close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Welcome to Glock Talk

Why should YOU join our Glock forum?

  • Converse with other Glock Enthusiasts
  • Learn about the latest hunting products
  • Becoming a member is FREE and EASY

If you consider yourself a beginner or an avid shooter, the Glock Talk community is your place to discuss self defense, concealed carry, reloading, target shooting, and all things Glock.

Art. 11, Revised Penal Code: Self Defense Q&A

Discussion in 'Band of Glockers' started by eug3n3_d3nn1s, Mar 9, 2009.

  1. eug3n3_d3nn1s

    eug3n3_d3nn1s

    106
    0
    Mar 27, 2008
    This thread discusses the legal technicalities of self defense.

    For starters here is Art. 11, RPC:

    "Art. 11. Justifying circumstances. — The following do not incur any criminal liability:

    1. Anyone who acts in defense of his person or rights, provided that the following circumstances concur;

    First. Unlawful aggression.

    Second. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it.

    Third. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself.​

    2. Any one who acts in defense of the person or rights of his spouse, ascendants, descendants, or legitimate, natural or adopted brothers or sisters, or his relatives by affinity in the same degrees and those consanguinity within the fourth civil degree, provided that the first and second requisites prescribed in the next preceding circumstance are present, and the further requisite, in case the revocation was given by the person attacked, that the one making defense had no part therein.

    3. Anyone who acts in defense of the person or rights of a stranger, provided that the first and second requisites mentioned in the first circumstance of this Art. are present and that the person defending be not induced by revenge, resentment, or other evil motive.

    4. Any person who, in order to avoid an evil or injury, does not act which causes damage to another, provided that the following requisites are present;

    First. That the evil sought to be avoided actually exists;

    Second. That the injury feared be greater than that done to avoid it;

    Third. That there be no other practical and less harmful means of preventing it.​


    5. Any person who acts in the fulfillment of a duty or in the lawful exercise of a right or office.

    6. Any person who acts in obedience to an order issued by a superior for some lawful purpose." ​

    PS: I will post Supreme Court cases discussing each part of Art. 11 whenever I find the time. for now if you have questions just post away.
     
    Last edited: Mar 11, 2009
  2. Allegra

    Allegra

    6,359
    3
    Mar 16, 2003
    Philippines
    Di ba unless mayaman yung nakaaway mo , you can skip all that and proceed to the areglo stage?
    Well at least , yan ang ginagawa dito sa probinsya
    Mas organized ang patayan dito
     


  3. eug3n3_d3nn1s

    eug3n3_d3nn1s

    106
    0
    Mar 27, 2008
    ^Iba yung areglo stage... civil liability lang yun (a.k.a. danyos para sa pamilya ng napatay mo or vise versa)

    yung criminal liability sa Sate Prosecutor (a.k.a Fiscal).
     
  4. De Angelo

    De Angelo

    170
    0
    Jan 6, 2009
    basta my advice to anyone who kills somebody, Run..do not surender, mas mabuti ng maki pag areglo ng hinde nakakulong kesa nakakulong ka..
     
  5. crazy_hans

    crazy_hans

    367
    0
    Apr 21, 2007
    Caloocan City
    sir what if two opposing circumstnaces would concur?say you were compelled to rob a bank because your family is being held hostages but during the robbery a police officer fired shots at you (in the performance of his duty) then you shot back hitting the police and killing him as well (self-defense on your part). will you be held liable for shooting the police officer?thanks in advance po!
     
  6. eug3n3_d3nn1s

    eug3n3_d3nn1s

    106
    0
    Mar 27, 2008
    Dapat pala sinama ko to sa unang post ko.

    Art. 12, RPC

    "Art. 12. Circumstances which exempt from criminal liability. — the following are exempt from criminal liability:

    1. An imbecile or an insane person, unless the latter has acted during a lucid interval.
    When the imbecile or an insane person has committed an act which the law defines as a felony (delito), the court shall order his confinement in one of the hospitals or asylums established for persons thus afflicted, which he shall not be permitted to leave without first obtaining the permission of the same court.

    2. A person under nine years of age.

    3. A person over nine years of age and under fifteen, unless he has acted with discernment, in which case, such minor shall be proceeded against in accordance with the provisions of Art. 80 of this Code.
    When such minor is adjudged to be criminally irresponsible, the court, in conformably with the provisions of this and the preceding paragraph, shall commit him to the care and custody of his family who shall be charged with his surveillance and education otherwise, he shall be committed to the care of some institution or person mentioned in said Art. 80.

