Ah
this case has the makings of a psychological thriller. Crime stemmed out from a doctor-patient
relationship. The defendant and his wife were regular patients of a certain Dr.
Pablo Sityar. The husband’s being treated for a lung ailment. His wife for
appendicitis.
One
fine day the doctor in one of their consultations asked the defendant to buy his
prescripted medicines.. I dunno maybe the drugstore right in front of his
clinic where he’s suppose to have an arranged cut with the referred sales or
somethin’. (I just interposed that
sorry). 3 to 5 minutes he comes back met by his outraged wife. An argument
with the doctor might have ensued. But despite what happened he again went back
to the doctor after sometime for another consultation about some excruciating
lung trouble. After which he was directed to the PGH for confinement. And from
there after several days of recovery he received a letter from the same
physician asking him for immediate settlement of services rendered for his
wife’s acount.
And
true enough one fateful afternoon as most murder story goes, defendant went to
the office of the doctor and found him there alone. And with intent to kill
murdered the physician right in his own clinic.
What
could be the startling reason why his wife was outraged? Are there any other
compelling reason other than the pecuniary aspect of this case? (enter Sam
Spade..lol)
According
to the evidence of the prosecution, the defendant then, without any preliminary
quarrel between the two did then and there willfully, unlawfully and
feloniously attacked the doctor
with
a fan-knife and stabbed him twice striking vital blows thereby causing him his
immediate death. Defendant admitted he killed the deceased but maintained in
court that it was a mere act of self defense. But the trial court failed in
establishing a case of self-defense here and was therefore left to determine the
question whether defendant was guilty of committing murder or simple
homicide.
In
a prosecution evidence seized by police in searching defendant’s effects on the
day of his arrest, a hand-penned letter was submitted as Exhibit-L written to
the defendant by his wife, where the tenor of which shows that the writer (his
wife) feared what could be the consequences of what the defendant was
contemplating which is resorting to physical violence in dealing with the
doctor. Due to this found element, PREMEDITATION was established which completely
constitutes the crime of MURDER. (This is like actually reading a case in
MURDER SHE WROTE.. lol.. may I propose a toast to the memory of the late Ms. Angela Lansburry. The
Hardy Boys & Nancy Drew Mysteries have barely scratched the surface of my childhood curiosity lol, so, have I further incriminated my self? ha ha ha)
Here’s
the ISSUE. Counsel for the defendant argues vigorously that the letter was
PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION, therefore not admissible as evidence.
Question:
Does the letter between the husband and the wife constitute PRIVILEGED
COMMUNICATION as was contemplated in the Rules of Evidence?
SC
Held that.. well generally where a privileged communication of spouse-to-spouse
comes either legally or not into the hands of a 3rd party. If
WITHOUT COLLUSION and there is VOLUNTARY DISCLOSURE on either spouse, then the
privilege is extinguished and the communication becomes admissible.
If
we become specific however, like in cases of DOCUMENTED COMMUNICATION coming
into 3rd party’s possession. A distinction should be obtained. First
we determine how they were obtained from the addressee. 1. If they were
obtained by voluntary delivery by the addressee, then they should still be
privileged. 2. But if they were obtained surreptitiously or without the
addressees consent, the privilege should cease.
But
in this case however, the letter in question was obtained through search and
seizure where no warrant was issued. And documents obtained by illegal searches
are NOT ADMISSIBLE IN EVIDENCE in a criminal case.
Sorry
I didn’t read any further down as to the final penalty meted by court.
I
guess since the letter was not admissible as evidence, court can therefore not
prove the crime of murder. Hence I believe the charge and penalty was modified
by the high courts into simple homicide, and life imprisonment into a lower
grade of penalty. Not unless another evidence was adduced to establish evident
premeditation… I don’t wanna get back to this case.. for now at least..
sometimes, to infer is more interesting than to conclude hmhm.
If
you think that you can think about a thing inextricably attached to something
else
without
thinking of the thing which it is attached to, then you have a legal mind
- Thomas Reed Powell, Harvard Law School
