Negros Oriental State University

College of Criminal Justice Education

MC 2 – Bajumpandan

CDI 201 (Specialized Crime Investigation 1 - with Legal Medicine)

Module/Lesson Guide
Instructor: TIRSO C. ALAS-AS, MSCJ
MODULE 2

Name: _____________________________________ Year & Section: ______________

Due date of submission: On or before May 18, 2023

The Crime of Murder

Introduction

Murder is known throughout the world as the killing of another person. The term "murder" and
the definition can be traced back to pre-roman days. By today's law and statutes, the legal definition of
murder is more complex than simply the killing of another human being.
Murder, as well as a massacre, is an unlawful or a violent act in the Philippines. This crime is the
worst kind of the crimes and leads to the capital punishment. In other words, the offence of murder is the
most serious killing of an individual, and occurs where any ‘reasonable creature in rerum natura’
unlawfully kills any person with malice aforethought. At the same time, murder is generally considered to
be the most reliably reported and recorded serious crime.
ART. 248. Murder. Any person who, not falling within the provisions of Article 246, shall kill
another, shall be guilty of murder and shall be punished by reclusion perpetua, to death if committed with
any of the following attendant circumstances:

1. With treachery, taking advantage of superior strength, with the aid of armed men, or
employing means to weaken the defense, or of means or persons to insure or afford impunity;
2. In consideration of a price, reward, or promise;
3. By means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion, shipwreck, stranding of a vessel, derailment
or assault upon a railroad, fall of an airship, by means of motor vehicles, or with the use of
any other means involving great waste and ruin;
4. On occasion of any calamities enumerated in the preceding paragraph, or of an earthquake,
eruption of a volcano, destructive cyclone, epidemic, or any other public calamity;
5. With evident premeditation;
6. With cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanly augmenting the suffering of the victim, or
outraging or scoffing at his person or corpse.

Note: Cruelty includes the situation where the victim is already dead and yet, acts were committed which
would decry or scoff the corpse of the victim. The crime becomes murder.

There is no cruelty if the act is the result of an impulse of passion or extreme obfuscation as such
will be inconsistent with the concept of deliberateness in augmenting the suffering of the victim. Murder
is the most vindictive crime society can commit. Society often wonders, what makes an individual want to
commit such a crime. As individuals in society, the belief of being born a murderer is false. No one is born a
murderer; society gives birth to that murderer. In Ted Bundy’s case the lack of parental guidance and
constant rejection of women contributed to him evolving into a vicious serial killer. Bundy was a man who
let his fantasies run his life, he believed that life was a game. All this contributed to making Bundy
revengeful, bitter, and not quite mentally stable. The type of murders this man committed was shockingly
cruel and inhuman.
Generally, the elements of murder are:

1) That a person was killed;

2) That the accused killed him;
3) That the killing was attended by any of the qualifying circumstances mentioned in Art. 248;
and
4) That the killing is not parricide or infanticide..
The evidence needed to file a crime of Murder
 1. Testimonial Evidence – Affidavit of complainant and witnesses.
2. Documentary Evidence – photographs, videos, police reports and other documents.
3. Object Evidence – Autopsy, weapons used and other Forensic Reports.
4. Other relevant evidence
Under the Revised Penal Code, the penalty imposed for the crime of murder is reclusion
perpetua (20 years and 1 day to 40 years, but still indivisible penalty).
Malice Aforethought
 A predetermination to commit an act without legal justification or excuse. A malicious de
sign to injure.
 An intent, at the time of a killing, willfully to take the life of a human being, or an intent
wilfully
 The conscious intent to cause death or great bodily harm to another person before a
person commits the crime. Such malice is a required element to prove a crime of murder.
 A general evil and depraved state of mind in which the person is unconcerned for the
lives of others. Thus, if a person uses a gun to hold up a bank and an innocent bystander
is killed in a shoot-out with police, there is malice aforethought.
When a crime is committed with “malice aforethought,” this means that the crime was
premeditated, and the perpetrator held malice for the victim. Put another way, malice aforethought can be
defined as a crime being planned in advance, with the intention to kill or grievously harm another
individual. Originally, proof of malice aforethought was a requirement in certain jurisdictions in order to
convict someone of a crime of murder.

The Meaning of Malice

Malice exists when the defendant desires the victim’s death or is indifferent to whether the victim
lives or dies. Malice is apparent in three criminal homicide situations: the defendant intends to kill the
victim, the defendant intends to cause serious bodily injury to the victim, or the defendant has a depraved
heart and does not care if the victim lives or dies.

The Meaning if Aforethought

The term aforethought at common law meant that the defendant planned or premeditated the
killing. However, this term has lost its significance in modern times and does not modify the malice
element in any way. Premeditation is a factor that can prove a crime of murder. Intent to Kill (Willfully,
deliberately, premeditated)

 Willful means “a specific intent to kill” or as a specific intent to kill, purposely, or express
malice.
 Deliberate – with a view to make a choice. to reflect. Quality of thought
 Premeditate – thinking of a plan to execute what you just deliberated. Quantity of thought.
Formed a plan in his mind
“Intent to kill” is another way of saying malice aforethought, or mens rea. Mens rea is a Latin
term that refers to a defendant’s intention to commit a crime, as opposed to the actual crime itself. Mens
rea is concerned only with the defendant’s mindset, not with his ultimate actions.
An intent to kill does not need to be specifically expressed by the killer. It can be inferred based
on the killer’s actions. For example, malice aforethought can exist if someone shoots another person with
a gun.
However, just because someone shoots another person, that does not mean that he necessarily
had an intent to kill. Perhaps he was just trying to defend himself, or to stop the person he shot from
harming someone else, and he accidentally killed that person in the process.
Determination of suspicious death at this point is critical. In many cases, the first officer to arrive
at the scene has erred and pronounced the death to be from natural causes, only to learn at a later time that
the cause of death was the result of an unnoticed bullet wound. The point is that care and attention to
detail are critical in these types of cases.
Once the investigation has begun, the investigator should attempt to find and identify all evidence
that may be associated with the case. Even items that may seem unimportant and of no value should be
considered potential evidence. In murder investigations, there is usually an abundance of evidence even in
cases in which the suspect has attempted to clean up after the crime. Even in a so-called perfect murder,
there will be much evidence to aid in the crime’s solution. In fact, there is no perfect murder—only cases
in which a deliberate killing could not be successfully prosecuted beyond a reasonable doubt.
In the majority of cases, it is not difficult to determine that the suspicious death was the result of a
murder rather than a suicide or accident. More difficult are those cases that are staged, so at first glance
they seem to be an accident or suicide. In those cases, the first officer and investigator must be thoroughly
familiar with all aspects of homicide investigation. The initial analysis of the situation and the evaluation
of the case require at least as much knowledge as the subsequent investigation of the crime scene.
The officer should keep in mind that if a supposed suicide is judged to be a murder, a serious
error has not been committed, even though the investigation may become more extensive than is
necessary. If, on the other hand, a murder is judged a suicide, the officer has not only failed in the
investigation but may also have made the solution of the crime and the apprehension of the killer more
difficult, if not impossible.
When evaluating whether the deceased died from an accident or suicide or if death was caused by
another person, it is generally best to suspect the worst—murder. Even if circumstances give the
overwhelming appearance of suicide or accident, the investigation should be conducted in as much detail
as possible. Murderers have been known to intentionally stage the death to appear to be an accident or
suicide. The investigating officer must be aware of this possibility. Only through systematic and accurate
investigation can a deception be revealed as that of homicidal intent.
When investigating cases of sudden death, the officer should attempt to evaluate the
circumstances revealed at the crime scene as quickly as possible. The following questions should try to be
answered as soon as possible: What was the cause of death? Could the deceased have produced the
injuries or brought about the circumstances that caused the death? Are there any signs of a struggle? Are
there defensive wounds on the victim? Where is the weapon, instrument, or object that caused the injuries
or traces of the medium that caused death? Although these are only some of the many questions that will
arise in death investigation, they are probably the most important ones for beginning the continued
investigation.
Course Learning Outcomes

