REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

FOURTH JUDICIAL REGION

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
BRANCH 18
TAGAYTAY CITY

CRIM CASE NO. TG-2395-94

TG-23595-94-A & TG-2396-94

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff,
-versus-
PEDRO C. LIM, ET. AL,
Accused.
xx
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PROSECUTION
The People, by the undersigned prosecutors, and unto this Honorable Court,
respectfully submits this Memorandum as follows:
PREFATORY STATEMENT
In the evening of November 14, 1994, Atty. Eugene Tan, former President of the
Integrated Bar of the Philippines and his driver Eduardo Constantino were
abducted by the accused, acting in conspiracy with one another, working under one
criminal design. The victims were forcibly abducted in Alabang, Muntinlupa and
were brought to Cavite where they were shot to death. The accused were then
charged for kidnapping and two counts of murder. The prosecution humbly takes
the position that it has presented competent witnesses, clear and convincing
evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused are guilty of the
crimes charged. Despite the defenses allegation that all of them, except Bonifacio
Roxas knew the missions real purpose, all their acts, taken together, show not only
that they played a vital part in the victims death, but that they were fully aware of
what was going to happen.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
On December 13, 1994 the Department of Justice issued a resolution in the
Preliminary investigation of the case after finding probable cause against Pedro
Lim, Bonifacio Roxas, Rodolfo Ochoa, Reynaldo de los Santos, Venerando
Ozores, Toto Mirasol, Mariano Hizon, Eugenio Hizon, Capt. Alfred Abad and
Eugene Yu wherein they were charged with intent to kill, qualified by treachery,
evident premeditation, taking advantage of superior strength, with the aid of armed
men or by a band, or by employing means or persons to ensure or afford impunity
and with the use of a motor vehicle, consideration of price, reward or promise,
conspiring, confederating and mutually helping one another, did then there
willfully, unlawfully and feloniously abduct the Atty. Eugene Tan and his driver
and thereafter, attack, assault and use violence upon the persons by shooting with a
firearm thereby causing instantaneous death.
Subsequently, an amended Information was filed against the same accused before
this Honorable Court on December 16 and 17, 1994. While under the custody of
the Presidential Anti-Crime Commission (PACC) the accused Ochoa and De los
Santos agreed to become state witnesses and thereafter executed separate sworn
statements implicating Eugene Yu and the other accused as to the latters
participation in the crime. During the Preliminary Investigation accused Reynaldo
de los Santos and Rodolfo Ochoa were discharged as state witnesses.
The discharge of Delos Santos and Ochoa were questioned before the Court of
Appeals and the Supreme Court by the other accused. The Court of Appeals and
the Supreme Court, however, upheld the decision of the Department of Justice to
discharge De los Santos and Ochoa as state witnesses.
Pedro Lim just adopted his evidence presented during the petition for bail as part
of his evidence in chief. While Ozores and Mirasol did not present anything for
their defense except collateral documents consisting of land titles and other
collateral documents completely irrelevant to the case. Eugene Yu on the other
hand presented his secretary and a former employee who testified on the character
of Eugene Yu. Both of which are completely irrelevant and will not suffice to
overturn the positive assertion and identification of the prosecution witnesses.
Testimonies of witnesses not presented can not be admitted as part of the evidence.
De los Santos and Ochoa overheard accused Pedro Lim, Roxas and Capt. Abad
talking about the surveillance operation where the accused Pedro Lim was the one
who brought funds for the operation, who also provided the Nissan Datsun car for
the surveillance operation made by the team against the alleged financier ng pula
who turned out to be the victim Atty. Eugene Tan. De los Santos alleged that the
surveillance operation of the NPA financier started in a closed door meeting
among Capt. Abad, Ozores and Roxas inside the office of Maj. Gammad. A day or
two after Eugene Yus meeting with Capt. Abad, the latter ordered all operatives
involved in the operation of the Financier ng Pula to concentrate on this
operation. Thereafter Ochoa told Capt. Abad Siguro sir malaking huli ang
gagawin tungkol sa Financier ng Pula kaya kailangan madaliin. Capt. Abad
replied Kailangan mahuli agad ninyo iyon subject sapagkat nangingikil iyan ng
mga pamilya ng instsik tulad ni Eugene. Sinong Eugene? Rodolfo Ochoa asked
again. Si Eugene Yu, kilala mo siya di ba? Capt. Abad retorted.They were later