    4. Any person who, while performing a lawful act with due care, causes an injury by mere accident without fault or intention of causing it.

    5. Any person who act under the compulsion of irresistible force.

    6. Any person who acts under the impulse of an uncontrollable fear of an equal or greater injury.

    7. Any person who fails to perform an act required by law, when prevented by some lawful insuperable cause."​
     
  7. eug3n3_d3nn1s

    eug3n3_d3nn1s

    106
    0
    Mar 27, 2008
    Sa Art. 12, RPC na pasok nyan. Pwede ka sa 5 or 6, depende sa facts ng case.

    Kaso may civil liability ka pa din, damages for the death of the police officer and for robbing the bank. wala ka nga lang criminal liability.
     
  8. eug3n3_d3nn1s

    eug3n3_d3nn1s

    106
    0
    Mar 27, 2008

    NOT A GOOD IDEA... mag mukha kang guilty. Judges have this bias: If wala kang kasalanan bakit tumakbo ka? the typical answer na: "ayoko kasi ng problema at baka kasuhan ako" will never save you.

    better stand your ground and let your lawyer do the talking.
     
  9. trayO

    trayO

    30
    0
    Oct 14, 2008
    My piece of advice is instead of running, make sure you don't leave witnesses behind. To put it plainly, if the other person is dead, you can freely say anything in your favor regarding the circumstances of the shooting and no one will correct you. I don't think our CSI have all that hi-tech equipment that we see on TV that can re-create the scene.
     
  10. Black_SIR

    Black_SIR

    342
    0
    Feb 20, 2009
    Philippines

    wala nga sila equipments eh heheheh gloves lang ata, may budget pero binulsa na
     
  11. PMMA97

    PMMA97 TagaBundok

    1,744
    0
    Nov 25, 2003
    Sir are you a lawyer?
     
  12. Dean

    Dean

    2,393
    0
    Nov 4, 2006
    "Make sure that you don't leave witnesses behind?"
    MAKE SURE?
    Friend, I think I understand that sentiment. But to really do that is kind of like crashing your car to cover up staying out an hour late, isn't it?
    In a scenario in which you've wounded multiple assailants would you then "finish them off" with your pistol, because you don't want to leave witnesses? While you may want to, it doesn't make much sense.
    That would be the actual comission of the crime of murder, to avoid being accused of the crime of assault under justifiable circumstances which makes it extremely difficult to prosecute. In actual practice such a thing is rarely doable and generally immoral.
    Why turn a good self defense shooting into a double homicide rap and two life sentences?

    No. You stay hardcore, make your police report and call your lawyer. They've probably got arrest records as long as your arm and now they're facing robbery charges. It's kind of hard to make bond when you're a prisoner with a forty-five slug in his gut.:drillsgt:
     
    Last edited: Mar 10, 2009
  13. eug3n3_d3nn1s

    eug3n3_d3nn1s

    106
    0
    Mar 27, 2008
    Not yet, will be soon though. But seriously... tama yang perception na yan kasi I also work with lawyers and judges.

    better yet, ask a lawyer, or if you have a friend who is a judge, what will the judge think if after shooting someone you RUN and not cooperate with the police.

    Lastly, the Fiscal will use that as part of his theory: "you ran coz your guilty."

    This is the best case scenario. but this incident is rare.

    BUT sometimes its better to have lots of witnesses so you could support your self defense theory.

    PS: When using self defense as a defense in court, the court will convict you IF you cannot prove self defense and not because the prosecution's case is weak. This is so because the burden of proof shifts from the prosecution to the defense's side.
     
    Last edited: Mar 10, 2009
  14. crazy_hans

    crazy_hans

    367
    0
    Apr 21, 2007
    Caloocan City
    sir why would shooting back not fall under art 11. of rpc?wouldn't you have complied with the requisites of art 11 in the facts given earlier?and why apply art 12?thanks po
     
  15. crazy_hans

    crazy_hans

    367
    0
    Apr 21, 2007
    Caloocan City
    and sir why would there be a civil liability on the bank robbery when you were only compelled to do something meaning it is not your act but rather an act of another who forced you into doing something. i know that art 12 does not extinguish civil liability outright but why impose it as well?

    sorry for passing the buck sir these questions have deprived me of sleep for a very long time.
     
