expert psychological and/or psychiatric
PEOPLE vs. GENOSA, G.R. No. 135981,
January 15 2004.
People of the Philippines vs. Marivic
Genosa
FACTS: This case stemmed from the
killing of Ben Genosa, by his wife Marivic
Genosa, appellant herein. During their first
year of marriage, Marivic and Ben lived
happily but apparently thereafter, Ben
changed and the couple would always
quarrel and sometimes their quarrels
became violent. Appellant testified that
every time her husband came home
drunk, he would provoke her and
sometimes beat her. Whenever beaten by
her husband, she consulted medical
doctors who testified during the trial. On
the night of the killing, appellant and the
victim were quarreled and the victim beat
the appellant. However, appellant was
able to run to another room. Appellant
admitted having killed the victim with the
use of a gun. The information for parricide
against appellant, however, alleged that
the cause of death of the victim was by
beating through the use of a lead pipe.
Appellant invoked self defense and
defense of her unborn child. After trial, the
Regional Trial Court found appellant guilty
beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of
parricide with an aggravating
circumstance of treachery and imposed
the penalty of death.
On automatic review before the Supreme
Court, appellant filed an URGENT
OMNIBUS MOTION praying that the
Honorable Court allow (1) the exhumation
of Ben Genosa and the re-examination of
the cause of his death; (2) the examination
of Marivic Genosa by qualified
psychologists and psychiatrists to
determine her state of mind at the time
she killed her husband; and finally, (3) the
inclusion of the said experts reports in the
records of the case for purposes of the
automatic review or, in the alternative, a
partial re-opening of the case a quo to
take the testimony of said psychologists
and psychiatrists. The Supreme Court
partly granted the URGENT OMNIBUS
MOTION of the appellant. It remanded the
case to the trial court for reception of
opinion on the battered woman
syndrome plea. Testimonies of two expert
witnesses on the battered woman
syndrome, Dra. Dayan and Dr. Pajarillo,
were presented and admitted by the trial
court and subsequently submitted to the
Supreme Court as part of the records.
ISSUE:
1. Whether or not appellant herein can
validly invoke the battered woman
syndrome as constituting self defense.
2. Whether or not treachery attended the
killing of Ben Genosa.
Ruling: 1. The Court ruled in the negative
as appellant failed to prove that she is
afflicted with the battered woman
syndrome.
A battered woman has been defined as a
woman who is repeatedly subjected to
any forceful physical or psychological
behavior by a man in order to coerce her
to do something he wants her to do
without concern for her rights. Battered
women include wives or women in any
form of intimate relationship with men.
Furthermore, in order to be classified as a
battered woman, the couple must go
through the battering cycle at least twice.
Any woman may find herself in an abusive
relationship with a man once. If it occurs a
second time, and she remains in the
situation, she is defined as a battered
woman.
More graphically, the battered woman
syndrome is characterized by the so-
called cycle of violence, which has three
phases: (1) the tension-building phase; (2)
the acute battering incident; and (3) the
tranquil, loving (or, at least, nonviolent)
phase.
The Court, however, is not discounting the
possibility of self-defense arising from the
battered woman syndrome. First, each of
the phases of the cycle of violence must
be proven to have characterized at least
two battering episodes between the
appellant and her intimate partner.
Second, the final acute battering episode
preceding the killing of the batterer must
have produced in the battered persons
mind an actual fear of an imminent harm
from her batterer and an honest belief that
she needed to use force in order to save
her life. Third, at the time of the killing, the
batterer must have posed probable -- not
necessarily immediate and actual -- grave
harm to the accused, based on the history
of violence perpetrated by the former
against the latter. Taken altogether, these
circumstances could satisfy the requisites
of self-defense. Under the existing facts of
the present case, however, not all of these
elements were duly established.
The defense fell short of proving all three
phases of the cycle of violence
supposedly characterizing the relationship
of Ben and Marivic Genosa. No doubt
there were acute battering incidents but
appellant failed to prove that in at least
another battering episode in the past, she
had gone through a similar pattern.
Neither did appellant proffer sufficient
evidence in regard to the third phase of
the cycle.
In any event, the existence of the
syndrome in a relationship does not in
itself establish the legal right of the woman
to kill her abusive partner. Evidence must
still be considered in the context of self-
defense. Settled in our jurisprudence, is
the rule that the one who resorts to self-
defense must face a real threat on ones
life; and the peril sought to be avoided
must be imminent and actual, not merely
imaginary. Thus, the Revised Penal Code
provides that the following requisites of
self-defense must concur: (1) Unlawful
aggression; (2) Reasonable necessity of