instructed to tail a light brown Nissan Patrol, a creamy Mercedes Benz, and a blue
Toyota Corolla. And they did so for a month.
Sgt. Edgar Butch Abalon, who was not included in the information, testified that
he came to know Peter Lim and Eugene Yu when he and his companions from the
ODI responded to a comrades distress call at the Sanctuario de San Jose Church at
Greenhills, San Juan, Metro Manila. The call was about a conflict between siblings
Atty. Gilda Lim and Pedro and Patricia Lim on the other hand. Sgt. Abalon was
told by his companions that some of them were providing security services to
Patricia Lim upon orders of Capt. Abad.
After that incident in Sanctuario de San Jose church, Sgt. Abalon was invited by
the accused Peter Lim to meet with him and his sister Patricia. He was told that his
sister, Atty. Gilda Lim, was being manipulated by a certain Atty. Eugene Tan in
taking away all the properties belonging to their family. On another occasion,
Pedro Lim asked Sgt. Abalon to be his security detail but refused because he has
not received any order from his security officer.
Sgt. Abalon then testified and confirmed his statement executed before the PACC -
that the surveillance was instructed by their superior officers and also told him that
the subject of the surveillance has a standing warrant of arrest. He said that it many
days to conduct the surveillance, he disguised himself as a repairman of PLDT to
gain access at the office of the financier ng pula. After that, he was ordered by the
superior officers to immediately make the arrest of the financier ng pula upon
coordination with Bonifacio Roxas who was designated the leader as he was the
one who has knowledge of the financer ng pula.
Sgt. Abalon, as with Ochoa and De los Santos further testified that in the evening
prior to November 14, 1994, they were instructed by Captain Abad to effect the
arrest of the Financier ng Pula because the latter was already pestering Pedro Lim
and the other members of his family, who was at his office at the Tan Manzano &
Velez law office in Makati City.
On November 15, 1994 De los Santos met Roxas at the office and asked him
kung bakit tinira? and Roxas answered may nagpatrabaho eh. Sino ba
nagpatrabaho sa atin noong kahapon? De los Santos persisted. Roxas answered
Kilala mo, si Eugene Yu pero si Peter and nakipag-usap kay Kapitan.
Then the group of Sgt. Abalon and Roxas executed their plan of arresting Pedro
Lim by following him. Sgt. Abalon was on board an owner type jeepney driven by
accused Ochoa and the other accused were in a Datsun car driven by accused
Roxas who is the designated leader of the group.
Before reaching the Nichols exit, accused Roxas radioed Sgt. Abalon who was on
board the owner type jeep and told the latter that they will carry out and start their
operation after the Alabang Access road exit which consist of their previous plan to
abduct their subject as hatched by accused Roxas, through a method where the
Datsun car being driven by accused Roxas will overtake the car and bump the rear
portion of the car. When they did this, Ozores, Mirasol and Delos Santos and the
other members of the same group went out of their respective vehicles and at that
instance accused Roxas and Mirasol grabbed, Eduardo Constantino, the driver of
the Mercedes Benz, and placed him inside the Datsun car.
During the abduction of the victims Sgt. Abalon remained inside the owner-jeep
and watched his companions abduct the two (2) victims. After getting them, they
traveled along the Alabang-Zapote road towards the direction of Cavite on board
the Datsun car driven by Accused Roxas, with their subjects driver and accused
Mirasol as passengers, followed by the Mercedes Benz car driven by accused
Ochoa and carrying victim Tan and accused De los Santos as passengers and the
owner type jeep driven by Sgt. Abalon.
When the subject reached the Alabang Twin cinema, accused Roxas ordered Sgt.
Abalon over the radio to transfer to the Mercedes Benz car. When Sgt. Abalon was
inside the Mercedes Benz of the victim he then asked Roxas that they immediately
proceed to their office at the Villamor Air Base for the tactical interrogation of the
victims but accused Roxas insisted in bringing their subject to a safe house first.
Abalon just kept silent. After a while, Atty. Eugene Tan, inquired from Sgt.
Abalon why he was being arrested. Sgt. Abalon then informed him that a warrant
for his arrest was being executed by the group, he being Wilfredo De Los Santos.
Eugene Tan then responded that he is not Wilfredo de los Santos and told Abalon
that if it is money they want, he could also give it.
When they reached Dasmarias, Cavite, accused Roxas then forcibly dragged the
victim Atty. Eugene Tan out of the Mercedes Benz and told him Putang Ina mo,
alam mo bang malaki ang atraso mo kay Peter Lim? Halika nga dito. and
