8/31/25, 11:21 AM People vs.
Gregorio y Amar
Title
People vs. Gregorio y Amar
Case Decision Date
G.R. No. 194235 Jun 8, 2016
Jimmy Ting y Sy, a corporate executive, was kidnapped for ransom by armed men posing
as NBI agents. After six days, he was rescued, and the kidnappers were convicted of
kidnapping for ransom, sentenced to life imprisonment, and ordered to pay damages.
Jur.ph - Case Digest (G.R. No. 194235)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
Overview of the Criminal Incident
The case involves the crime of kidnapping for ransom under Article 267 of the
Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 7659.
The kidnapping occurred between October 8 and 14, 2002, spanning several
locations in Bulacan, Ilocos Norte, and other areas.
The primary victim was Jimmy Ting, Vice-President and CEO of Styrotech
Corporation, whose abduction was executed by a group of accused-appellants.
The Kidnapping and Ransom Demand
The Information charged the accused-appellants with kidnapping for ransom and,
in separate cases, with illegal possession of firearms (the latter charges were
eventually dismissed).
During the abduction, the kidnappers used firearms, threats, and intimidation
tactics.
They abducted Jimmy by force—overpowering him, binding and blindfolding him,
and taking him by a Tamaraw FX vehicle.
The kidnappers demanded a ransom initially set at P50,000,000.00, eventually
settling on a ransom amount of P1,780,000.00 after negotiations with Jimmy’s
mother, Lucina Ting.
Sequence of Events During the Kidnapping
On October 8, 2002, events unfolded as follows:
https://jur.ph/jurisprudence/v/digest/people-v-gregorio-y-amar?q=124235 1/4
8/31/25, 11:21 AM People vs. Gregorio y Amar
Jimmy’s vehicle suffered a flat tire, and while awaiting help, he was accosted by
armed men.
Kidnappers, identifying themselves (in part) as agents of the NBI or NPA, used
threats and physical harm (including being hit on the head) to subdue him.
The kidnappers transported Jimmy to a remote house where he was detained for
almost a week.
Throughout his captivity, Jimmy was intermittently allowed brief interactions (such
as meals and short conversations) and even given moments to observe his captors’
faces.
Ransom arrangements were handled by kidnappers through phone negotiations
with Jimmy’s parents, with the victim’s cellular phone used to relay instructions.
Proceedings and Evidence Presented at Trial
The trial court (RTC of Malolos City, Bulacan, Branch 12) consolidated Criminal
Case No. 2867-M-2002 (kidnapping-for-ransom) and Criminal Cases Nos. 2868-M,
2869-M, and 2870-M-2002 (illegal possession of firearms).
Testimonies from the victim Jimmy Ting, his family members (including Lucina
Ting, Girlie Ting, and cousin Marlon), bank evidence of ransom deposits, and police
officers’ accounts formed the nucleus of the prosecution’s evidence.
The detailed narrative described the abduction, telephone communications for
ransom negotiation (with dialogues in Tagalog), ransom deposit procedures, and
subsequent police intervention leading to the rescue of Jimmy on October 14, 2002.
The Role and Version of the Defense
The accused-appellants, including Jay Gregorio y Amar, Rolando Estrella y
Raymundo, Ricardo Salazar y Go, Danilo Bergonia y Aleleng, and Efren Gascon y
delos Santos, claimed they were merely escorting Jimmy as a VIP on a vacation.
They asserted that Jojo Salazar (referred to as John Doe in some records) was the
mastermind and that they were unwittingly drawn into a plot to secure ransom.
Their defense argued that the contradictory details in the prosecution’s narration—
and the fact that not all ransom money was recovered—cast reasonable doubt on
their direct involvement.
Trial Court and Appellate Court Decisions
The RTC found:
Accused-appellants Jay, Rolando, and Ricardo guilty as principals in the crime
of kidnapping for ransom, sentencing them to death (with a recommendation
for commutation to life imprisonment under Art. 5, RPC).
https://jur.ph/jurisprudence/v/digest/people-v-gregorio-y-amar?q=124235 2/4
8/31/25, 11:21 AM People vs. Gregorio y Amar
Accused-appellants Efren and Danilo were convicted as accomplices in the
kidnapping-for-ransom crime.
The illegal possession of firearms charges were dismissed for those cases.
The Court of Appeals modified the penalties in light of the enactment of Republic
Act No. 9346 (prohibiting the death penalty) by imposing reclusion perpetua on all
accused-appellants.
The appellate court also held that the various accused, by virtue of their conspiracy,
were equally liable as principals in the kidnapping-for-ransom.
Supplemental Issues Raised in the Appeal
Accused-appellants challenged the sufficiency and credibility of the evidence,
asserting that any ambiguity should favor the accused.
Specifically, accused-appellant Efren argued that his role was downgraded by the
court from that of an accomplice to a principal, contending he was deceived into
escorting a VIP for vacation.
The court reviewed these arguments in its supplemental briefing and ultimately
found no merit in the defense’s contentions.
Issues:
Sufficiency of Evidence
Whether the prosecution was able to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the
accused-appellants committed the crime of kidnapping for ransom.
Whether the detailed testimonies of Jimmy Ting and corroborative accounts by his
family, as well as the actions of the PACER teams, established all elements of the
offense.
Nature and Degree of Participation of the Accused-Appellants
Whether the roles of the accused-appellants should be categorized merely as
accomplices or considered as principals in the kidnapping for ransom.
The implications of each categorization in terms of liability and penalty.
Existence of Conspiracy Among the Accused
Whether there was a common design or agreement among all accused that resulted
in the kidnapping for ransom.
Whether the circumstantial evidence and the coordinated actions at various stages
of the crime sufficiently established conspiracy.
Credibility of the Prosecution and Defense Versions
https://jur.ph/jurisprudence/v/digest/people-v-gregorio-y-amar?q=124235 3/4
8/31/25, 11:21 AM People vs. Gregorio y Amar
Whether the victim’s detailed and consistent testimony, along with the
corroborative evidence, outweighed the defense’s narrative of mistaken
participation.
Whether any inconsistencies or gaps in the recovered ransom (i.e. the missing
portion) undermined the prosecution’s case.
Appropriateness of the Imposed Penalty
Whether the sentencing of death (as imposed by the RTC and later substituted to
reclusion perpetua by the Court of Appeals) was proper under Article 267 and
subsequent jurisprudence.
The effect of Republic Act No. 9346 in modifying the punitive measures in capital
cases.
Ruling:
(Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
(Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
(Subscriber-Only)
Note: AI summaries may not capture all details. Please refer to full text for complete accuracy.
https://jur.ph/jurisprudence/v/digest/people-v-gregorio-y-amar?q=124235 4/4