At the end of the module, you are expected to know the elements of murder, understand the RA
7659 and to discuss briefly the evidence needed to file a crime of Murder to curriculum requirements
(4.1.1).

Contents of the Module

This module contains the following lessons:

Lesson 1: The Crime of Murder
Lesson 2: The Crime of Homicide
Lesson 3: The Crime of Parricide

Lesson 1: The Crime of Murder

 Definition of Murder
 Republic Act 7659
 Republic Act 248 – The law punishes the crime of Murder
 Elements of Murder
 The evidence needed to file a crime of Murder
 Malice Aforethought

Specific Learning Outcomes

At the end of this lesson, you will be able to;

1. Define Murder
2. Know and memorize the elements of murder
3. Know and understand the RA 7659
4. Familiarize the law punishes the crime of murder
5. Discuss briefly the evidence needed to file a crime of Murder
 6. Explain the criminal act or the element required for murder.
7. Discuss and explain malice aforethought
8. Define and identify the actus reus and mens rea of the offence of murder.

Motivation/Prompting Questions

1. Roger, the leader of a crime syndicate in Malate, Manila, demanded the payment by Antonio, the
owner of a motel in that area, of P10,000 a month as "protection money". With the monthly
payment, Roger assured, the syndicate would provide protection to Antonio, his business, and his
employees. Should Antonio refuse, Roger warned, the motel owner would either be killed or his
establishment destroyed. Antonio refused to pay the protection money. Days later, at round 3:00
in the morning, Mauro, a member of the criminal syndicate, arrived at Antonio's home and hurled
a grenade inti an open window of the bedroom where Antonio, his wife and their three year-old
daughter were sleeping. All three of them were killed instantly when the grenade exploded. State,
with reason, What crime or crimes that had been committed by Roger and Mauro? Discuss and
explain your answer

2. Olimpio caught a cold and was running a fever. His doctor prescribed paracetamol. Olimpio went
to a drug store with the prescription, and the pharmacist sold him three (3) tablets. Upon arriving
home, he took a tablet. One hour later, he had a seizure and died. The autopsy showed that the
tablet he had taken was not paracetamol but a pill to which he was allergic. The pharmacist was
charged with murder. Is the charge proper? If not, what should it be? Explain

3. Manolo revealed to his friend Domeng his desire to kill Cece. He likewise confided to Domeng
his desire to borrow his revolver. Domeng lent it. Manolo shot Cece in Manila with Domeng’s
revolver. As his gun was used in the killing, Domeng asked Mayor Tan to help him escape. The
mayor gave Domeng P5,000.00 and told him to proceed to Mindanao to hide. Domeng went to
Mindanao. The mayor was later charged as an accessory to Cece’s murder.
Can he be held liable for the charge? Explain
Can he be held liable for any other offense? Explain fully

4. Francis and Joan were sweethearts, but their parents had objected to their relationship because
they were first cousins. They forged a pact in writing to commit suicide. The agreement was
shoot each other in the head which they did. Joan died. Due to medical assistance, Francis
survived. Is Francis criminally liable for the death of Joan? Explain your answer

5. Eddie brought his son Randy to a local faithhealer known as "Mother Himala." He was diagnosed
by the faithhealer as being possessed by an evil spirit. Eddie thereupon authorized the conduct of
a "treatment" calculated to drive the spirit from the boy’s body. Unfortunately, the procedure
conducted resulted in the boy’s death.
 The faithhealer and tree others who were part of the healing ritual were charged with murder and
convicted by the lower court. If you are appellate court Justice, would you sustain the conviction
upon appeal? Explain your answer.

Discussion

Define, describe or discuss the following questions based on your own understanding;

1. What is Murder?

2. What springs to your mind when you hear the word ‘murder’? Discuss

3. Explain why criminal intent is an important element of murder.

4. What Evidence Does the Prosecution Need to Prove Murder?

5. What the difference is between ‘kill’ someone and ‘murder’ someone? Explain

6. Is it murder to take someone’s life in a war? Describe or discuss

7. What does it mean when a victim is stabbed multiple times

Learning Activities/Exercises

Activity/Exercises 1
Murder at School
On the first day of the school year, a geography teacher was murdered. The police had 4 suspects: the
gardener, the math teacher, the coach, and the school principal. They all had alibis:
 The gardener was cutting bushes.
 The math teacher was holding a mid-year test.
 The coach was playing basketball.
 The principal was in his office.

The killer was arrested immediately. Who killed the geography teacher, and how did the police solve the
mystery?

Activity/Exercises 2 : Frozen windows

Once on a winter day, John found his friend dead in his own house. John called the police and said that he
was just passing by Jack's house and decided to come in.
He'd been knocking and ringing the bell for a long time, but all was silent. However, he could see the
light in the room through a frozen window. He breathed on the iced window glass and saw Jack on the
floor.
The police arrested John as the main suspect. Why?

Activity/Exercises 3: Chemical substances

A famous chemist was murdered in his own lab. There was no evidence except for a piece of paper with
the names of chemical substances on it. On the day he was murdered, the chemist had only 3 visitors: his
wife, Mary, his nephew Nicolas, and his friend Johnathan.
The police arrested the murderer right away. How did they know who it was?

Activity/Exercises 4: The murder of an aristocrat

George Smith was murdered on Sunday evening. There were 5 other people in his house: Mr. Smith's
wife, his personal cook, a butler, a housemaid, and a gardener. They all told Detective Stevens what they
were doing that evening:
 Mrs. Smith was reading a book near a fireplace.
 The cook was making breakfast.
 The butler was giving instructions to workers in the living room.
 The housemaid was washing the dishes.
 The gardener was watering plants in the greenhouse.

