LEGAL MEDICINE

Medico-legal Aspects of Physical Injuries

V. Medico-legal Aspects Physical Injuries

Physical injury is the effect of some forms of stimulus on the body. The effect may only be apparent when
the stimulus applied is insufficient to cause injury and the body resistance is great. It may be real when the
effect is visible.

The effect of the application of stimulus may be immediate or may be delayed. A thrust to the body of a
sharp pointed and sharp edged instrument will lead to the immediate production of a stab wound, while a
hit by a blunt object may cause the delayed production of a contusion.

Causes of Physical Injuries:

1. Physical violence – the effect of the application of physical violence on a person is the production of
wound. A wound is the solution of the natural continuity of any tissue of the living body. The effect of the
physical violence, however, may not always result to the production of wound, but the wound is always
the effect of physical violence.
2. Heat or cold
3. Electrical energy
4. Chemical energy
5. Radiation by Radio-active substances
6. Change of atmosphere pressure (Barotrauma)
7. Infection

A. Medico-legal classification of Wounds

1. As to Severity
a. Mortal wound – wound which is caused immediately after infliction or shortly thereafter that is
capable of causing death.
Parts of the Body where the Wounds Inflicted are considered Mortal:
(a) Heart and big blood vessels
(b) Brain and upper portion of the spinal cord
(c) Lungs
(d) Stomach, liver, spleen and intestine
b. Non-mortal wound – wound which is not capable of producing death immediately after infliction or
shortly thereafter.

2. As to the Kind of Instrument Used

a. Wound bought about by blunt instrument (contusion, hematoma, lacerated wound)
b. Wound brought about by sharp instrument
i. Sharp-edged instrument (incised wound)
ii. Sharp-pointed instrument (punctured wound)
iii. Share-edged and sharp pointed instrument (stab wound)
c. Wound brought about by tearing force (lacerated wound)
d. Wound brought about by change of atmospheric pressure (barotrauma)
e. Wound brought about by heat or cold (frostbite, burns or scald)
f. Wound brought about by chemical explosion (gunshot or shrapnel wound)
g. Wound brought about by infection

3. As to the Manner of Infliction

a. Hit – by means of bolo, blunt instrument, axe
b. Thrust or stab – bayonet dagger
c. Gunpowder explosion – projectile or shrapnel wound
d. Sliding or rubbing or abrasion

4. As regards to the Depth of the Wound

LEGMED | MOJICA | VELASCO 1

LEGAL MEDICINE
Medico-legal Aspects of Physical Injuries

a. Superficial – when the wound involves only the layers of the skin
b. Deep – when the wound involves the inner structure beyond the layers of the skin.
i. Penetrating – one in which the wounding agent enters the body but did not come out or the
mere piercing of a solid organ or tissue of the body.
ii. Perforating – when the wounding agent produces communication between the inner and outer
portion of the hollow organs. It may also mean piercing or traversing completely a particular
part of the body causing communication between the points of entry and exit of the instrument
or substance producing it.

5. As regards to the Relation of the Site of the Application of Force and the Location of Injury
a. Coup Injury – physical injury which is located at the site of the application of force
b. Contre-coup Injury – physical injury found opposite the site of the application of force
c. Coup Contre-coup Injury – physical injury located at the site and also opposite the site of application
of force
d. Locus Minoris Resistencia – physical injury located not at the site nor opposite the site of the
application of force but in some areas offering the least resistance to the force applied. A blow on the
forehead may cause contusion at the region of the eyeball because of the fracture on the
papyraceous bone forming the roof of the orbit
e. Extensive Injury – physical injury involving a greater area of the body beyond the site of the
application of force. It has not only the wide area of injury but also the varied types of injury. A fall
from a height or a run-over victim of a vehicular accident may suffer from multiple fractures,
laceration of organs, and all types of skin injuries.

6. As to the Regions or Organs of the Body Involved

See Injuries in Various Parts of the Body.

7. Special Types of Wounds

a. Defense wound – wound which is the result of a person’s instinctive reaction of self-protection.
Injuries suffered by a person to avoid or repel potential injury contemplated by the aggressor.
b. Patterned wound – wound in the nature and shape of an object or instrument and which infers the
object or instrument causing it.
c. Self-inflicted wound – wound produced on oneself. Here, the person has no intention to end his life.

