed in detail in Chapter 9 “Criminal
Homicide”.

To successfully claim self-defense, the defendant must prove four

elements. First, with exceptions, the defendant must prove that
he or she was confronted with an unprovoked attack. Second, the
defendant must prove that the threat of injury or death was
imminent. Third, the defendant must prove that the degree of
force used in self-defense was objectively reasonable under the
circumstances. Fourth, the defendant must prove that he or she
had an objectively reasonable fear that he or she was going to be
injured or killed unless he or she used self-defense. The Model
Penal Code defines self-defense in § 3.04(1) as “justifiable when
the actor believes that such force is immediately necessary for
the purpose of protecting himself against the use of unlawful
force by such other person on the present occasion.”

V
Whether or not the doctrine of lawful performance of
a duty under Article 11 of the Revised Penal Code is
present on this particular situation

The PNP acted consequently because Ragos had respond in

aggressive manner when they ordered him to return home
violating the quarantine, and they suspected him of carrying a

17
firearm. As the cops drew their gun on Ragos, alarmed
bystanders could be heard pleading with the police not to shoot
because the man they were subduing allegedly had a mental
health problem. My jurisprudence and support my answer at
below.

The court, not the police, should determine whether the fatal
shooting of former soldier Winston Ragos is justified, the
Commission on Human Rights (CHR) said Thursday.

“We reiterate our call to allow the rule of law to prevail and let
the scrutiny of the proper courts weigh in on the question if
circumstances are justifiable to warrant the shooting which
eventually resulted to death,” CHR spokesperson and lawyer
Jacqueline de Guia said in a statement.

De Guia was referring to Ragos being shot dead by Police Master

Sergeant Daniel Florendo Jr. near a checkpoint along Maligaya
Drive in Barangay Pasok Putik, Quezon City on Wednesday. The
neighbors in the area reportedly kept telling the policemen,
including Florendo, not to engage with Florendo since the former
soldier had a mental condition

VI

Whether or not an imminent danger was present during

the incident that would justify the killing of Ragos.

18
If we look at the video clip on the incident, this is a – well we can
say self-defense. If he did, he would have pulled it out of fired,
for sure it would disgrace our police. And to support my answer
again there are jurisprudence below.

As such, ACT-CIS Party-List Rep. Niña Taduran on Sunday called

for a comprehensive psychological training among law enforcers
to address situations involving similarly-distressed individuals.

“Maximum tolerance should have been observed in dealing with

violators of the enhanced community quarantine especially at this
time when everyone’s getting agitated and depressed because of
the uncertainty of the COVID-19 situation,” said Taduran

It was obvious that Ragos was mentally ill when, according to

reports, he approached the policemen manning the checkpoint
and hurled invectives on them, for no apparent reason,” added
the former journalist.

The neophyte solon said that under Republic Act Number (RA)
11036, the rights of those who are suffering from mental illness
should be protected.

“Maybe it’s time to look at the Philippine Mental Health Act

because it does not cover how law enforcers should deal with
people who are suffering from mental illness,” Taduran noted.

Improved mental health support for the battle-scarred police and

military can also help in reducing such unfortunate situations, she
further said.

Ragos, 34, had served in battles in the provinces and was

diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder and schizophrenia.

19
He was buried with full military honors at the Libingan Ng Mga
Bayani (Heroes’ Cemetery) in Taguig City on Sunday. On the
other hand, the shooter, Police Master Sergeant Daniel Florendo
Jr., has been charged with homicide

VII
If you are in the position of PMSG Florendo, what will be
your course of action? Would you do same as what
PMSG Florendo did to defend your life or would you
shoot Winston Ragos on the non-fatal of his body to see
to it that lives are saved including of Ragos.

If I was in the position of police master sergeant Florendo, I

would do what he did in his life because he did put himself in a
good way and safe, such as self-defense because the police are
trained in what matters is that they know what they are doing
and are doing and I love my town. well in their town, so I will do
the same thing if I am in danger, I will put myself safe first
because I have a family

To support, the person defending himself must have been

attacked with actual physical force or with actual use of weapon,”
the Court said in People vs. Rubiso, where the Court rejected a self-
defense plea.

It cited previous cases where “mere thrusting of one’s hand into

his pocket as if for the purpose of drawing a weapon” was not
considered unlawful aggression or even the “cocking of a rifle
without aiming the firearm at any particular target” was not
20
deemed sufficient to conclude that one’s life was in imminent
danger.

“Hence, a threat, even if made with a weapon, or the belief that a

person was about to be attacked, is not sufficient. It is necessary
that the intent be ostensibly revealed by an act of aggression or
by some external acts showing the commencement of actual and
material unlawful aggression,” it said.

PRAYER

In the light of the foregoing, it is most respectfully

prayed that this position paper be accepted with merit.

May 10, 2020, Tagoloan, Misamis Oriental

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

__________________________________
HASNOR B. LAGUINDAB

21