Right after all the conversations, the detective arrested the murderer. Who was the killer, and how did
Stevens find the criminal?

Activity/Exercises 5
Murder Or Suicide

By seeing the image below, you need to figure out if it's a Murder or Suicide?

Teacher Intervention

Since most attrition occurs at the beginning of the subject, it is important to frontload this
preparation and interventions for them to reach out;

 Use technology to track student participation.

 Educate students about the “spirit” of distance learning.

 Distance learning is also available for students who cannot attend lectures and who are capable of
the amount of self-direction and discipline required to complete such a course.
 Reading the materials, communication via email, and on-line discussion are some of the methods
used for distance learning.
 Organize students into learning teams or being an active part of an online learning community.
 They should be a team decision, based on their needs and available resources.
 Use personal education plan details the activities that I’ve going to use in order to help them to
address the student's academic issues.

Practice Task/Assessment

Instruction: Select and encircle the letter of the best answer for each of the following
questions/statements.
Test II: Multiple Choice (2 Points Each)
1. Can be defined as a crime being planned in advance, with the intention to kill or grievously harm
another individual.
a. Malice aforethought c. Deliberate
b. Corpus delicate d. wilful
2. Generally, the elements of murder are; except
a. That a person was killed
b. That the killing was attended by any of the qualifying circumstances mentioned in Art. 248
c. With malice aforethought
d. Without malice aforethought
3. Cruelty includes the situation where the victim is already dead and yet, acts were committed
which would decry or scoff the corpse of the victim. The crime becomes what offense?
a. Homicide c. Infanticide
b. Parricide d. Murder
 4. “A specific intent to kill” or as a specific intent to kill, purposely, or express malice. This
statement means what?
a. Willful c. Premeditated
b. Deliberate d. None of these
5. Donald Bright an illegitimate son of Peter Bright and Lou Wang. Peter Bright shot Lou Wang
with a revolver resulted to the latter’s death; Peter Bright is liable for what crime?
a. Homicide c. Murder
b. Parricide d. Infanticide
6. Kanto Boy a 23 years old killed a 3 years old boy, kanto boy is liable for what crime?
a. Infanticide c. Homicide
b. Murder d. Fraternicide
7. An Act in which an individual kills one or more other persons immediately before or at the same
time as him or herself is called
a. Suicide c. Mass suicide
b. Murder-suicide d. Suicide attack
8. What crime is committed by a person who kills a three-day old baby?
a. Infanticide c. Murder
b. Homicide D. Parricide
9. What crime is committed by a person who kills his legitimate brother on the occasion of a public
calamity?
a. Parricide c. murder
b. homicide d. death caused in a tumultuous affray
10. What crime is committed by a person who kills a three-day old baby?
a. Infanticide c. murder
b. Homicide d. parricide

Test I: True or False (2 Points Each)

Discrete Type of Test:

Direction: Write a complete word TRUE if the statement is correct and the word FALSE if the statement
is wrong.
___________ 1. The offence of murder is the most serious killing of an individual, and occurs where any
‘reasonable creature in Men’s rea.
___________ 2. Evident premeditation means thinking of a plan to execute what you just deliberated.
___________ 3. There is no cruelty if the act is the result of an impulse of passion or extreme obfuscation
as such will be inconsistent with the concept of deliberateness in augmenting the suffering of the victim.
___________ 4. The unconscious mind to cause death or great bodily harm to another person before a
person commits the crime. Such malice is a required element to prove a crime of murder.
___________ 5. When a crime is committed with “malice aforethought,” this means that the crime was
premeditated, and the perpetrator held malice for the victim.
___________ 6. The term aforethought at common law meant that the defendant planned or premeditated
the killing.
___________ 7. Rerum natura is concerned only with the defendant’s mindset, not with his ultimate
actions.
___________ 8. An intent to kill does not need to be specifically expressed by the killer. It can be
inferred based on the killer’s actions.
___________ 9. There is no perfect murder—only cases in which a deliberate killing could not be
successfully prosecuted beyond a reasonable doubt.
___________ 10. If, on the other hand, a murder is judged a suicide, the officer has not only failed in the
investigation but may also have made the solution of the crime and the apprehension of the killer more
difficult, if not impossible.
References/Materials:

Wingfield, L. (2017, February 7). A guide to Murder Cases

https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/1993/12/13/republic-act-no-7659/
https://batasnatin.com/law-library/criminal-law/crimes-and-penalties/1723-murder.html
https://www.lawteacher.net/modules/criminal-law/fatal-offences/murder/
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/an-introduction-to-murder/
https://www.lawteacher.net/modules/criminal-law/fatal-offences/murder/lecture.php
https://essaystone.com/blog/how-to-accomplish-your-essay-on-murder/
Assignment (Enrichment Activity)

Lucila Lulu Murder (1967)

Lucila Lu was the original “Chop-chop Lady,” a term that described women whose body parts
were dismembered and scattered across different parts of the city or province to cover up the identity of
the victim.
Sometime in the early ‘60s, Lu left her hometown in Candaba, Pampanga to seek her fortunes in
Manila, where she found a job as a waitress. When she saved up enough money from her waiting tables,
she put up her own salon at Manila’s red light district. Then, in 1967, she disappeared.
On May 28, the police discovered in Malabon a badly wrapped package that contained different
body parts: a pair of legs, chopped into 4 pieces. The body parts were wrapped with newspaper that was
dated May 14th. They were handed over to the police by garbage collectors, who reported that the
package felt cold, as like frozen meat being defrosted. They knew it was a woman’s because of the well
pedicured toenails.
A day later, a similar package was found on EDSA, near Guadalupe Bridge, this time containing
a torso. Like the first one, it was wrapped in newspaper, but dated May 23.
The police concluded that these body parts had to be from one person, so they suspected that the hands
they found in Recto Avenue a week earlier belonged was connected to these other body parts. Luckily,
the police had Lulu’s fingerprints on file, which they got when she applied for police clearance years
prior. They identified the body as Lulu’s.

Lucila Lulu’s case remains unsolved to this day. Her gruesome death led to the rise of urban
legends and cautionary tales told to young girls so they come home early, lest they become the chop-chop
lady.
Provide short answers and justifications to the following questions:

1.) What type of crime is featured in this case?

2.) What are the main characteristics of the offender?

3.) To what extent are these offender characteristics similar to or different from general patterns in
offenders who commit this particular type of crime?

4.) What are the main characteristics of the victim?

5.) To what extent are these victim characteristics similar to or different from general patterns in
victims of this particular type of crime?

6.) What were the warning signs that emerged as risk factors in the lead up to the homicide incident
in this case?