Motive of Producing Self-inflicted Wounds:

1. To create or deliberately magnify an existing injury or disease for pension or workman's
compensation;
2. To escape certain obligations or punishment. During war time soldiers may cut their fingers to avoid
frontline assignments and prisoners may inflict physical injuries on their body to avoid hard labor and
just be confined in a hospital to receive food and rest.
3. To create a new identity or destroy the existing one. Fingerprints may be destroyed by acid, by
cutting or burning. A person may even Request for the services of a plastic surgeon to create a new
identity or destroy existing ones.
4. To gain attention or sympathy.
5. Psychotic behavior.

Some Ways of Self-Mutilation:

1. Head banging or bumping — This is commonly observed in overactive children and causes
hematoma.
2. Exposure of parts of the body to heat radiation from open fires, radiators, or protective grills over
radiator (thermophilia).
3. Penetrating nail or spike to the chest wall, or insertion into the urinary bladder in a female.
4. Castration by amputation of the penis.

LEGMED | MOJICA | VELASCO 2

LEGAL MEDICINE
Medico-legal Aspects of Physical Injuries

5. Trauma inflicted on the female genitalia to induce abortion or promotes hemorrhage and creates an
anemia.
6. Subcutaneous injection of fecal matters to promote abscess formation.
7. Pricking of acne eruption to lead to a severe facial disfigurement.
8. Subcutaneous injection of air to create a condition of emphysema.
9. Nail-biting (onychophagia) which may lead to maceration of the skin and an infection.
10. Grinding of the teeth (bruxism) is frequently seen in the mentally retarded and can lead to abnormal
tooth wear, a bilateral hypertrophy of the masseter and a pain on chewing.
11. Pressure on the subcutaneous tissue by a tightly applied cord or belt around the body:
a. Tribal customs of metal band around the heck or a leg by some African tribes may cause a
permanent disfigurement.
b. Use of shoes made of metal by Chinese women.
12. Pulling of the body hair (Trichotillomania).

Legal Classification of Physical Injuries

1. Mutilation – act of looping or cutting off any part/s of the living body. In order to be punishable under
the Revised Penal Code (RPC), it must be intentional, otherwise, it will be considered as a physical
injury.

Kinds of Mutilation punishable under the RPC:

(1) Intentionally depriving a person, totally or partially of some of the essential organs for
reproduction;
(2) Intentionally depriving a person of any part/s of the human body other than the organs for
reproduction.

2. Serious physical injuries

The crime of serious physical injuries may be due to:
(1) Wounding
The injured person became insane, imbecile, impotent, or blind.
(2) Beating
a. Loss of the use of speech or the power to hear or to smell, or loss of an eye, a hand, a
foot, an arm, or a leg;
b. Loss of the use of any such member; or
c. Becomes incapacitated for the work in which he was therefore habitually engaged.
(3) Assaulting (Art. 263)
a. Deformity;
b. Loss of any other member of the body;
c. Loss of the use thereof; or
d. Becomes ill or incapacitated for the performance of the work in which he was habitually
engaged for more than 90 days, as a consequence of the physical injuries inflicted.
(4) Administering injurious substances (Art. 264) without the intent to kill.
The injured person becomes ill or incapacitated for labor for more than 30 days and impliedly
less than 90 days.

It may be committed through a simple negligence/imprudence.

Types of Wounds:
1. Closed Wound – there is no breach of continuity of the skin or mucous membrane
a. Superficial
i. Petechiae – circumscribed extravasation of blood in the subcutaneous tissue or
underneath the mucous membrane.
ii. Contusion
iii. Hematoma

LEGMED | MOJICA | VELASCO 3

LEGAL MEDICINE
Medico-legal Aspects of Physical Injuries

b. Deep
i. Musculo-skeletal injuries
(a) Sprain
(b) Dislocation
(c) Fracture
(d) Strain
(e) Subluxation
ii. Internal hemorrhage
iii. Cerebral Concussion