the means employed to prevent or repel it;
and (3) Lack of sufficient provocation on
the part of the person defending himself.
Unlawful aggression is the most essential
element of self-defense. It presupposes
actual, sudden and unexpected attack --
or an imminent danger thereof -- on the
life or safety of a person. In the present
case, however, according to the testimony
of Marivic herself, there was a sufficient
time interval between the unlawful
aggression of Ben and her fatal attack
upon him. She had already been able to
withdraw from his violent behavior and
escape to their childrens bedroom. During
that time, he apparently ceased his attack
and went to bed. The reality or even the
imminence of the danger he posed had
ended altogether. He was no longer in a
position that presented an actual threat on
her life or safety.
The mitigating factors of psychological
paralysis and passion and obfuscation
were, however, taken in favor of appellant.
It should be clarified that these two
circumstances -- psychological paralysis
as well as passion and obfuscation -- did
not arise from the same set of facts.
The first circumstance arose from the
cyclical nature and the severity of the
battery inflicted by the batterer-spouse
upon appellant. That is, the repeated
beatings over a period of time resulted in
her psychological paralysis, which was
analogous to an illness diminishing the
exercise of her will power without
depriving her of consciousness of her
acts.
As to the extenuating circumstance of
having acted upon an impulse so powerful
as to have naturally produced passion and
obfuscation, it has been held that this
state of mind is present when a crime is
committed as a result of an uncontrollable
burst of passion provoked by prior unjust
or improper acts or by a legitimate
stimulus so powerful as to overcome
reason. To appreciate this circumstance,
the following requisites should concur: (1)
there is an act, both unlawful and sufficient
to produce such a condition of mind; and
(2) this act is not far removed from the
commission of the crime by a considerable
length of time, during which the accused
might recover her normal equanimity.
2. NO. Because of the gravity of the
resulting offense, treachery must be
proved as conclusively as the killing itself.
Besides, equally axiomatic is the rule that
when a killing is preceded by an argument
or a quarrel, treachery cannot be
appreciated as a qualifying circumstance,
because the deceased may be said to
have been forewarned and to have
anticipated aggression from the assailant.
Moreover, in order to appreciate alevosia,
the method of assault adopted by the
aggressor must have been consciously
and deliberately chosen for the specific
purpose of accomplishing the unlawful act
without risk from any defense that might
be put up by the party attacked.
The appellant acted upon an impulse so
powerful as to have naturally produced
passion or obfuscation. The acute
battering she suffered that fatal night in
the hands of her batterer-spouse, in spite
of the fact that she was eight (8) months
pregnant with their child, overwhelmed her
and put her in the aforesaid emotional and
mental state, which overcame her reason
and impelled her to vindicate her life and
that of her unborn child.
The Supreme Court affirmed the
conviction of appellant for parricide.
However, considering the presence of two
(2) mitigating circumstances and without
any aggravating circumstance, the penalty
is reduced to six (6) years and one (1) day
of prision mayor as minimum; to 14 years
8 months and 1 day of reclusion temporal
as maximum. Inasmuch as appellant has
been detained for more than the minimum
penalty hereby imposed upon her, the
director of the Bureau of Corrections may
immediately RELEASE her from custody
upon due determination that she is eligible
for parole, unless she is being held for
some other lawful cause.
NOTE: After this case was decided by the
Supreme Court, R.A. 9262, otherwise
known as Anti-Violence Against Women
and their Children Act of 2004 was
enacted. Sec. 26 of said law provides that
"xxx. Victim-survivors who are found by
the courts to be suffering from battered
women syndrome do not incur any
criminal and civil liability nothwithstanding
the absence of any of the elements for
justifying circumstances of self-defense
under the Revised Penal Code.xxx"
Cycle of Abuse
The cycle usually goes in the following
order, and will repeat until the conflict is
stopped, usually by the survivor entirely
abandoning the relationship[4] or some
form of intervention.[5]The cycle can occur
hundreds of times in an abusive
relationship, the total cycle taking
anywhere from a few hours, to a year or
more to complete. However, the length of
the cycle usually diminishes over time so
that the "reconciliation" and "calm" stages
may disappear,[citation needed]
violence
becomes more intense and the cycles
become more frequent.[5]
1: Tension building[edit]
Stress builds from the pressures of daily
life, like conflict over children, marital
issues, misunderstandings, or other family
conflicts. It also builds as the result of
illness, legal or financial problems,
unemployment, or catastrophic events,
like floods, rape or war.[5] During this
period, the abuser feels ignored,
threatened, annoyed or wronged. The
feeling lasts on average several minutes