Reflection or Insights

Give a personal reflection on the following cases;

Here are a few important points to take note for your personal reflection. Your task is to assess
and to give your own insights with this cases;
A. The Chiong Murder Case, which occurred in 1997. The Chiong murder case is one of the most
controversial rape-slay cases in the Philippines because of the amount of publicity it gained.
B. Vizconde Massacre (1991). The Vizconde Massacre is one of the most high-profile rape and murder
cases in the Philippines.
 Note: Your answers should be written in a paragraph form using proper sentences. You should look to
combine detail on other cases as a reference (especially cases of a similar nature). Do not simply
describing the details of the crime, but you are required to show your general understanding of some of
the key trends and characteristics of the crime incident. The task is focused upon the characteristics of the
crime, analysing those characteristics in terms of wider trends in the crime of murder, and identifying
possible intervention points (aimed at reducing the incidence of such crimes in the future). So try to
identify the nature of the crime and to put it into wider perspective, and then work out how such crimes
might be prevented in the future. Always remember that you are carrying out this work with the benefit of
hindsight, so frame your language appropriately here.

The Crime of Homicide

Introduction

Throughout time there has been a very high number of crimes committed in the world. Crime is an
action that constitutes an offense that may be prosecuted by the state and is punishable by law. One of the
most common and well known crimes is homicide. Homicide is the act of a human being causing the death
of another human being.
Homicide. – Any person who, not falling within the provisions of Article 246, shall kill another,
without the attendance of any of the circumstances enumerated in the next preceding article, shall be
deemed guilty of homicide and be punished by reclusion temporal.”
The elements of Homicide are the following:
(a) a person was killed;
(b) the accused killed him without any justifying circumstance;
(c) the accused had the intention to kill, which is presumed; and
(d) the killing was not attended by any of the qualifying circumstances of Murder, or by that of
Parricide or Infanticide.
The simple act of killing of a human being gets classified as homicide. It does not require the
intent of the criminal to be taken into account, and the fact that a man has died because of the fault of
another person is enough to refer the act as homicide.
This means that homicide is a broad, generic concept that could mean the difference between a
lifer and an acquittal without a sentence. An act of harming an individual in defense of oneself or a family
member leading to his death classifies as homicide and not murder. When a person gets killed in line of
duty of a law enforcement officer, he is not charged with murder but homicide.
There are three different types of homicides called justifiable, excusable, and criminal. Among
these three, it is the criminal homicide that carries most severe punishment as the act is unjustifiable.
Justifiable homicides are acts where a human being gets killed in self defense or when one is trying to
defend another person.
Homicide is a legal term for any killing of a human being by another human being. Homicide
itself is not necessarily a crime—for instance, a justifiable killing of a suspect by the police or a killing
in self-defense. The unintended killing of a person while committing a crime, or acting in a reckless or
negligent manner. This type of killing is committed without malice or intent, even accidentally, and is
considered a less serious crime than murder.
Homicide is the act of one human killing another. A homicide requires only a volitional act by
another person that results in death, and thus a homicide may result from accidental, reckless, or negligent
acts even if there is no intent to cause harm. The legal term for the killing of another person is
“homicide,” and while every homicide is heartbreaking and tragic, not every homicide results in the same
criminal charges against the perpetrator. Homicide is a legal term that refers to the killing another human
being without forethought, malice, reckless disregard for life, or implied intent. In many situations, this
type of killing may be considered accidental, though it is caused by the perpetrator’s recklessness or lack
of care for human life.
While a homicide charge is less severe than a charge of murder, but it is still considered a very
serious crime. Each state defines the crime of homicide a bit differently, with some breaking it down into
categories, depending on the specific circumstances surrounding the killing. Homicide is
the unintentional killing of a person by someone who has no spite or anger, and who has no intent to kill
the victim.
In order for a person to be found guilty of homicide, the prosecutor must prove certain elements.
If any of these elements are missing, the charge is likely to be murder, rather than manslaughter.
 Someone died as a result of the defendant’s actions
 The act was done with a reckless indifference for human life, or was inherently dangerous to others
 The defendant should have known his conduct threatened or endangered the lives of others
When a person is charged with homicide, the prosecution has the burden of proving that the
victim was killed by negligent, reckless, or illegal actions taken by the defendant. It must generally be
 proven that the defendant should have known that those actions could have threatened the life or safety of
another person. There is no need to prove intent, as if the defendant intended to injure or kill the victim,
the charge would be elevated to murder.
A defendant may, at trial, show affirmative defenses, in which he illustrates why he should not be
held responsible for his actions, or that his culpability should be lessened. The most commonly used
defenses to homicide charges include:
 Severity of Negligence – negligence resulting in someone’s death must rise to the level of being gross
negligence, or criminal negligence. If the defendant’s actions were only slightly negligent, it may prove
an effective defense. Arguing that the victim was negligent as well is not likely to help.
 Accident or Self-Defense – any defense against the underlying crime in a charge of justifiable homicide
is a defense against charges for the killing itself. This might include a claim of having caused the victim’s
death while acting in self defense, or in defense of another, or it might involve showing that the death was
accidental when the defendant assaulted the victim, using very little force.
Homicide is the killing of a person without prior intent, but which happens during the “heat of
passion.” This means that, during a circumstance that would likely cause any reasonable person to
become so severely emotionally distressed, as to act without thinking, resulting in the victim’s death.
Vehicular Homicide
Vehicular homicide may be charged as either involuntary or voluntary homicide, depending on
the circumstances, and the jurisdiction in which it occurs. This crime is defined as the killing of another
person while driving in a negligent manner, including driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs. In
most jurisdictions, vehicular homicide is likely to be charged as voluntary when the driver intentionally
engaged in actions considered to be severely negligent or reckless, which he should have known would
endanger others. In addition, driving under the influence (“DUI”) is usually considered to be a voluntary
or intentional act.
Homicide is, according to the revised penal code, punishable by reclusion temporal or a minimum
of 12 years and 1 day up to a maximum of 20 years.

Course Learning Outcomes

At the end of the module, you are expected to discuss the distinction between murder and
homicide, identify the elements of homicide and to know the stages of the commission of homicide to met
curriculum requirements (4.1.1).

Lesson 2: The Crime of Homicide

 Definition of Homicide
 Revised Penal Code Article 249 – The law punishes the crime of Homicide
 Elements of Homicide
 The evidence needed to file a crime of Homicide

Specific Learning Outcomes

At the end of this lesson, you will be able to;

1. Discuss the distinction between murder and homicide
2. Identify the elements of homicide.
3. Analyze the stages of the commission of the offense.
4. Apply the basic concepts of homicide as an act without malice.

