* AI ("Artificial Intelligence") subtitles on Tagalog.com are generated using "Whisper" by OpenAI (the same company that created ChatGPT and DallE2). Results and accuracy may vary.
* The subtitles do include errors occasionally and should only be used as a tool to help with your listening practice.
* You can request this website to create a transcript for a video if one doesn't already exist by clicking the "Request AI Subtitles" button below a video. Transcribing usually takes 30-40% of the length of a video to complete if there are no other videos in
the queue. For example, a 21 minute video will take 7-8 minutes to transcribe.
* Running a super fast cloud GPU server to do these transcriptions does cost money. If you have the desire and financial ability, consider
becoming a patron
to support these video transcriptions, and the other tools and apps built by Tagalog.com
00:00.0
First in the offing is mistake of fact.
00:17.5
What is mistake of fact?
00:20.0
In mistake of fact, the supposed offender believes as true the facts perceived by him that impelled him to do a particular act.
00:29.1
Otherwise stated, had the facts been true to the belief of the offender, his act would have been justified because of the absence of intent or dolo.
00:40.6
And since there is no intent, then there is no criminal liability.
00:47.4
For example, in the famous case of US vs. Acheong,
00:53.7
Acheong, who works as a cook, was suddenly awakened by someone trying to force him to do something.
00:59.1
He forced open the door of the room.
01:01.6
He sat up in bed and called out twice,
01:06.0
He heard no answer and was convinced by the noise at the door that it was being pushed open by someone bent upon forcing his way into the room.
01:15.9
Acheong, fearing that the intruder was a robber,
01:20.0
leaped to his feet and called out,
01:22.0
If you enter the room, I will kill you.
01:24.6
At that moment, he was struck just above the knee by the edge of the chair.
01:29.5
which had been placed against the door.
01:32.7
Seizing a kitchen knife which he kept under his pillow,
01:36.5
Acheong struck at the intruder who, it turned out, was his roommate Pascual,
01:42.6
a houseboy who, in the spirit of mischief, was just playing a trick on him.
01:49.0
Now, there had been several robberies not long prior to the date of the incident,
01:54.9
one of which took place in a house where Acheong was
01:59.1
also previously employed as a cook,
02:02.6
that's why he kept a knife under his pillow for his personal protection.
02:08.5
It will be observed in the said example that Acheong was of the firm belief that the intruder
02:14.7
who forced open the door of his room was a thief in view of the circumstances obtaining at that time, such as
02:24.1
the victim was trying to force open the door of the room.
02:29.1
Acheong asked the victim who he was, but the victim gave no answer.
02:36.8
Acheong, fearing that the victim was a thief or a robber, even warned the victim
02:42.4
that if he entered the room, he would get killed.
02:45.1
Still, the victim gave no answer.
02:50.1
Instead of responding to Acheong's questions, the victim pushed open the door, and
02:58.5
was struck just above the knee by the edge of the chair which had been placed against the door.
03:07.3
Acheong, therefore, acted in good faith, without malice or criminal intent,
03:13.1
in the belief that he was merely exercising his right of self-defense.
03:19.9
Take note, however, that mistake of act is relevant only when the felony would have been intentional or through dolo,
03:28.5
but not when the felony is a result of culpa.
03:32.5
It is only a defense in intentional but not in culpable felonies.
03:41.5
Let's take a look at this example.
03:44.5
X was driving his car along a public highway.
03:48.5
Thinking that the object that was crossing the highway at that time was just a cat,
03:53.5
X did not slow down.
03:55.5
As a result, he hit and bumped an old vehicle.
03:57.5
As a result, he hit and bumped an old vehicle.
03:58.2
Instead, the victim hit an old lady.
04:01.2
Here, X cannot invoke the defense of mistake of act,
04:04.2
as this absolutory cause is applicable only in felonies committed by means of dolo and not by culpa,
04:14.2
such that X here will be liable for the crime of reckless imprudence resulting in physical injuries
04:21.2
or reckless imprudence resulting in homicide, as the case may be,
04:26.2
for the law provides
04:27.2
that no person shall drive any motor vehicle upon a highway at such a speed as to endanger the life, limb, and property of any person,
04:37.8
nor at a speed greater than will permit him to bring the vehicle to a stop within the assured clear distance ahead.
04:47.1
Also take note that the person invoking mistake of act must not be negligent in ascertaining the true state of facts.
04:55.2
Otherwise, he will still be held liable for the felony that is produced.
05:01.8
For example, X, a security guard manning the premises of a convenience store, saw the cashier and a customer in a heated argument.
05:13.3
X did nothing to check what was the argument about, nor did he get near the protagonists to prevent any untoward incident from happening.
05:25.2
X, who was positioned behind the customer, saw the customer raise his hand, thinking that the customer was already aiming a gun as if to shoot the cashier.
05:38.8
X shot and killed the customer, who, it turned out, was merely pointing his finger at the cashier.
05:47.7
Here, X will be liable for homicide because he was clearly negligent in ascertaining the true state of facts.
05:54.5
So here, X cannot invoke the defense of mistake of act because he was negligent in ascertaining the true state of facts.
06:24.5
Here, X cannot invoke the defense of mistake of act because he was clearly negligent in ascertaining the true state of facts.
