• Announcements

    • REDivivus.WRAITH

      APS NEEDS YOUR HELP FOR 2019!!!   11/05/18

      Hello APS'ters It's been more than 10 years APS staff has been keeping this place alive and kickin ass from the rest!!!  And now is the time for us to ask help from all of you who are enjoying this place. APS are looking for generous members who are willing to show some support and love to raise funds for our VPS hosting and domain name fees. We would like to make the most contributions as much as we can and use all of it for " VPS hosting and Domain name fees" ONLY (no personal interest/expenses) We want to keep this community alive and that wouldn't be possible without your help. We won't be promising any VIP access or whatsoever for monetary contributions. But....... we can assure you that your contributions big or small can keep this place alive and We will give you an APS Supporter (yellow pants) to give credits and recognition sa inyong tulong! and that's the only thing we can promise you. If you are feeling generous today feel free to send your contributions to our PAYPAL account. (ANY AMOUNT ARE WELCOME) PAYPAL: allpinoystuff2017@yahoo.com If you have any questions comment on this thread or Feel free to send me or any Admins/Supreme Mods a PM. If you have contributed or will be contributing please let us know so we can directly say "thank you" to you. Thanks in advance and more power to APS!!!
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

You can “legally” kill people... Weird but true.

2 posts in this topic

Did you know that you can “legally” kill people. Weird?

Article 247 of the Revised Code of the Philippines

Under Article 247 of the Revised Code, anyone “who having surprised his spouse in the act of committing sexual intercourse with another person, shall kill any of them or both of them in the act or immediately thereafter, or shall inflict upon them any serious physical injury, shall suffer the penalty of destierro.”

Likewise, the article also applies to parents “with respect to their daughters under eighteen years of age, and their seducer, while the daughters are living with their parents.”

The expected overwhelming outrage and the need to vindicate one’s honor would form the rationale of why killing is allowed under these circumstances. On the other hand, destierro or mere banishment of the killer would be to prevent the deceased’s family from retaliating against him.


Credit to:



Edited by Vinno B. Rocha
Coded live external link
Stewie likes this

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is actually based from crimes of passion observed in other countries. It is not weird, but is an expected response by an enraged busband. But if you think this is weird, I will give you a “weirder”perspective of this case by giving you actual cases.


There was a case decided by the SC in 1939, People vs. Gonzales.

What happened in this case was the husband caught his wife with another man, doing acts preparatory to sexual intercourse, in short, “foreplay.” To make the long story short, the enraged husband ran after the man, but was unable to catch him. So he went back to the house, attacked her wife without intending to kill her, but her wife died anyway.

The Supreme Court convicted the husband of parricide, and did not exculpate him from killing, applying strictly the aforementioned provision. They said that for the provision to apply, the husband should have caught them in the act of sexual intercourse. 

Although there is one justice who dissented, finding it unfair that the killing was not justified because the act would definitely lead into sexual intercourse, and it is contrary to natural response for the husband to wait for the actual carnal act for him to act accordingly.


However, in 1987, the Supreme Court, in People vs. Abarca, made another ruling.

So in this case, the husband did not actually catch his wife having sex with another man, but only learned of it an hour after. He killed the man an hour after the sexual act. 

The Supreme Court, surprisingly, applied this case, justifying the act of killing, although it happened an hour after, because the law “only requires that the death caused be the proximate result of the outrage overwhelming the accused after chancing upon his spouse in the basest act of infidelity.”


repapips9 and Jigoy like this

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0