Question

On February 5, 2017, Rho Rio Fraternity held initiation rites. Present were: (i) Redmont, the Lord Chancellor and head of the fraternity; (ii) ten (10) members, one (1) of whom was Ric; and (iii) five (5) neophytes, one (1) of whom was Ronald. Absent were: (i) Rollie, the fraternity's Vice Chancellor and who actually planned the initiation; and (ii) Ronnie, the owner of the house where the initiation was conducted.

Due to the severe beating suffered by Ronald on that occasion, he lost consciousness and was brought to the nearest hospital by Redmont and Ric. However, Ronald was declared dead on arrival at the hospital.

During the investigation, it was found that although Ronald really wanted to join the fraternity because his father is also a member, it was his best friend Ric who ultimately convinced him to join and undergo initiation as a prerequisite. It was also shown that Redmont and Ric did not actually participate in the beating. The two either merely watched the hazing or helped in preparing food. Lastly, two (2) days prior thereto, Ronnie texted Rollie that the fraternity may use his house as the venue for the planned initiation.

Aside from those who actually participated in the hazing, Redmont, Rollie, Ric, and Ronnie were criminally charged for the hazing of Ronald that resulted in his death.

(a) Are the four criminally liable?

(b) Can all those criminally charged be exonerated upon proof that Ronald, knowing the risks, voluntarily submitted himself to the initiation? Will the absence of proof that the accused intended to kill the victim affect their liability? (2018 BAR)

0/1500
5:00
Skip