transferred Atty. Eugene Tan to the Datsun car. Thereafter, the group of Sgt.
Abalon and accused Roxas drove away. Between 10:30 to 11:00 pm while they
were cruising along the highway of Silang, Cavite, using a .38 caliber provided by
Engine who was driving the a Datsun car he shot the victim Atty. Tan once on
the forehead and the victim Constantino on the right side of the head at close range
while the two were seated at the back seat of the Datsun car. Sgt. Abalon attempted
to convince accused Roxas that they should bring the victims to the office of Capt.
Abad for tactical interrogation by flagging down the Datsun car being driven by
accused Roxas and when the Datsun car stopped and Bonifacio Roxas rolled down
its window glass, Sgt. Abalon saw at the back seat of the same car, that Atty. Tan
was already lying limped together with his driver Eduardo Constantino. When
asked why Roxas shot the victim, he answered Directive ng opisina.
Rudy Ochoa, Engine and Toto Mirasol then proceeded to Silang, Cavite, where
they buried the victims in a shallow grave which Mariano Hizon dug earlier for a
fee of P500.00. After disposing of the bodies they returned to Villamor Air base
and reported to Capt. Abad.
Then the group went to see Capt. Abad in his house. After informing Capt. Abad
of what has happened, he called up Pedro Lim on the phone saying Hello.Peter
pleasePeter LimSi Nonoy (nickname of Capt. Abad) O tapos na and
place down the receiver in the presence of Sgt. Abalon, Ochoa and Ozores.
Bonifacio Roxas further testified that he drove the Datsun car to Villamor and took
it to the Shell station at the corner of Libertad and Harrison for cleaning. Bonifacio
Roxas tried to collect the P500,000.00 from Pedro Lim but the latter told him to
wait. After a week he called up accused Lim twice for the P500,000.00 and to get
the salary but was unable to get the money. Bonifacio Roxas stated that if the
money was paid he will divide it evenly among Abalon, Ochoa, Engine,
Veneracion and himself. Toto Mirasols share will be taken cared of. He likewise
testified that he has no motive to kill Atty. Eugene Tan aside from the money of
P500,000.00. That as far as he knows, Peter Lim and Gilda Lim have a bitter
dispute over their properties with Atty. Eugene Tan, who he said is having an affair
with Gilda Lim and who instigated the latter to take over the family business.
On November 22, 1994 at about six in the morning Reynaldo De los Santos
received a pager message stating Proceed to Villamor/Wing 2 Office ASAP
Scorpio. Scorpio was Ozores code name, Reynaldo De los Santos rushed to the
office but did not see Ozores so he proceeded to the house of Capt. Abad where he
thought he would see them. There he found Ozores, Ochoa and Emong Samonte. It
was there he learned that Roxas was arrested and that they were all being hunted
for the killing of Atty. Eugene Tan and Constantino. Capt. Abad then ordered them
to surrender all the documents, firearms, MO/MR he issued to them. They stayed
in the house of Capt. Abad the whole day and were prevented from going out of
the house by Col. Abelardo Abad, who is Capt. Abads brother.
Reynaldo De los Santos does not know if money changed hands but he does recall
that a day or two after the operation inside the house of Capt. Abad that he was
talking to someone over the phone and told him, Ozores and Ochoa that it was
Maj. Gammad who he talked to and Maj. Gammad was asking for a bonus for the
successful operation.
ANALYSIS
All of the evidence taken together, conclusively show that the accused acted in
conspiracy with one another, and clearly committed the crimes charged -
kidnapping with illegal detention and two counts of murder, except for Yu and
Hizon who were charged as Accomplice and Accessory, for the killing of Atty.
Eugene Tan and his driver Eduardo Constantino.
All the accused acted in conspiracy with one another in mutual aid of one
another in order to kidnap and kill Atty. Eugene Tan and his driver Eduardo
Constantino
Article 8 of the Revised Penal Code states that there is a conspiracy if two or more
persons agree to commit a felony and decide to commit it.1 Conspiracy must be
proven on the same quantum of evidence as the felony subject of the agreement of
the parties. It may be proven by direct or circumstantial evidence consisting of
acts, words, or conduct of the alleged conspirators before, during and after the
commission of the felony to achieve a common design or purpose. Conspiracy can
be express or implied - it is enough that the offenders acted in concert at the time
of the commission of the offense, each doing his part to fulfill the common design.2
In the case of Preferred Home Specialties, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals3 that:
It is a common design which is the essence of conspiracy. The
conspirators may act separately or together by commission on different

