Sei sulla pagina 1di 2

Navarro v.

CA

DOCTRINES:

A) THE PROHIBITION UNDER RA 4200 ONLY COVERS THE RECORDING OF


PRIVATE CONVERSATIONS;
B) AUTHENTICATION OF AUDIO RECORDING REQUIRES THAT:
(1) he personally recorded the conversation; (2) that the tape played in court was the
one he recorded; and (3) that the voices on the tape are those of the persons such are
claimed to belong.

Facts:

1. On February 4, 1990, Stanley Jalbuena and Enrique Lingan reporters of DWTI


Lucena and Mark Ilagan went to Entertainment City after hearing that
establishment was showing nude dancers;
2. After entering the establishment, a sexy dancer approached the reporters where
the former eventually removed her brassieres and performed a strip act;
3. Jalbuena then took a picture of the act;
4. Dante Liquin (floor manager) and Alex Sioco (Security Guard) approached
Jalbuena and ask why he took the photo. Jalbuena replied that it was part of his
job.
5. Sioco pushed Jalbuena towards the table as he warned the latter that he would
kill him. When Jalbuena saw that Sioco was about to pull out his gun, he ran out
of the joint followed by his companions;
6. Jalbuena and his companions went to the police station to report the incident;
7. Upon arrival Jalbuena saw petitioner Navarro together with two other policemen
who were having drinks in front of the police office;
8. Jalbuena then went to the desk officer Sgt. Añonuevo to report the incident;
9. In a while, Sioco and Liquin arrived at the police station where they talked with
petitioner Navarro;
10. After the conversation, Navarro pushed Jalbuena to the wall where an altercation
ensued. (The said encounter was secretly recorded by Jalbuena);
11. Lingan then intervened and said that their purpose was only to blotter the
incident Petitioner Navarro replied: "Walang press, press, mag-sampu pa
kayo." He then turned to Sgt. Añonuevo and told him to make of record the
behavior of Jalbuena and Lingan;
12. The recording of Lingan’s behavior angered the same, hence Langin said
“Masyado kang abusado, alisin mo yang baril mo at magsuntukan na lang tayo.
To which, petitioner Navarro replied: "Ah, ganoon”;
13. Petitioner Navarro used the handle of his pistol to hit Langin as he was about to
turn away. The assault caused Langin to fall to the ground with blood dripping
from his wounded head;
14. Langin was eventually brought by his station manager, Boy Casañada to the
hospital where the former eventually succumbed to his injuries.
RTC: Convicted Navarro on the basis that the testimony offered by Jalbuena is more
credible as it was bolstered and is consistent with the audio recording and post-mortem
examination results;

CA: Affirmed the RTC’s decision

Issue:

A) Whether Jalbuena’s testimony was credible so as to convict petitioner

Ruling:

YES. Jalbuena’s testimony was credible as it was corroborated by evidence.

The Court affirmed the lower court’s decision on the basis that the petitioner failed to
present any justification to reverse the decision.

Furthermore, Jalbuena's testimony is confirmed by the voice recording he had made. It |||

may be asked whether the tape is admissible in view of R.A. No. 4200, which prohibits
wire tapping. The answer is in the affirmative. The law prohibits the overhearing,
intercepting, or recording of private communications. Since the exchange between
petitioner Navarro and Lingan was not private, its tape recording is not prohibited. |||

Nor is there any question that it was duly authenticated. A voice recording is
authenticated by the testimony of a witness (1) that he personally recorded the
conversation; (2) that the tape played in court was the one he recorded; and (3) that the
voices on the tape are those of the persons such are claimed to belong. In the instant
case, Jalbuena testified that he personally made the voice recording; that the tape
played in court was the one he recorded; and that the speakers on the tape were
petitioner Navarro and Lingan. A sufficient foundation was thus laid for the
authentication of the tape presented by the prosecution.

As such, Navarro’s conviction is PROPER.

Potrebbero piacerti anche