TO: Atty. Eunice Marie D.

Samonte, Partner Samonte,

Samonte and Associates

FROM: Atty. Maria Aubrey B. Villamor, Junior Associate

SUBJECT: Criminal Case of Leonard Steven Vaughn

DATE: November 9, 2017

ISSUE:

Whether it is allowed in the court that Christine Vaughn, the wife of

the accused, to testify against his husband Leonard Vaughn as stated

under the Rules of Court?

Whether new evidence which is a set of love letters be considered as

a valid ground for the accused to reopen the case?

Whether the love letters allegedly sent by the wife of the accused to a

certain Max be considered as admissible as evidence even though both the

wife and Max did not give their consent to use them or to divulge in trial?

What are the possible defenses of the wife in killing her husband?

BRIEF ANSWER:

1. No. It is not allowed in the Court that the wife of the accused will

testify against the accused. It is explicit in Rule 130 Sec. 22,

Revised Rules of Court that in any case, a husband or a wife may

not testify against the other without having a decision of nullity or

annulment of their marriage.

2. Yes. According to the Revised Rule of Criminal Procedures, Rule

121, Sec.2, if new evidence was discovered after the trial, the
 court shall grant a new trial. Therefore, the new evidence which is

a set of love letters may reopen the case.

3. Yes. The love letters allegedly sent by the wife of the accused to

a certain Max is considered as admissible as evidence even

though both the wife and Max did not give their consent to use

them or to divulge in trial. The Constitution states that upon the

lawful order of the court or when public safety requires, it may be

allowed.

4. In this case, there are no aggravating circumstances and there

is a mitigating circumstance of passion or obfuscation, the

crime would be homicide and not murder pursuant to Article 13

of the Revised Penal Code.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Leonard Vaugh was accused with murder for the death of Mrs.

France. The prosecution presented his wife as a witness against him but in

the end, his wife revealed that she purposely presented herself in order to

have a judgment favourable to her husband. Unaware that he was a

married man, Miss French made him her principal heir, casting suspicion

on Leonard. When his wife, Romaine, agrees to testify, she does so not in

Leonard's defense but as a witness for the prosecution. Romaine's decision

is part of a complicated plan to free her husband. She first gives the

prosecution its strongest evidence, then fabricates new evidence that

discredits her testimony, believing that this improves Leonard's chances of

acquittal far more than her testimony for the defense. It is then revealed

that Leonard actually did kill Emily French. She killed her husband when

she knew that he has a new woman.

DISCUSSION:

1. Christine who is the alleged wife of the accused was presented

by the prosecution to testify against the accused. Considering

the Philippine laws and jurisprudence, was it proper for the

court to allow the wife to testify against her husband?

No. It was not proper for the wife to be allowed to testify against

her husband. In Philippine laws, neither the husband or the wife may testify

for or against the other without the consent of the affected spouse

evidently, the existing marriage of Christine prior to her marriage to

Leonard would constitute her second marriage as a bigamous marriage.

Therefore, any subsequent marriage contracted here or abroad is void if

either or both parties have a valid subsequent marriage regardless where it

was solemnized. As a result, It is not allowed in the Court that the wife of

the accused will testify against the accused. It is explicit in Rule 130 Sec.

22, Revised Rules of Court that in any case, a husband or a wife may not

testify against the other without having a decision of nullity or annulment of

their marriage.

2. When there is new evidence found by the defense is it proper to

reopen the case and call the wife of the accused as a hostile

witness for the defense be allowed?

Yes. According to Rule 121 Section 2 of the Rules of Criminal

procedure, if new evidence was discovered after the trial, the court shall

grant a new trial. As a result, the punishment to murder is reclusion

perpetua to death for murder with aggravating circumstance of dwelling. In

the case at bar, where the penalty is death or capital punishment, the court

would give the accused every possible means to lower his/her penalty.

3. Could the love letters by the wife of the accused be used as an

evidence without the consent of his wife and Max?

Based on the presented case, the barrister bought those letters

in order to use those letters for the defense of his client and the court

accepted those letters as evidence which means that the barrister did not

get those letters illegally. Pursuant to the 1987 Constitution, upon the lawful

order of the court or when public safety requires, it may be allowed.

4. With the turn of events at the end of the movie, what are the

possible defenses of Christine in killing her husband?

According Article 13 of the Revised Penal Code, that of having

acted upon an impulse so powerful as naturally to have produced passion

or obfuscation mitigates the crime. Such possible defenses of Christine in

killing her husband may be determined based on the nature of the crime.

Thus, nature of the crime would be changed into homicide because of one

mitigating circumstance. In this case, killing was brought by the sudden

burst of emotion of the accused when she saw that her husband whom she

helped had a paramour. There is a mitigating circumstance of passion and

obfuscation pursuant to Article 13 of the Revised Penal Code which makes

her penalty be lowered.