  16. De Angelo

    De Angelo

    170
    0
    Jan 6, 2009

    sir based on experiences of friends who have killed people,,and advise of police friends and lawyers..they say do not surrender, mas mabuti pa daw antayin na lang i file ang kaso at antayin ang warrant..doon din naman pupunta yun sa court, may friend ako sumuko ayon, na stress out ang pamilya at gumastos pa sa mga pulis at mga preso para lang maalagaan sya sa kulungan, gumastos pa ng malaki sa fiscal dahil 3 ang binaril nya..buti na lang wala namatay at nabigyan sya ng bail..could you imagine if namatay yung 3?! multiple homicide yun o triple murder. no bail recommended yun mabubulok na sya doon. and this was done in self defense, bottom line self defense or not ikukulong ka pa din at i charge ng homicide


    you dont have to take my word for it..i just learned it from experiences of others, ask a lawyer you know to tell you what he thinks or even a police friend if you have one.

    no one is ever guilty unless proven in court, you just have to know how to work the system
     
    Last edited: Mar 10, 2009
  17. eug3n3_d3nn1s

    eug3n3_d3nn1s

    106
    0
    Mar 27, 2008
    I did. A lot of POs, a few Majors, and another high ranking officer (division chief ata, dunno the exact term). Re: lawyer friends, dami din!

    The thing is... kanya kanyang opinion yan. Sure you could run and not cooperate and not suffer the scenario you posted BUT what happens when the case hits the courts?

    Sure your lawyer could argue the scenario you pictured above BUT there is no assurance that the judge will buy your story.

    Don't get me wrong, i do understand your side of the coin and I AM tempted to agree with your opinion but... there are ways to get out of jail, as a detainee, and your lawyer could always use technicalities to get your bail. Hindi naman porket sinabi na NO BAIL RECOMMENDED ay hindi kana makakakuha ng bail.
     
    Last edited: Mar 10, 2009
  18. eug3n3_d3nn1s

    eug3n3_d3nn1s

    106
    0
    Mar 27, 2008
    Kasi the aggression, in this case, is LAWFUL. The police officer has no idea that your family is being held hostage.

    Dahil sa Art. 101, RPC:

    "Art. 101. Rules regarding civil liability in certain cases. — The exemption from criminal liability established in subdivisions 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 of Article 12 and in subdivision 4 of Article 11 of this Code does not include exemption from civil liability, which shall be enforced subject to the following rules:

    First. In cases of subdivisions 1, 2, and 3 of Article 12, the civil liability for acts committed by an imbecile or insane person, and by a person under nine years of age, or by one over nine but under fifteen years of age, who has acted without discernment, shall devolve upon those having such person under their legal authority or control, unless it appears that there was no fault or negligence on their part.

    Should there be no person having such insane, imbecile or minor under his authority, legal guardianship or control, or if such person be insolvent, said insane, imbecile, or minor shall respond with their own property, excepting property exempt from execution, in accordance with the civil law.

    Second. In cases falling within subdivision 4 of Article 11, the persons for whose benefit the harm has been prevented shall be civilly liable in proportion to the benefit which they may have received.

    The courts shall determine, in sound discretion, the proportionate amount for which each one shall be liable.

    When the respective shares cannot be equitably determined, even approximately, or when the liability also attaches to the Government, or to the majority of the inhabitants of the town, and, in all events, whenever the damages have been caused with the consent of the authorities or their agents, indemnification shall be made in the manner prescribed by special laws or regulations.

    Third. In cases falling within subdivisions 5 and 6 of Article 12, the persons using violence or causing the fears shall be primarily liable and secondarily, or, if there be no such persons, those doing the act shall be liable, saving always to the latter that part of their property exempt from execution. "

    Please read the third rule of Art. 101.
     
  19. Duckman1975

    Duckman1975

    149
    0
    Aug 18, 2007
    Asia
    IMOHI, the voice recording of Winston Garcia during a GSIS meeting regarding the Planned Meralco take over said it all:"We have a flawed legal system, we have to take advantage of it....."
    Its a very sad fact, if you know how to work the system and have enough money you could take advantage of the system.
     
  20. PMMA97

    PMMA97 TagaBundok

    1,744
    0
    Nov 25, 2003
    "Nasa ayos ang sistema natin, ang problema may mga taong wala sa ayos!" -Marine Major Ferdinand Marcelino

    Sorry OT