1 An Act Revising The Penal Code and Other Penal Laws [Revised Penal Code], Act No. 3185, art. 8 (1930)
2
People v. Hernandez, 182 SCRA 794, 799 (1990)
3 Preferred Home Specialties, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, 478 SCRA 387, 414-415 (2005).
 manner but always leading to the same unlawful act. The character and
effect of a conspiracy are not to be judged by dismembering it and
viewing its separate parts but only by looking at it as a whole. Acts done
to give effect to the conspiracy may be, in fact, wholly innocent acts. Yet,
if they are parts of the sum of the acts which are relied upon to effectuate
the conspiracy which the law forbids, they lose that character. Such acts
become a public wrong if the result is harmful to the public or to the
individual against whom the concerted action is directed.

Clearly, all the accused acted with one criminal intent and design. They all
agreed to conduct an operation to abduct Atty. Eugene Tan by blocking his vehicle,
with the purpose of killing them and handcuffed the victims hands to ensure that
they would not be able to defend themselves, and after shot both victims in the
head. Particular facts even show that the accused have the knowledge of the real
purpose prior to the commission of the offense. The previous surveillance, the
meetings for the funding by Pedro Lim, are only some of the instances that prove
their common design to kill, and not only arrest the victims. Moreover, Sgt. Abalon
stated that they already have a standing warrant of arrest before they commenced
the mission. It is questionable that they would have to conduct the arrest in such a
such a manner - by intercepting the car in the middle of the road, and abducting the
victims. It was not even alleged that the victims were informed that there was such
a warrant. Taking all of this into consideration, all the accused clearly committed
the crime of murder. In conspiracy, the act of one is the act of all. Here,
overwhelming evidence has been presented to prove conspiracy. The case of
People vs. Bulan held that if conspiracy is proved, all the conspirators are
criminally liable for the crime charged and if proved the act of one is the act of
all.4
For the crime of kidnapping, evidence has been presented to prove that the
accused in conspiracy with one another, forcibly abducted Atty. Eugene Tan and
Eduardo Constantino with the use of a motor vehicle and firearms and deprived
them of their liberty for an unspecified length of time and against their will. The
crime was qualified because they simulated their public authority as members of
the Philippine Air Force. They presented themselves to the victims as members of
the Philippine Air Force and testified that the abduction was part of their
surveillance operation on Atty. Eugene Tan as an alleged financier ng pula. The
crime of kidnapping is further qualified because the accused threatened to kill the
victims.
It cannot be denied that the real plan of the accused was to abduct Atty. Eugene
Tan and his driver Constantino. The establishment of conspiracy is also vital in
proving the other elements of murder as will be explained after.
The evidence conclusively shows that the accused committed murder and
kidnapping
There is no doubt as to the commission of murder as all the elements of
Article 248 punishing murder are present. First, that the victims were indeed killed.
Second, that their deaths were caused by Roxas who shot them. Though Roxas was
the only one who did the act of killing, they are all still liable because conspiracy

