Digest People v. Tomio

People v. Tomio

Facts: Tatsumi Nagao, a Japanese national, came to Manila. Maida Tomio alias Sato Toshio and Mitamura gave Nagao a pack of cigarettes that the policemen who searched him said contained marijuana and proceeded to bring him to jail. The accused acted as interpreters in jail and told Nagao that the penalty for illegal possession of marijuana is 6 to 12 years imprisonment but the policemen are willing to accept $100,000 in lieu of this. Nagao agreed and accused told him that they have advanced the money to the police, Nagao was then brought back to his hotel where he was not allowed to leave. He called up his friend to ask for help and called up his dad as well who agreed to send 3M yen. While retrieving money from the bank, the police, whose help was asked for by the Japanese embassy, brought the accused to the police district for investigation and were charged with kidnapping and serious illegal detention. The accused claims that they were guarding Nagao, they claim that he could have left them anytime as they did not physically restrain him. Issue: 1. WON kidnapping for ransom was committed 2. WON court had jurisdiction Ratio: 1. The accused got Nagao’s passport and his money was taken by the police, he can not speak Tagalog or English and had no friends or relatives in the Philippines. Even if he could have left, where would he go without his money and passport? Plus the fact that Nagao thought he was on a temporary leash by the police, which would mean at least 6 years imprisonment plus the threat of scandal, that  would cause him ignominy as he is a Buddhist priest. Even though he was not  physically restrained, he was psychologically restrained. Accused claims that the money they were asking is for is the payment of hotel expenses and to pay them back for the alleged payment to the police to release Nagao. The court did not believe this as the evidence points to an elaborate plan to kidnap Nagao and ask for ransom money. Even assuming that they merely asked for a loan, they still deprived Nagao of liberty to compel him to pay the loan. 2. Yes. The crime was committed in various places. Moreover, in the proceedings of  the lower court, the accused never questioned the jurisdiction of the court. The court also directs the Philippine National Police to conduct a thorough investigation into the involvement of the five policemen and should the evidence warrant, file the appropriate criminal and administrative cases against them. As regards Mitamura efforts must be exerted by the Bureau of Immigration and Deportation, in coordination with the National Bureau of Investigation, to have him investigated and prosecuted, should the evidence warrant.