Motivation/Prompting Questions

1. Father and son, Yu Lon and Yu Yu stopped on the sidewalk when a man who was later identified
as Cagoco had been passing back and forth behind Yu Lon. Cagoco approached Yu Lon from
behind and without warning, struck him with his fist on the back part of the head. Yu Lon fell, his
head hitting the pavement, and such caused his death. Is Cagoco criminally liable though he has
no intention to kill Yu Lon? If yes, what specific offense? Explain

2. Mr. A fired at B, but the bullet landed on a bystander who died due to the gunshot. Mr. A shall be
criminally liable for the bystander’s death? Explain
 3. Lina worked as a housemaid and yaya of the one week old son of the spouses John and Joana.
When Lina learned that her 70-year old mother was seriously ill, she asked John fora cash
advance of P20,000.00, but the latter refused. In anger, Lina gagged the mouth of the child with
stockings, placed him in a box sealed it with masking tape, and placed the box in the attic. Lina
then left the house and asked her friend Fely to demand a “P20,000.00 ransom for the release of
the spouses’ child to be paid within twenty-four hours. The spouses did not pay the ransom. After
a couple. of days, John discovered the box in the attic with his child already dead. According to
the autopsy report, the child died of asphyxiation barely minutes after the box was sealed. What
crime or crimes, if any, did Lina and Fely commit? Explain

4. X killed B, mistakenly believing that she was his wife, upon surprising her having sex with
another man in a motel room. What is the crime or criminal liability of X? Explain

Discussion

Discuss the following questions based on your own understanding;

1. What law punishes the crime of Homicide?

2. What is the evidence needed to file a crime of Homicide?

3. Discuss and illustrate the stages of execution of the crime of homicide, taking into account the
nature of the offense, the essential element of each of the stages of execution and the manner of
committing such felony?

4. Distinguish or differentiate between the crime of murder, homicide, parricide and infanticide.

Learning Activities/Exercises

Activity/Exercises 1

 Bruno was charged with homicide for killing the 75-year old owner of his rooming house. The
prosecution proved that Bruno stabbed the owner causing his death; and that the killing
happened at 10 in the evening in the house where the victim and Bruno lived. Bruno, on the
other hand, successfully proved that he voluntarily surrendered to the authorities; that he
pleaded guilty to the crime charged; that it was the victim who first attacked and did so without
any provocation on his (Bruno's) part, but he prevailed because he managed to draw his knife
with which he stabbed the victim. The penalty for homicide is reclusion temporal. Assuming a
judgment of conviction and after considering the attendant circumstances, what penalty should
the judge impose? Explain your answer

Activity/Exercises 2

 John comes home to find his wife engaged in sexual relations with another man, and he
immediately becomes enraged. John picks up a heavy lamp next to the bed and hits the man over
the head. The blow causes a bleed in the man’s brain, from which he dies in the hospital the next
 day. Ordinarily, John would never harm another person, but learning that his wife was involved
in an affair caused him to become so emotional, he acted in the heat of passion. Is John
responsible for the killing the man? Yes or No? If yes, What specific offense? If No, Explain your
viewpoint.

Activity/Exercise 3

 Rick, a professional truck driver, unloads and accepts another load after lying to his dispatcher
about his driving log, and his level of fatigue. While driving on the highway with the new load,
Rick falls asleep, running over another vehicle on his way to crash into the center divider. The
driver of the other vehicle is killed in the accident. Although Rick did not intend to injure or kill
anyone, he knows of the dangers of driving while fatigued, as well as the regulations requiring
truck drivers to stop and rest at specific intervals. Rick may be held liable for what specific
offense? Explain

Teacher Intervention

Since most attrition occurs at the beginning of the subject, it is important to frontload this
preparation and interventions for them to reach out;

 Use technology to track student participation.

 Educate students about the “spirit” of distance learning.
 Distance learning is also available for students who cannot attend lectures and who are capable of
the amount of self-direction and discipline required to complete such a course.
 Reading the materials, communication via email, and on-line discussion are some of the methods
used for distance learning.
 Organize students into learning teams or being an active part of an online learning community.
 They should be a team decision, based on their needs and available resources.
 Use personal education plan details the activities that I’ve going to use in order to help them to
address the student's academic issues.

Practice Task/Assessment

Discrete Type of Test:

Test I: True or False (2 Points Each)

Direction: Write a complete word TRUE if the statement is correct and the word FALSE if the statement
is wrong.
___________ 1. Homicide is the act of a human being causing the death of another human being.
___________ 2. An act of harming an individual in defence of oneself or a family member leading to his
death classifies as murder and not homicide.
___________ 3. The unintended killing of a person while committing a crime, or acting in a reckless or
negligent manner. This type of killing is committed without malice or intent, even accidentally, and is
considered a less serious crime than murder.
___________ 4. Justifiable homicides are acts where a human being gets killed in self defense or when
one is trying to defend another person.
___________ 5. Not every homicide results in the same criminal charges against the perpetrator.
___________ 6. Parricide is a legal term that refers to the killing another human being without
forethought, malice, reckless disregard for life, or implied intent.
___________ 7. Homicide is the unintentional killing of a person by someone who has no spite or anger,
and who has no intent to kill the victim.
____________ 8. A homicide charge is less severe than a charge of murder.
____________ 9. Homicide is the unlawful killing of a person with malice aforethought.
____________ 10. Homicide is the killing of a person without prior intent.

Test II: Multiple Choice (2 Points Each)

Instruction: Select and encircle the letter of the best answer for each of the following
questions/statements.
1. Crime is an action that constitutes an offense that may be prosecuted by the state and is;
a. Punishable by law c. Civil law
b. Statutes d. Remedial law
2. The simple act of killing of a human being gets classified as ____________. It does not require
the intent of the criminal to be taken into account.
a. Homicide c. Infanticide
b. Murder d. Parricide
3. There are three different types of homicides called justifiable, excusable, and;
a. Self –defense c. acting in a reckless
b. Criminal d. negligent in manner
4. When a person is charged with ___________, the prosecution has the burden of proving that the
victim was killed by negligent, reckless, or illegal actions taken by the defendant.
a. Infanticide c. Homicide
b. Parricide d. Murder
5. There is no need to prove ___________, as if the defendant intended to injure or kill the victim,
the charge would be elevated to murder.
a. Intent c. Reckless
b. Negligent d. Illegal actions
6. Any defense against the underlying crime in a charge of justifiable homicide is a defense against
charges for the killing itself.
a. Severity of Negligence c. Negligent in manner
b. Accident or Self-Defense d. Reckless
7. Homicide is the killing of a person without prior intent, but which happens during the
__________________. This means that, during a circumstance that would likely cause any
reasonable person to become so severely emotionally distressed, as to act without thinking,
resulting in the victim’s death.
a. Heat of passion c. Heat of the moment
b. Distress d. None of these
8. Homicide is, according to the revised penal code, punishable by ____________________ or a
minimum of 12 years and 1 day up to a maximum of 20 years.
a. Reclusion perpetua c. Prision mayor
b. Reclusion temporal d. Prision correctional