4
People vs. Bulan, 459 SCRA 550, 576 (2005).
has been established. Next, their act of killing was qualified by treachery, evident
premeditation, taking advantage of superior strength, with the aid of armed men or
by a band, or by employing means or persons to ensure or afford impunity and
with the use of a motor vehicle, consideration of price, reward or promise.5

There killing was attended by treachery and evident premeditation, taking

advantage of their superior strength, with the aid of armed men or by a band.
There is treachery when the offender employs means, methods, or forms in
the execution of the crime which tends directly and specially to insure its execution
without risk to himself arising from the defense which the offended party might
take.6
The evidence also shows that the murder of the two victims were qualified
with treachery and evident premeditation. Treachery was clearly present because
the victims were not given the opportunity to defend themselves. Accused Roxas
had the two victims handcuffed and placed at the back seat of the car. The act
ensured the prosecution of the crime. The victims were defenseless. The
suddenness in the shooting of the victims would clearly show that treachery was
present. The Supreme Court in a number of decisions has stated that treachery to
exists when these two conditions are found: (1) that at the time of the attack the
victim was not in a position to defend himself; and (2) the offender consciously
adopted the particular means, method or form of attack employed by him.7
Clearly, evident premeditation was seen in the circumstances. Upon the
evidence of the prosecution and accuseds own admissions they conspired with one
another to kill Atty. Eugene Tan and his driver. One circumstance that shows the
premeditation is the digging of the grave by Mariano Hizon. The Supreme Court
has held that for Evident Premeditation to qualify a crime the following must be
proven: (a) the time when the offender has determined to commit the crime; (b) an
act manifestly indicating that the offender has clung to his determination; (c) an
interval of time between the determination and the execution of the crime enough
to allow him to reflect upon the consequence of his act.8
These were again proved by their admission that the they conducted surveillance
operations and observed Atty. Eugene Tan prior to the November 14, 1994
incident. From the testimony of the witnesses, Eugene Yu and Peter Lim were
already plotting with Capt. Abad and coordinating with the other accused to kill
Atty. Eugene Tan. This can be also be determined from the action of the accused
when the Datsun car was provided by Peter Lim and monies given by Eugene Yu
and Peter Lim to the operatives.
When the incident occurred on November 14, 1994 all of the accused waited for
the victims to leave the office, followed the vehicle and even concocted a plan to
stop the vehicle of the victims by having the Datsun car driven by Roxas to cut the
vehicle of the victims and then the owner type jeep driven by Ochoa to bump the

5
Revised Penal Code, art. 248.
6 People vs. Caloza, Jr., 396 SCRA 329, 344 (2003)
7 People vs. Avendano, 396 SCRA 309, 325-326 (2003).
8 People vs. Castillano, Sr., 400 SCRA 401, 421 (2003).
rear of the vehicle. Accused Roxas let go of his actual motive when he shouted at
Atty. Eugene Tan that putang ina mo alam mo ba malaki atraso mo kay Peter
Lim!. Likewise the fact that the accused even had a burial site prepared in the
property of Eugenio Hizon clearly shows that there was evident premeditation on
the part of the accused and they carefully planned the entire operation for more
than one month.
According to the witnesses there were six operatives who conducted the operation
on November 14, 2007 and all of them were armed except for Sgt. Abalon. Roxas
acting in concert with his cohorts used their superior strength and their arms in
order to abduct and kill the two victims.
The accused committed the crime of murder qualified by the use of a motor
vehicle.
As repeated by the witnesses, Peter Lim provided the Datsun car with the owner
type jeep which they used in stopping the vehicle of Atty. Eugene Tan, and abduct
him and Constantino, for the latter two to be eventually killed. In short, the
vehicles were used by the accused in transporting and killing the victims.
Kidnapping is also established by the evidence and testimonies presented
The evidence shows that all the elements in Art. 267 for kidnapping and serious
illegal detention are present. The accused are a mix of private and public
individuals. Next, the victims were deprived of their liberty when they were
forcefully made to ride the Datsun car against their will. The deprivation here can
be in whatever form and whatever length of time. Next, that serious physical
injuries were inflicted, and it even resulted into the victims death.9
Eugene Yu and Peter Lim arranged the killing and kidnapping of Atty. Eugene
Tan for a consideration of price, reward or promise
The Supreme Court has ruled that the person who has received the price or reward
or who accepted a promise of price or reward would not have killed the victim if
not for that price, reward or promise. Such person is a principal by direct
participation. The one who gave the price or reward or who made the promise is a
principal by induction. When these circumstances are alleged in the information
for murder and proven by the prosecution, accused are guilty as principals by
inducement for the crime of murder 10
From the testimony of the witnesses and the extra-judicial confessions executed
given by the other witnesses, Bonifacio Roxas and the rest of the operatives were
promised a reward by Eugene Yu and Peter Lim. Again the testimonies show that
the vehicle and monies were provided by accused Lim and Yu for the entire
operation and also coordinated with the superior of the accused named as Captain
Abad. Bonifacio Roxas testified that he was ordered to kill Atty. Eugene Tan for
the amount of P500,000.00.

