PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee,

vs.
EUSTAQUIO LORENO y MALAGA and JIMMY MARANTAL y LONDETE, accused-appellants.
G.R. No. L-54414 July 9, 1984
Facts: Barangay Captain Elias Monge, his family & Francisco Fabie, their farm helper were home
preparing for the barrio dance when Loreno & a man in a dark sweater came by their house,
saying there was a letter from the chief (hepe). Elias let them in & when they read the letter, it
said that they were NPA. They were made to lie on the ground while other men went in the house.
The alleged NPA members robbed the family of several belongings. Moreover, the man in the
dark sweater raped the 2 daughters of Elias, Cristina & Monica. Elias, Cristina, Monica & Fabie
positively identified Loreno as 1 of the robbers. Fabie also identified Marantal.
Issue: WON Loreno and Marantal are exempted from criminal liability under the defenses of
Article 12(5) and (6)
Held: No. Appellants Eustaquio Loreno and Jimmy Marantal claimed that they acted under the
compulsion of an irresistible force and/or under the impulse of uncontrollable fear of equal or
greater injury. They admitted that they were in the house of Elias that night but they were only
forced by a man wearing black sweater and his five companions who claimed to be members of
the NPA, with the threat that if they did not obey, appellants and their families would be killed.
This was found untenable.
A person who acts under the compulsion of an irresistible force, like one who acts under the
impulse of uncontrollable fear of equal or greater injury, is exempt from criminal liability because
he does not act with freedom. The force must be irresistible to reduce him to a mere instrument
who acts not only without will but against his will. The duress, force, fear or intimidation must be
present, imminent and impending and of such a nature as to induce a well-grounded
apprehension of death or serious bodily harm if the act is not done. A threat of future injury is not
enough. The compulsion must be of such character as to leave no opportunity to the accused for
escape or self-defense in equal combat.
Loreno and Marantal had admitted their participation in the commission of the crimes of robbery
and rape against Elias and is family. Facts inconsistent with the appellants defense were
established: (a) having been armed with a firearm, (b) Loreno positioning himself near the post of
the balcony without prior instructions, (c) Loreno furnishing the rattan to tie the victims, and (d)
Loreno pointing his gun to the other victims when Monica was being raped. Furthermore, Loreno
brought Beata, Eliass wife to the different rooms to open the trunks and closets, without the
threat and assistance of the man in dark sweater. And lastly, Loreno tried to molest Cristina after
being raped by the man in dark sweater.
When Marantal kicked Fabie when the latter saw his face, it was due to the fact the Fabie had
recognized him & the blows which he gave to Fabie who was still tied was a warning not to report
his presence & participation in the crime. Furthermore, there was no showing that Jimmy
Marantal raised a voice of protest nor did an act to prevent the commission of the crimes. All
these demonstrated the voluntary participation & the conspiracy of the appellants. Not only was
their defense untenable, but the facts show that that there was conspiracy.