9. X killed B, mistakenly believing that she was his wife, upon surprising her having sex with
another man in a motel room. What is the criminal liability of X?
a. None since he killed her under exceptional circumstances.
b. None since he acted under a mistake of fact.
c. Parricide
d. Homicide
10. Out of spite and simply intending to put Gina to shame for breaking off with him, Ritchie
emptied a gallon of motor oil on the school's stairway where Gina usually passed. Gina, unaware
of what Ritchie did, used the slippery stairway and slipped, hitting her head on the stairs. Gina
died from brain hemorrhage. What crime did Ritchie commit?
a. Murder c. Homicide
b. Reckless imprudence resulting in homicide d. Impossible crime of homicide.
References/Materials

https://legaldictionary.net/involuntary-manslaughter/
Howell, J.M (1999). Homicide Investigation Standard Operating Procedures.
https://www.doj.gov.ph/files/ccc/Criminal_Code_September-2014(draft).pdf
https://www.chanrobles.com/revisedpenalcodeofthephilippinesbook2.htm
https://batasnatin.com/law-library/criminal-law/crimes-and-penalties/1724-homicide.html

Assignment (Enrichment Activity)

 Write at least 100 words essay by describing this question “Is homicide truly justifiable?” Sight
some of your defence or justification towards stated question.
Reflection or Insights

Personal Reflection

 Give your own perception and understanding about the Murder and Homicide cases in the
Philippines. How it could be affect our safety and security?

The Crime of Parricide

Introduction

Found in a verse of the Bible in the book written by Paul to Timothy giving letters of exhortation
to the people of God in those times. It has been especially persecuted and regarded as one of the most
heinous crimes, while in ancient Rome, the power of the father over the family reached such an extent
that during certain periods of time punishment which inflicted the patricidal father was less than that of
other less serious crimes. However, throughout history have been frequent cases of princes who killed
their parents to inherit their kingdoms. The judeo-Christian tradition has been based on the story of the
sacrifice of Isaac (Abraham's faith test) to assert that their God expressly disapproves of parricide.
It is said that, in Romulus’ time, there was no penalty for parricide because it was considered a
crime too evil ever to be committed. While parricide in those days referred to the murder of one’s own
parent or ascendant, the killing of one’s own offspring, which the term’s modern meaning now includes,
is equally horrendous and deserving of the stiffest penalty.
The relationship between the offender and the victim is a key element in the crime of
parricide, which punishes any person “who shall kill his father, mother, or child, whether legitimate or
illegitimate, or any of his ascendants or descendants, or his spouse.” The relationship between the
offender and the victim distinguishes the crime of parricide from murder or homicide. However, the issue
in the annulment of marriage is not similar or intimately related to the issue in the criminal case for
parricide. Further, the relationship between the offender and the victim is not determinative of the guilt or
innocence of the accused.
The issue in the civil case for annulment of marriage under Article 36 of the Family Code is
whether petitioner is psychologically incapacitated to comply with the essential marital obligations. The
issue in parricide is whether the accused killed the victim. In this case, since petitioner was charged with
frustrated parricide, the issue is whether he performed all the acts of execution which would have killed
respondent as a consequence but which, nevertheless, did not produce it by reason of causes independent
of petitioner’s will. At the time of the commission of the alleged crime, petitioner and respondent were
married. The subsequent dissolution of their marriage, in case the petition in Civil Case No. 04-7392 is
granted, will have no effect on the alleged crime that was committed at the time of the subsistence of the
marriage. In short, even if the marriage between petitioner and respondent is annulled, petitioner could
still be held criminally liable since at the time of the commission of the alleged crime, he was still married
to respondent."
Art. 246. Parricide. — Any person who shall kill his father, mother, or child, whether legitimate
or illegitimate, or any of his ascendants, or descendants, or his spouse, shall be guilty of parricide and
shall be punished by the penalty of reclusion perpetua to death.
Period to prepare complaint when arrested without a warrant: 36 hours
Parricide is committed when: (1) a person is killed; (2) the deceased is killed by the accused; (3)
the deceased is the father, mother, or child, whether legitimate or illegitimate, or a legitimate other
ascendant or other descendant, or the legitimate spouse of accused.”
The imposition of parental discipline on children of tender years must always be with the view of
correcting their erroneous behavior. A parent or guardian must exercise restraint and caution in
administering the proper punishment. They must not exceed the parameters of their parental duty to
discipline their minor children. It is incumbent upon them to remain rational and refrain from being
motivated by anger in enforcing the intended punishment. A deviation will undoubtedly result in sadism."

Parricide is differentiated from murder and homicide by the relationship between the killer and
his or her victim. Even without the attendant circumstances qualifying homicide to murder, the law
punishes those found guilty of parricide with reclusion perpetua to death, prior to the enactment of
Republic Act No. (RA) 9346 (An Act Prohibiting the Imposition of the Death Penalty in
the Philippines). The commission of parricide is punished more severely than homicide since human
beings are expected to love and support those who are closest to them. The extreme response of killing
someone of one’s own flesh and blood is indeed unnatural and tragic."
 Art. 247. Death or physical injuries inflicted under exceptional circumstances. — Any legally
married person who having surprised his spouse in the act of committing sexual intercourse with another
person, shall kill any of them or both of them in the act or immediately thereafter, or shall inflict upon
them any serious physical injury, shall suffer the penalty of destierro. If he shall inflict upon them
physical injuries of any other kind, he shall be exempt from punishment.
These rules shall be applicable, under the same circumstances, to parents with respect to their
daughters under eighteen years of age, and their seducer, while the daughters are living with their parents.
Any person who shall promote or facilitate the prostitution of his wife or daughter, or shall otherwise
have consented to the infidelity of the other spouse shall not be entitled to the benefits of this article.

What are the main questions about parricide that remain unanswered? We
know that most children do not kill their abusive parents and that most
individuals with a psychotic illness do not kill their parents. It is the particular
nexus of biopsychosocial factors connecting abuse and parricide or psychosis
and parricide that remains to be established. In other words, does everyone who
has a psychosis and has conflicts with parents pose at least a slight risk of
parricide? Does every abused child pose at least a slight risk of parricide?
Parricides raise legal questions with regard to criminal responsibility. In
parricide cases, the facts tend to be more emotionally salient, and it is
conceivable that a judge or jury might be persuaded to arrive at a more drastic
outcome than in another homicide. In the event of an insanity defense for
parricide, a judge or jury may be more likely to be persuaded of a defendant's
mental incapacity because of the relative inconceivability of the crime.
Courts seek to determine an offender's level of intention to kill or harm the
victim or victims. For example, the courts try to determine whether the offender
willingly and knowingly killed the victim or victims, whether the offender should
have known the risks inherent in his or her actions, or whether the offender
failed to take reasonable care in his or her actions. Each of these levels of intent
demands a different level of punishment.

Parricide offenders may try to raise legal defenses relating to mental state
at the time of the crime in an effort to show that they lacked mental capacity.
Two possibilities suggested are mental incapacity in the form of psychosis and
self‐defense. In many jurisdictions, insanity may serve as a legal defense if it can
be established that the offender, at the time of the crime, could not appreciate
the wrongfulness of his or her actions or was unable to control his or her actions
due to a mental illness or defect. Self‐defense is also a legal defense to murder.
To plead self‐defense, a perpetrator in many jurisdictions must establish that he
or she had a reasonable perception of imminent harm to self or others, that the
use of force was necessary to avoid the danger, and that the force used in self ‐
defense was justified by the degree of threatened harm.