2. Open Wound – there is a breach of continuity on the skin or mucous membrane

a. Abrasion
b. Incised Wound
c. Stab Wound
d. Punctured
e. Lacerated

B. Documentation of injuries
• Medina vs. People, G.R. No. 161308, January 15, 2014

Ricardo Medina Jr. y Joel vs. People of the Philippines

G.R. No. 161308, 15 January 2014

Facts:
This case concerns the fatal stabbing of Lino Mulinyawe between 9:00pm and 10:00pm of 3 April 1997 in
Pinagbuhatan, Pasig City. The stabbing was preceded by a fight during a basketball game between Ross
Mulinyawe, Lino’s son, and Ronald Medina, the younger brother of Ricardo and Randolf. In that fight,
Ronald had hit Ross with a piece of stone. Hearing bout the involvement of his brother in the fight, Randolf
rushed to the scene and sent Ronald home. Ross was brought to the hospital for treatment. Once Lino
learned that his son had sustained a head injury inflicted by one of the Medinas, he forthwith went towards
the house of the Medinas accompanied by his drinking buddies, Jose Tapan and Abet Menes. He had a
bread knife tucked in the back, but his companions were unarmed. Along the way, Lino encountered Randolf
whom he confronted about the fight. The two of them had a heated argument. Although Randolf tried to
explain what had really happened between Ross and Ronald, Lino lashed out at Randolf and gripped the
latter’s hand. Tapan almost simultaneously punched Randolf in the face. Lino, already holding the knife in
his right hand, swung the knife at Randolf who was not hit. Randolf retreated towards the store and took two
empty bottles of beer, broke the bottles and attacked Lino with them. Arriving at the scene, Ricardo saw
what was happening, and confronted Lino. A commotion ensued between them. Ricardo entered their house
to get a kitchen knife and came out. Lino made a thrust at Ricardo but failed to hit the latter, who then
stabbed Lino on the left side of his chest, near the region of the heart. Lino fell face down on the ground.
After that, Ricardo walked away, while Randolf threw the broken bottles at the fallen Lino.

Lino’s injuries were described as follows:

Fairly nourished, fairly developed male cadaver, in rigor mortis, with postmortem lividity at the dependent
portions of the body. Conjunctive lips and nailbeds are pale.

HEAD, CHEST AND LEFT KNEE:

(1) Lacerated wound, left parietal region, measuring 2 by 0.7 cm, 5 cm from the midsagittal line.
(2) Abrasion, left parietal region, measuring 1.2 by 0.6 cm, 8 cm from the anterior midline.
(3) Abrasion left maxillary region, measuring 2 by 0.3, 4.5 cm, from the anterior midline.
(4) Stab wound, left mammary region, measuring 3.6 by 1.4 cm, 5.5 cm from the anterior line, 12 cm
deep, directed posteriorwards, downwards, and medialwards, thru the 4th left intercostal space,
piercing the pericardial sac and left ventricle.

LEGMED | MOJICA | VELASCO 4

LEGAL MEDICINE
Medico-legal Aspects of Physical Injuries

Cause of death is Stab wound of the chest.

On 4 April 1997, the Office of the City Prosecutor of Pasig City charged Randolf with homicide. The
information was amended with leave of court to include Ricardo as a co-conspirator. The defense claimed
that it was Lino who had attacked Ricardo with a knife, and that Lino had accidentally stabbed himself by
falling frontward and into his own knife.

RTC’s Decision:
Acquitted Randolf but convicted Ricardo of homicide. It rejected Ricardo’s defense that the fatal stab
wound of Lino had been self-inflicted:

The fatal wound of the deceased is: ‘stab wound, left mamary region, measuring 3.6 by 1.4 cm, 5.5 cm from
the anterior midline, 12 cm deep, directed posteriorwards, downwards, and medialwards, thru the 4th left
intercostal space, piercing the pericardial sac and left ventricle.’ 

CA’s Decision:
The CA affirmed the conviction of Ricardo with modification of the penalty and the civil liability.

Issues:
1. Whether or not the stabbing and inflicting of the fatal wound on Lino were not proven beyond reasonable
doubt.
2. Whether or not the State did not present as evidence in court the two knives wielded by him and Lino
despite repeated demands for their presentation;
3. Whether or not the CA erred for not appreciating the justifying circumstance of defense of a relative in
his favor was bereft of any support from the records.

Ruling:
1. NO. Time and again, this Court has deferred to the trial court’s factual findings and evaluation of the
credibility of witnesses, especially when affirmed by the CA, in the absence of any clear showing that the
trial court overlooked or misconstrued cogent facts and circumstances that would justify altering or
revising such findings and evaluation.12 This is because the trial court’s determination proceeds from its
first-hand opportunity to observe the demeanor of the witnesses, their conduct and attitude under grilling
examination, thereby placing the trial court in the unique position to assess the witnesses’ credibility and
to appreciate their truthfulness, honesty and candor. But here Ricardo has not projected any strong and
compelling reasons to sway the Court into rejecting or revising such factual findings and evaluation in his
favor.

2. NO. The contention deserves no serious consideration. The following findings of the CA indicate that the
evidence supporting the conviction for homicide was already overwhelming even without the
presentation of the knife held by the victim.

