The Regional Trial Court in Bacolod City acquitted a man accused of estafa in a case filed against him 10 years ago by an hacienda owner in Murcia , Negros Occidental.

Judge Edgardo de los Santos acquitted Benedicto Compania for lack of evidence of the charges filed against him and his co-accused Iladio Barrameda by Victor Gerardo Rojas, farm administrator of Hacienda La Purisima Concepcion.

In his decision, De los Santos said the case was resolved, not based on its factual milieu replete with human interest, but the attendant exculpatory facts.

Court records show that sometime in August 1996, Rojas accused Compania and Barrameda of estafa after they received P61,750 from him in exchange for providing him with 90 hacienda laborers to cut and load sugar cane in his farm.

The accused, however, failed to provide Rojas with the workers, prompting the latter to file a complaint against him.

During the arraignment in 1997, the accused pleaded not guilty to the crime but on March 23, 1999, Barrameda changed his plea to guilty and was sentenced to suffer an indeterminate penalty of imprisonment of six months and one day to a maximum of six years.

Trial for Compania continued with Rojas as lone witness for the prosecution and the accused also taking the witness stand for his defense.

Evidence for the accused showed he was able to bring the required workers and made them work in the farm of the complainant. Compania claimed he was not even paid for his services and some of the laborers were also not paid.

Court records also showed that the workers recruited by Compania and Barrameda worked in Rojas' farm for four months from September 24, 1996 to January 15, 1997.

They stopped working, informed the secretary of the hacienda and said they vacated the place as they were not given their food allowance and not paid for their services for the period January 1 to 15, 1997.

The court order noted that, surprisingly, there was not a even a feeble attempt made by the prosecution to refute and destroy the evidence from the accused which proved that the farm workers ceased to work only after non-payment of what were due them.

In his decision, De los Santos said a careful scrutiny of the documentary evidence showed that while Rojas cannot be entirely be blamed for the non-payment of all the benefits of the farm workers, the fault lies more in the failure to adopt a more systematic way of recording the work done and payments made.

He also acquitted Barrameda of the estafa charges for lack of evidence to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.*NAB

back to top