THE Court of Appeals (CA) has upheld the dismissal from service of a Manila policeman for grave misconduct over the killing of a 23-year-old epileptic in an anti-drug operation in 2017.
In its decision, the appellate court’s Fifth Division affirmed the decision of the Office of the Ombudsman dismissing Staff Sergeant Gerry Genalope from the service after finding him guilty of grave misconduct in the killing of Djastin Lopez in Tondo, Manila.
The Ombudsman also ordered the filing of a murder case against the police officer.
Lopez was killed in what the Manila Police Department initially said was an operation against a wanted person for the killing of a certain Michael Turla Panganiban.
The police said that despite his epilepsy, Lopez resisted arrest and engaged the policemen in a shootout which resulted in his death.
But it was found out that the name of Lopez was not included in the list of suspects in Panganiban’s killing.
The police later said he was killed in a supposed drug buy-bust operation.
Autopsy results said Lopez sustained five gunshot wounds in the chest and stomach, and another in the arm.
The Ombudsman said Lopez was pleading for his life and was pushed to the ground, defenseless, before he was shot.
In its decision, the Ombudsman said that Genalope committed “treachery” when he, as attested by witnesses, “consciously and deliberately” carried out the attack to ensure the execution of the crime and to make it impossible for the victim to defend himself or to retaliate.
Genalope contested his dismissal before the CA, arguing that there were many who fired at Lopez and that the prosecution’s evidence was based on hearsay and conjectures.
Assuming that he had shot at the victim, Genalope said this was in self-defense as the former had pulled out a gun first.
But the CA in a January 31, 2025 ruling rejected Genalope’s claim and said there was substantial evidence, including the testimonies of witnesses, to sustain the Ombudsman’s ruling.
The appellate court said Lopez was socializing with his friends when the police officers arrived, pushed him to the ground, slapped and eventually shot him.
“It is not natural for socializing to be equated with an illegal act that would justify police officers, especially petitioner, approaching and inflicting injuries on Djastin, more so of killing him with multiple gunshots,” part of the CA ruling penned by Associate Justice Emily San Gaspar-Gito said.
The appellate court also found out that the gun supposedly owned by Lopez was not in the police incident report and only surfaced during the police officer’s filing of a counter-affidavit.
Moreover, the CA held that in an administrative case, it is not necessary to prove all the elements of murder such as treachery and the use of excessive force, to sustain a guilty finding.
“It is enough that there is substantial evidence to prove that petitioner willfully caused the death of Djastin to hold him liable for grave misconduct and that it shows a clear intent to violate a law,” the CA added.
Finally, the CA held that Genalope’s invocation of self-defense cannot be sustained as it was contradicted by the testimonies of witnesses who, it added, “clearly and categorically” said that the victim was raising his hands and pleading for his life when he was pushed to the ground, slapped and shot.