Reviewing the records, the Court finds that appellant’s guilt as the perpetrator of the unlawful killing of
the victim Lino Mulinyawe had been adequately proven by prosecution evidence, both testimonial and
physical. The credible and categorical testimonies of two (2) eyewitnesses during the entire incident on
the night of 3 April 1997, Jeffrey and Sherwin, positively point to appellant as the one (1) who delivered
the single fatal stabbing blow upon the victim while the latter was trying to counter the assault of
appellant’s brother, co-accused Randolf who was then holding a broken bottle. The lone knife thrust was
directed at the heart of the victim, the wound penetrating said vital organ up to 12 centimeters deep, the
direction, trajectory and depth of the stab wound clearly showing the intent to kill him . The medico-legal
findings of Dr. Aranas sufficiently corroborate the account of said eyewitnesses that the victim was
attacked frontally and the fatal stab wound caused by a single-bladed kitchen knife such as the one (1)
identified in court, previously identified by the witness but only the photographs thereof were formally
offered in evidence by the prosecution.

LEGMED | MOJICA | VELASCO 5

LEGAL MEDICINE
Medico-legal Aspects of Physical Injuries

The totality of prosecution evidence more than satisfactorily proves the commission of the offense and
appellant’s authorship thereof. Contrary to appellant’s contention, the non-presentation of blood samples
from the victim and the accused as well as the instrument which accused used in perpetrating his
felonious acts do not negate criminal liability – it is enough for the prosecution to establish by the
required quantum of proof that a crime was committed and the accused was the author thereof. The
presentation of the weapon is not a prerequisite for conviction. Such presentation and identification of
the weapon used are not indispensable to prove the guilt of the accused much more so where the
perpetrator has been positively identified by a credible witness. Appellant’s insistence, therefore, that the
presentation of the two (2) knives would prove his innocence is futile, irrelevant and immaterial, in the
face of positive identification by two unbiased and credible eyewitnesses. Positive identification where
categorical and consistent and without any showing of ill-motive on the part of the eyewitnesses
testifying on the matter prevails over a denial. Denial being negative evidence which is self-serving in
nature, cannot prevail over the positive identification of prosecution witnesses. More so in this case
where the defense of denial is not corroborated by disinterested and credible witnesses: the mother of
the accused whose presence in the crime scene was not sufficiently established and Edgar Erro whose
testimony is found to be doubtful and not without bias.

The non-identification and non-presentation of the weapon actually used in the killing did not diminish
the merit of the conviction primarily because other competent evidence and the testimonies of witnesses
had directly and positively identified and incriminated Ricardo as the assailant of Lino. Hence, the
establishment beyond reasonable doubt of Ricardo’s guilt for the homicide did not require the production
of the weapon used in the killing as evidence in court, for in arriving at its findings on the culpability of
Ricardo the RTC, like other trial courts, clearly looked at, considered and appreciated the entirety of the
record and the evidence. For sure, the weapon actually used was not indispensable considering that the
finding of guilt was based on other evidence proving his commission of the crime.

3. NO. In order that defense of a relative is to be appreciated in favor of Ricardo, the following requisites
must concur, namely: (1) unlawful aggression by the victim; (2) reasonable necessity of the means
employed to prevent or repel the aggression; and (3) in case the provocation was given by the person
attacked, that the person making the defense took no part in the provocation. Like in self-defense, it is
the accused who carries the burden to prove convincingly the attendance and concurrence of these
requisites because his invocation of this defense amounts to an admission of having inflicted the fatal
injury on the victim.

In invoking defense of a relative, Ricardo states that his immediate impulse upon seeing Randolf being
attacked by Lino with a knife was to get his own weapon and to aid in the defense of Randolf. But that
theory was inconsistent with his declaration at the trial that Lino’s fatal wound had been self-inflicted, as
it presupposes direct responsibility for inflicting the mortal wound. Thus, his defense was unworthy of
belief due to its incongruity with human experience.

Verily, the issue of credibility, when it is decisive of the guilt or innocence of the accused, is determined
by the conformity of the conflicting claims and recollections of the witnesses to common experience and
to the observation of mankind as probable under the circumstances.

• Madrid vs. CA, G.R. No. 130683, May 31, 2000

Eligio Madrid vs. Court of Appeals, Regional Trial Court and People of the Philippines
G.R. No. 130683, 31 May 2000

Facts:
That on or about 21 May 1992, in Buguey, Cagayan, the said accused, Arsenio Sunido y Silos and Eligio
(Melencio) Madrid, armed with a sharp pointed instrument, conspiring together and helping each other, with

LEGMED | MOJICA | VELASCO 6

LEGAL MEDICINE
Medico-legal Aspects of Physical Injuries

intent to kill attack, assault and stab one Angel Sunido and inflicting upon him stab wounds on his body
which caused his death.

