People v. Tong
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: On August 28, 1912, A. J. Robertson, comandante of the Province of Cebu, arrested several individuals, including Yap Shut and Te Tong, for gambling (jueteng). Various books and articles used in the game were seized and kept under Robertson's supervision in an iron safe. On the night of August 30, an unknown Chinaman approached Robertson's cook, expressing a desire to speak with Robertson about the seized books, proposing their substitution with others. Robertson agreed, provided a sufficient sum was paid. On September 1, the accused, Te Tong, went to Robertson's house, stating he brought money for the book substitution. Robertson had arranged for two policemen to secretly observe the encounter. Te Tong examined the books, selected two containing damaging evidence, and presented substitute books. Robertson then demanded payment, and Te Tong produced P500 from his pocket, handing it to Robertson. As Te Tong began to leave, Robertson signaled the two policemen, who confirmed they witnessed the transaction. Te Tong was then arrested. Procedural History: The Court of First Instance of Cebu convicted the accused of attempted bribery, sentencing him to a fine of P6,000 pesetas, an additional fine of 750 pesetas with subsidiary imprisonment, confiscation of the P500 bribe money, and costs. The Petition: The accused appealed the judgment of the Court of First Instance.
Issue(s)
Whether the acts of the accused constitute attempted bribery. Whether the crime committed is attempted, frustrated, or consummated bribery.
Ruling
The judgment of the Court of First Instance is affirmed, with costs against the appellant.
Ratio Decidendi
On whether the acts constitute attempted bribery: The Court held that the facts proved beyond shadow of doubt that the accused committed attempted bribery. The accused went to the comandante, offered a sum of money as consideration for the substitution of incriminating books seized during a gambling raid. He then proceeded to examine the books, selected the ones containing damaging evidence, and presented substitute books. Subsequently, he paid P500 to the comandante for this illicit transaction. The presence of the policemen, arranged by the comandante to witness the exchange, did not negate the intent of the accused to bribe the officer. The crime was consummated in the sense that the offer and payment were made, but the intended corrupt act (substitution of evidence) was thwarted by the entrapment. On whether the crime is attempted, frustrated, or consummated bribery: The Court reiterated its consistent holding in similar cases that the crime committed is attempted bribery. The Court cited United States vs. Sy-Suikao, United States vs. Paua, United States vs. Camacan, and United States vs. Tan Gee as precedents. In these cases, where an offer of a bribe was made and accepted by the officer who was merely feigning compliance to entrap the offender, the crime was classified as attempted bribery. The Court opined that it should follow this substantially uniform holding. The essential elements of attempted bribery—the intent to bribe and the overt act of offering the bribe—were present, even though the corrupt purpose was not achieved due to the officer's actions.
Main Doctrine
The crime of attempted bribery is committed when the accused offers a bribe to a public officer with the intent to corrupt the latter, even if the officer feigns acceptance and procures the accused's arrest.