to hours, it may last as much as several
months.[6]
To prevent violence, the victim may try to
reduce the tension by becoming compliant
and nurturing. Or, to get the abuse over
with, prepare for the violence or lessen the
degree of injury, the victim may provoke
the batterer. "However, at no time is the
batterer justified in engaging in violent or
abusive behavior," said Scott Allen
Johnson, author of Physical Abusers and
Sexual Offenders.[6]
2: Acute violence[edit]
Characterized by outbursts of violent,
abusive incidents which may be preceded
by verbal abuse[5] and
[6]
include psychological abuse. During this
stage the abuser attempts to dominate
his/her partner (survivor) with the use of
domestic violence.
In intimate partner violence, children are
negatively affected by having witnessed
the violence and the partner's relationship
degrades as well. The release of energy
reduces the tension, and the abuser may
feel or express that the victim "had it
coming" to them.[5]
3: Reconciliation/honeymoon[edit]
See also: Abusive hoovering
Parricide
The perpetrator may begin to feel
remorse, guilty feelings, or fear that their
partner will leave or call the police. The
victim feels pain, fear, humiliation, A. Concept: The crime committed by a
disrespect, confusion, and may mistakenly person who kills his:
feel responsible.[5]
Characterized by affection, apology, or,
a). Father or mother
alternatively, ignoring the incident, this
phase marks an apparent end of violence,
b). Child whether legitimate or illegitimate
with assurances that it will never happen
again, or that the abuser will do his or her
c). Legitimate ascendant
best to change. During this stage the
abuser may feel or claim to feel
d). Legitimate descendant
overwhelming remorse and sadness.
Some abusers walk away from the
e). Lawful spouse
situation with little comment, but most will
eventually shower the survivor with love
and affection. The abuser may use self-
harm or threats of suicide to gain
sympathy and/or prevent the survivor from
leaving the relationship. Abusers are B. The spouse must be the lawful spouse
frequently so convincing, and survivors so
eager for the relationship to improve, that
survivors (who are often worn down and 1). The spouses maybe separated by
confused by longstanding abuse) stay in judicial decree or separated in fact
the relationship.[7][8]
4: Calm[edit] 2). The fact of marriage must be alleged in
See also: Abusive hoovering the Information otherwise the killing is
homicide or murder as the case maybe,
During this phase (which is often even if the fact of marriage was proved in
considered an element of the the course of the trial.
honeymoon/reconciliation phase), the
relationship is relatively calm and 3). The best evidence would be the
peaceable. During this period the abuser marriage contract but evening the
may agree to engage in counseling, ask absence thereof, testimony witnesses may
for forgiveness, and create a normal show the lawful relationship as the
atmosphere. In intimate partner presumption of marriage also applies, or if
relationships, the perpetrator may buy the accused does not object to the claim
presents or the couple may engage in of marriage.
passionate sex.[5] Over time, the batterer's
apologies and requests for forgiveness 4). In case of Muslim marriages Article 27
become less sincere and are generally of P.D. 1083 The Muslim Code of
stated to prevent separation or Personal Laws s a Muslim to validly
intervention.[6] However, interpersonal contract marriage with four wives, but the
difficulties will inevitably arise, leading killing of the 2nd, 3rd or 4th wife will not
again to the tension building phase.[5] The constitute parricide because a Muslim
effect of the continual cycle may include would be punished and penalized more
loss of love, contempt, distress, and/or than a non-muslim by reason of a
physical disability. Intimate partners may marriage which the law allows him to
separate, divorce or, at the extreme, contract.
someone may be killed.[5]
C. The child may be legitimate or
illegitimate but should not be less than 3
days old. The father or mother maybe
legitimate or not, but in case of other
ascendant or descendant, they must be
legitimate
1). Question: GF has a bastard son
named BS who has a legitimate son
named L. Is parricide committed if: (a) GF
kills L (b) L kills GF
G. The crime may be aggravated by the
circumstances which qualify murder but
they will be considered as ordinary
aggravating circumstances. For example:
The husband may poison the wife or kill
her by means of fire, or resort to
treachery. Said circumstances will be
appreciated as generic aggravating
circumstances.

2). Question: Suppose BS is legitimate but

L is illegitimate, would the answer be the
same?

D. The basis of the classification is the

blood relationship in the direct ascending
and descending lines hence:

1). Killing of siblings (brother/sister) and

other collateral relatives is not parricide

2) Non-relatives or strangers who

participate in the killing will be liable for
homicide or murder as the case may be

E. The killing maybe through negligence

as when a father plays with his gun which
went off and killed the wife

F. If the accused is not aware that the

victim is his relative, he will be charged for
the actual crime committed but Article 49
will be applied to determine his penalty