When arraigned, petitioner and Sunido pleaded “not guilty” to the crime charged. Trial ensued. The
prosecution presented three witnesses: Remedios Sunido, wife of the victim; Merdelyn Sunido, victim’s
daughter; and Dr. Teddy Unida, medico-legal examiner.

Remedios Sunido adopted her testimony on direct examination, the affidavit executed by her at the Buguey
Police Station. In said affidavit, she narrated that Arsenio and Angel Sunido were brothers who, previous to
21 May 1992, had a quarrel over a fighting cock which Arsenio claimed was his. At around 12 noon of 21
May 1992, Angel Sunido and Jerry Escobar had drinks in the former's house. Under the influence of alcohol,
Angel provoked a fight with Arsenio. As a result, as Angel was walking back to his house after taking
Escobar home, he was stopped by Arsenio and two companions, one of whom was petitioner. Arsenio's
companions held Angel by the arms as Arsenio stabbed him several times on different parts of the body.
Arsenio and his companions afterwards fled using petitioner's tricycle.

Merdelyn Sunido also executed an affidavit before the police on 2 June 1992. She stated that her father, her
uncle Arsenio, and some visitors were drinking in their house on 21 May 1992. The brothers quarrelled over
a fighting cock which she claimed Arsenio took from their yard. Angel then accompanied Jerry Escobar to
his home. Because of the bad blood between the brothers, on his way back from Escobar's house, Angel
was attacked by Arsenio Sunido, with the help of petitioner and an unidentified man, and stabbed Angel to
death. On the witness stand, Merdelyn testified that at around noon of 21 May 1992, her father Angel and
the latter's friends, Jerry Escobar and a certain Rudy, were in their house having drinks. At 12 noon, Angel
took Jerry Escobar home. Either on the way to or back from Escobar's house, Angel was stopped by
Arsenio Sunido who was with petitioner and another person. Petitioner and his companion held Angel's
hands, raising them upwards, with petitioner holding him by the right hand, while his companion held Angel
by the left hand. And then, Arsenio started attacking Angel with a knife. After seriously wounding Arsenio,
the three fled. Merdelyn said she witnessed the incident because she was just approximately five meters
away from the place where it happened.

The other witness for the prosecution was Dr. Teddy A. Unida, municipal health officer of Buguey, who
conducted the autopsy on the body of Angel Sunido. His findings were embodied in a medical
certificate, which showed the following wounds suffered by Angel Sunido:

DIAGNOSIS:
1. Incised wound — 6 cm. in length — 1 cm. deep, located at the left temporal region.
2. Stab wound — 3 cm. in length, 8 cm. deep, located at right anterior lower thorax.
3. Stab wound — 4 cm. in length — 6 cm. deep, located at right anterior lower thorax. Direction —
Antero-posterior.
4. Stab wound — 3 cm. in length — 6 cm. deep, located at left anterior lower thorax. Direction —
Antero-posterior.
5. Stab wound — 6 cm. in length — 6 cm. deep, located at the right upper [quadrant] of the abdomen-
anterior. Direction — Antero-posterior.
6. Stab wound — 3 cm. in length — 6 cm. deep, located at left upper [quadrant] of the abdomen-
anterior. Direction — Antero-posterior.
7. Stab wound — 1 1/2 cm. in length — 3 cm. deep, located at the right side of the abdomen-lateral.
Direction — Right to left.
8. Stab wound — 2 1/2 cm. — 5 cm. deep, located at left lower [quadrant] of the abdomen. Direction —
Antero caudal.
9. Stab wound — 2 cm. in length — 8 cm. deep, located at the left side of the abdomen-lateral.
Direction — Left to right.

LEGMED | MOJICA | VELASCO 7

LEGAL MEDICINE
Medico-legal Aspects of Physical Injuries

Dr. Unida testified that based on these wounds, it could be concluded that the assailant was in front of the
victim and that he used a sharp-edged instrument, like a bolo with a pointed tip, in killing the latter. It
is possible that either the assailant and the victim were in a standing position facing each other or the victim
was lying on the ground with his face upwards. Stab wound nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 were fatal injuries
causing the victim's death in the absence of medical attendance. As to how many assailants were
responsible for the wounds, he said that judging from the variance in the size and shape of the wounds, it
was possible that there was more than one assailant or that more than one weapon was used. However, Dr.
Unida stressed that there was no certainty as to this because the elasticity of the skin makes it difficult to
conclude exactly what type of instrument was used on the basis of the length of the stab wounds alone.