9
Revised Penal Code, art. 267.
10U.S.
vs. Alim, 38 Phil. 1, 3 (1918).
The witnesses and their testimonies were credible and sufficient to convict the
accused of the charges against them
The witnesses presented by the Prosecution are also credible enough to warrant the
conviction of the accused. Sgt. Abalons testimony was straightforward. De los
Santos and Ochoa, whose qualification to become state witnesses was favorably
decided by the Honorable Supreme Court itself are more damaging for they
themselves participated and were present when they and their colleagues abducted
and killed the victims.
While the defense points to some inconsistencies in the testimonies of the other
witnesses, as a rule however, inconsistencies in minor details and collateral
matters, does not affect the credibility of the witnesses nor the veracity or weight
of their testimonies.11
The Supreme Court has ruled that even one witness is sufficient to convict an
accused for murder. The Prosecution has presented more than five (5) credible
witnesses who were subjected to cross-examination questions by the defense
counsels of the accused and all their testimonies prove that all the accused acted in
conspiracy with one another to kill Atty. Eugene Tan and Eduardo Constantino.
The accused are liable for civil damages to the heirs of the victims
The heirs of Atty. Eugene Tan have spent the amount of P450,000.00 as funeral
expenses evidenced by the Official Receipt No. 55493 of the Loyola Memorial
Chapels, Inc. (Exhibit K of the Prosecution) and P141,000.00 for the
entombment at the St. Jerome Emiliani & St. Susana Parish as evidenced by
Certificate of Payment issued by the St. Jerome Emiliani & St. Susana Parish
(Exhibit L of the Prosecution).
The heirs of Atty. Eugene Tan are also entitled to damages because of the loss of
his earning capacity due to his untimely demise. At the time of his death Atty.
Eugene Tan was making at least P1,446,976.75 annually as evidenced by Tan
Manzano & Velez Law Office Statement of Partners Equity (Exhibit J of the
Prosecution).
The Honorable Court should also award the heirs of Eduardo Constantino the
amount of not less than 300,000.00 or as the court may deem wise as actual and
moral damages.
The Heirs of Atty. Eugene Tan and Eduardo Constantino are also entitled to
exemplary and moral damages because of the violent manner in which the two
victims were killed.
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, Prosecution respectfully prays that a Decision be rendered
finding the Accused Pedro Lim, Captain Alfred Abad, Venerando Ozores,
Bonifacio Roxas and Luisito Mirasol and Eugene Yu guilty beyond reasonable
doubt for the crime of KIDNAPPING and TWO (2) counts of MURDER for the

11
People vs. Santos, 420 SCRA 37, 43 (2004).
abduction and killing of Atty. Eugene Tan and Eduardo Constantino, as penalized
under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, and be adjudged civilly liable to
indemnify the heirs of their victims.
Private prosecutors

JOHN ROBERT ANDRES

RENZO ESCALONA

NOWELL PAOLO SIM

PAUL RICO TAN