Although not widely recognized in the legal community, academic arguments have been made for
expanding self‐defense theory, using what has been labeled battered ‐child syndrome as a defense to
parricide. The theory of battered‐child syndrome is modeled after battered ‐woman syndrome and suggests
that in the case of the severely abused child, parricide is an act of desperation, as the child sees the death
of the abusive parent as the only way out of an intolerable situation (even if the abuse is not occurring at
the time of the offense). It has been suggested that current definitions of self ‐defense are too narrow and
should be expanded to include battered‐child syndrome as a legal defense to parricide.

It is not possible to predict that a particular boy or girl will kill a parent. The reason that parricide
cannot be predicted is because parricide is such a statistically unusual event. Most of the offspring who
killed their parents, as we have seen, were actually adult children, meaning they were over 18 years of
age. Over the 32-year period examined, the number of juvenile parricide offenders was substantially
lower. On the average, juveniles killed 31 fathers and 18 mothers per year. In addition to the small
number of cases of parricides in relation to all homicides, studies have shown that it is hard to predict
violent behavior, unless there is a history of violent behavior by a particular individual.

Although it is not possible to predict that a youth will kill his or her parent, research has indicated
there are certain factors, if present, that increase the likelihood of a youth killing a parent. These include:
1. The youth is raised in a chemically dependent or other dysfunctional family
2. An ongoing pattern of family violence exists in the home
3. Conditions in the home worsen, and violence escalates.
4. The youth becomes increasingly vulnerable to stressors in the home environment.
5. A firearm is readily available in the home environment.

There is no specific age. However, age is indeed relevant when looking at likely motivations or
factors contributing to the homicide. Motivations for the killing are very important, as they are related to
how much risk the parricide offender is to society and what should be done in terms of justice. Children
and adolescents are most likely to kill to end abuse or to get their own way. Sometimes they kill because
of severe mental illness. However, severe mental illness is not as much of a factor with young parricide
offenders as with older parricide offenders.

Adults who kill their parents, particularly those who are middle-aged, are likely to kill their
aging parents because of severe mental illness, such as psychosis or severe depression. They also kill for
antisocial reasons, such as to get their parent's assets. Abuse alone is rarely the driving force for an older
adult to kill a parent because a healthy adult has options a child under 18 does not have. A healthy adult,
for example, can leave the home of the aging parent or cut ties with an abusive parent. When conditions
warrant it, such as the deteriorating health of an aging parent, perhaps, complicated with substance abuse,
a healthy adult can take action to have the parent hospitalized or put in a nursing facility.

There are two particular facets

relating to parricide. One being
patricide the
killing of ones father and
matricide being the killing of
ones mother. According
to Holcomb (2000) out of the
2.2% of parricides, patricides
comprised of 1.5%
with matricides making
up .07% revealing that
matricide killing was less
significant than patricidal
killing. Matricide is when a son
or daughter kills their
mother.
There are two particular facets
relating to parricide. One being
patricide the
killing of ones father and
matricide being the killing of
ones mother. According
to Holcomb (2000) out of the
2.2% of parricides, patricides
comprised of 1.5%
with matricides making
up .07% revealing that
matricide killing was less
significant than patricidal
killing. Matricide is when a son
or daughter kills their
Course Learning Outcomes

At the end of the module, you are expected to define and understand the elements of parricide,
Know the relationship between the offender and the victim distinguishes the crime of parricide from
murder or homicide and familiarize the law punishes those found guilty of parricide to meet curriculum
requirements (4.1.1).

Lesson 3: The Crime of Parricide

 Definition of Parricide
 Revised Penal Code, Article 248 – The law punishes the crime of Parricide
 Elements of Parricide
 The evidence needed to file a crime of Parricide

Specific Learning Outcomes

At the end of this lesson, you will be able to;

1. Define the crime of parricide

2. Know and understand the elements of parricide.
3. Know the relationship between the offender and the victim distinguishes the crime of parricide
from murder or homicide.
4. Familiarize the law punishes those found guilty of parricide.
5. Determine whether the act of the offender willingly and knowingly killed
the victim.
6. Determine the type of parricide offender.

Motivation/Prompting Questions

1. It is possible or not to predict that a particular boy or girl will kill a parent? Give a concrete
reasoning on why a crime of parricide cannot be predicted or can be predicted that occurred
within the family relationships?

2. 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? Yes or No. Explain your answer

3. Suppose BS is legitimate but L is illegitimate, would the answer be the same? Explain

4. Aldrich was dismissed from his Job by his employer. Upon reaching home, his pregnant wife,
Carmi, nagged him about money for her medicines. Depressed by his dismissal and angered by
the nagging of his wife, Aldrich struck Carmi with his fist. She fell to the ground. As a result, she
and her unborn baby died. Question: What crime was committed by Aldrich?

5. A, a young housewife, and B, her paramour, conspired to kill C her husband, to whom she was
lawfully married, A and B bought pancit and mixed it with poison. A gave the food with poison
to C, but before C could eat it. D, her illegitimate father, and E, her legitimate son, arrived. C, D
and E shared the food in the presence of A who merely watched them eating. C, D and E died
because of having partaken of the poisoned food. What crime or crimes did A and B commit?

6. In 1975, Pedro, then a resident of Manila, abandoned his wife and their son, Ricky, who was then
only three years old. Twenty years later, an affray took place in a bar in Olongapo City between
Pedro and his companions, on one hand, and Ricky and his friends, upon the other, without the
 father and son knowing each other. Ricky stabbed and killed Pedro in the fight, only to find out, a
week later, when his mother arrived from Manila to visit him in jail, that the man whom he killed
was his own father. Suppose Ricky knew before the killing that Pedro is his father, but he
nevertheless killed him out of bitterness for having abandoned him and his mother, what crime
did Ricky commit? Explain

Discussion

Discuss the following questions based on your own understanding;

1. What prompted your study of parricide? Give your own analysis with regards to this offense.

2. How do you determine the type of parricide offender? Discuss and explain

3. Is there an specific age when a child is more likely to kill their parent (juvenile versus adult)?
And is there an overwhelming motivation?

4. Can you talk about the importance of boundary setting and parental respect for children in
regards to their parents?

5. What conclusions can you draw from children who choose knives over firearms?

Learning Activities/Exercises

Activity/Exercises 1: Romantic journey

Mr. and Mrs. Clyde went on a trip to the mountains. But 2 days later, Mr. Clyde returned home alone. He
went to the police and said that Mrs. Clyde had fallen to her death. The next day, Detective Stevens
visited Mr. Clyde and arrested him for his wife's murder. Clyde confessed his guilt and asked the
detective how he'd found out he was the murderer. Stevens said he'd simply called a travel agent and
asked for some information. What did the travel agent say to the detective?