RTC’s Decision: The RTC found accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of homicide.

CA’s Decision: Affirmed RTC’s decision.

Issue:
Whether or not the prosecution evidence is sufficient to prove beyond reasonable doubt petitioner’s guilt.

Ruling:
NO.
First. The trial court's decision contains no analysis of the evidence of the parties nor reference to any legal
basis in reaching its conclusion. It contains nothing more than a summary of the testimonies of the
witnesses of both parties.

Art. VIII, §14 of the Constitution provides:

No decision shall be rendered by any court without expressing therein clearly and distinctly the facts and the
law on which it is based.

No petition for review or motion for reconsideration of decision of the court shall be refused due course or
denied without stating the basis therefor.

In the same vein, Rule 120, §2 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure provides:
Form and contents of judgments. — The judgment must be written in the official language, personally and
directly prepared by the judge and signed by him and shall contain clearly and distinctly a statement of the
facts proved or admitted by the accused and the law upon which the judgment is based.

If it is of conviction, the judgment shall state (a) the legal qualification of the offense constituted by the acts
committed by the accused, and the aggravating or mitigating circumstances attending the commission
thereof, if there are any; (b) the participation of the accused in the commission of the offense, whether as
principal, accomplice, or accessory after the fact; (c) the penalty imposed upon the accused; and (d) the civil
liability or damages caused by the wrongful act to be recovered from the accused by the offended party, if
there is any, unless the enforcement of the civil liability by a separate action has been reserved or waived.

In case of acquittal, unless there is a clear showing that the act from which the civil liability might arise did
not exist, the judgment shall make a finding on the civil liability of the accused in favor of the offended party.

The decision fails to comply with these constitutional and statutory requirements. 

Second. The Court of Appeals sustained petitioner's conviction on the strength of the testimonies given by
Remedios and Merdelyn Sunido. No independent evidence, however, incriminating petitioner on the death of
Arsenio Sunido has been presented by the prosecution. Although they claimed that petitioner held the
victim's right hand while Arsenio stabbed him, their testimony should have been given the strictest scrutiny
in view of the fact that Remedios and Merdelyn Sunido are the wife and daughter, respectively, of the victim.

LEGMED | MOJICA | VELASCO 8

LEGAL MEDICINE
Medico-legal Aspects of Physical Injuries

In fact, Merdelyn Sunido gave contradictory accounts of how her father was stabbed by Arsenio while
petitioner allegedly held the victim. These contradictions raise doubts on whether she really witnessed the
incident and on the part allegedly played by petitioner.

As can be seen, Remedios Sunido's testimony, like that of her daughter Merdelyn, is replete with
inconsistencies and contradictions that render its veracity doubtful. Her answers oftentimes are not
responsive to the questions propounded to her. She even committed a mistake as to the date when the
provocation was made by her husband, stating a date which is a day after he died.

Likewise, the considerable length of time which lapsed before Merdelyn and Remedios Sunido made their
statements before the police puts into question the claim that they actually witnessed the killing of Angel
Sunido. It is true that delay in reporting a crime, if adequately explained, is not sufficient to cast doubt on the
truthfulness of a witness' testimony as, for instance, the delay may be explained by the natural reticence of
most people and their abhorrence to get involved in a criminal case.

Disposition:
WHEREFORE, the decision of the Court of Appeals is hereby REVERSED and petitioner is hereby
ACQUITTED of the crime of homicide.

C. Gunshot Wounds
• Custodio vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 96027-28, March 08, 2005
• Sabang vs. People, G.R. No. 168818, March 9, 2007
• People vs. Abriol, G.R. No. 123137, October 17, 2001
D. Sex Crimes
• People vs. Prodenciado, G.R. No. 192232, December 10, 2014
• Lejano vs. People, G.R. No. 176389, December 14, 2010
• People vs. Yatar, G.R. No. 150224, May 19, 2004
VI. Medico-legal Aspects of Death
• Saluta vs. People, G.R. No. 181335, July 27, 2016
• People vs. Dulay, G.R. No. 92600, January 18, 1993

All voluntary movement of the body comes from the frontal lobe

LEGMED | MOJICA | VELASCO 9

LEGAL MEDICINE
Medico-legal Aspects of Physical Injuries

LEGMED | MOJICA | VELASCO 10