Activity/Exercises 2: Detective's tragedy

One morning, the detective had an argument with his wife and went away without his cell phone and
keys. In the evening, when he returned home, he found his colleague, his scared wife, and a murdered
man. Stevens's wife told her story:
"I was sitting in the living room when I heard the doorbell. I thought it was my husband and opened the
door. But a criminal pushed me, and so I stabbed him with a knife."
The detective ordered the policeman to arrest his wife because she had planned to kill him.
How did the detective figure it out?

Activity/Exercises 3: Liar

A man told the police that he'd come home from work to find his wife's dead body lying in the middle of
the parlor. He said she had apparently found his gun in his desk and shot herself. However, the policeman
knew at once that the man was lying. How did he know?

Activity/Exercises 4: Guilty in Court

A man is in court for killing his wife. In the closing statements, the man’s lawyer surprises everyone
when he announces “His wife was just missing. Everyone look atthose doors. His wife is going to walk in
those doors in about 30 seconds.” The entire court is silent and the jury stares at the door as the lawyer
and the defendant stares at the jury After a couple of minutes, the lawyer says “See! If you were so sure
he killed his wife, you wouldn’t be watching that door!” The jury immediately gave a guilty verdict. Why
did the jury convict him?

Teacher Intervention
 Since most attrition occurs at the beginning of the subject, it is important to frontload this
preparation and interventions for them to reach out;
 Use technology to track student participation.
 Educate students about the “spirit” of distance learning.
 Distance learning is also available for students who cannot attend lectures and who are capable of
the amount of self-direction and discipline required to complete such a course.
 Reading the materials, communication via email, and on-line discussion are some of the methods
used for distance learning.
 Organize students into learning teams or being an active part of an online learning community.
 They should be a team decision, based on their needs and available resources.
 Use personal education plan details the activities that I’ve going to use in order to help them to
address the student's academic issues.

Practice Task/Assessment

Discrete Type of Test:

Test I: True or False (2 Points Each)
Direction: Write a complete word TRUE if the statement is correct and the word FALSE if the statement
is wrong.
_____________ 1. In Romulus’ time, there was no penalty for parricide because it was considered a
crime too evil ever to be committed.
_____________ 2. Even if the marriage between petitioner and respondent is annulled, petitioner could
still be held criminally liable for a crime of parricide since at the time of the commission of the alleged
crime, he was still married to respondent.
_____________ 3. Self‐defense is not a legal defense to murder.
____________ 4. It is not possible to predict that a particular boy or girl will kill a parent.
_____________ 5. To plead self‐defense, a perpetrator in many jurisdictions must establish that he or she
had a reasonable perception of imminent harm to self or others, that the use of force was necessary to
avoid the danger, and that the force used in self‐defense was justified by the degree of threatened harm.
____________ 6. In the case of the severely abused child, parricide is not an act of desperation.
_____________ 7. Children and adolescents are most likely to kill to end abuse or to get their own way.
_____________ 8. Studies have shown that it is hard to predict violent behavior, unless there is a history
of violent behavior by a particular individual.
_____________ 9. Adults who kill their parents, particularly those who are middle-aged, are likely to kill
their aging parents because of severe mental illness, such as psychosis or severe depression.
_____________ 10. Abuse alone is not the driving force for an older adult to kill a parent.

Test II: Multiple Choice (2 Points Each).

Instruction: Select and encircle the letter of the best answer for each of the following
questions/statements.
1. Has been based on the story of the sacrifice of Isaac (Abraham's faith test) to assert that their God
expressly disapproves of parricide.
a. Judeo-Christian Tradition c. Monk’s Tradition
b. Islam Tradition d. Jehovah’s Witnesses
2. Any person who shall kill his father shall guilty of what crime?
a. Murder c. Homicide
b. Parricide d. Paternicide
3. When the crime of parricide is committed and only the mother is killed, this crime is called:
a. Patricide c. Filicide
b. Matricide d. Sororicide
4. The law punishes those found guilty of parricide with reclusion perpetua to death, prior to the
enactment of ______________.
a. RA 4693 c. RA 9196
b. RA 9346 d. RA 5383
5.Which of the statements below is true?
a. Adults use firearms more often in committing the crime of parricide than adolescents
b. Adolescents use firearms more often in committing the crime of parricide than adults
c. There is no difference in the frequency with which adults and adolescents use firearms to
commit the crime of parricide
d. Daughters use firearms more than Sons to commit the crime of parricide

6. Which of the following is correct?

 a. There is no difference between sons and daughters; both are likely to be suffering from the
mental illness schizophrenia when committing the crime of parricide
b. Daughters suffer from the mental illness more so than sons when committing the crime of
parricide
c. Sons suffer from the mental illness schizophrenia more so than daughters when committing the
crime of parricide
d. A parent is usually suffering from the mental illness schizophrenia when a child commits the
crime of parricide
7. Most of the offspring who killed their parents, as we have seen, were actually adult children, meaning
they were over _______________.
15 years old c. 17 years old
16 years old d. 18 years old
8. The following are certain factors that increase the likelihood of a youth killing a parent. Except;

a. The youth is raised in a chemically dependent or other dysfunctional family

b. An ongoing pattern of family violence exists in the home
c. Conditions in the home worsen, and violence escalates
d. The youth becomes positively involved in the home environment
9. Children and adolescents are most likely to kill to end abuse or to get their own way. Sometimes
they kill because of severe mental illness.
a. Stress c. Irritable
b. Chemically dependent d. Severe Mental Illness
10. The husband will be held criminally liable for a crime of ___________ if he intentionally killed
his wife.
a. Murder c. Homicide
b. Parricide d. a & b

References/Materials
 Hillbr, M & Cipriano, T. (September 2007). Commentary: Parricides—Unanswered Questions,
Methodological Obstacles, and Legal Considerations
 https://attorneypsychefontanillamamadra.blogspot.com/2014/11/rpc-246-parricide.html
 https://www.cbsnews.com/news/qa-why-kids-kill-parents/
 https://batasnatin.com/law-library/criminal-law/crimes-and-penalties/1721-parricide.html
 https://edukalife.blogspot.com/2013/02/parricide.html
 https://www.thoughtco.com/teenagers-who-killed-their-parents-972257
 https://attorneypsychefontanillamamadra.blogspot.com/2014/11/rpc-246-parricide.html
 https://study.com/academy/lesson/parricide-definition-cases.html#lesson
 https://www.bigwas.com/2014/05/parricide.html

Assignment (Enrichment Activity)

 Write at least 100 words essay describing the statement ”The extreme response of killing
someone of one’s own flesh and blood is indeed unnatural and tragic."

Reflection or Insights

 Give your own personal reflection on the crime of Parricide which is differentiated from murder
and homicide by the relationship between the killer and his or her victim.