People vs Saladino (07 March 2001) en banc

(Topic: Impossible crime, Art 4 Par 2 of RPC)

Ponente: Bellosillo

FACTS:

Lourdes Relevo is the niece of the accused-appellant Conrado Saladino. (Her mother and
Conrados wife, Rosita, are sisters.)
In 1995, Lourdes (who was then 13) was sent by her parents (from Balayan, Batangas) to live
with Conrado and Rosita Saladino in Pasig because her own parents cannot send her to school.
Rosita gave Lourdes weekly allowance while Lourdes helped doing household chores.
Saldinos lived in a two-storey house in Rosario, Pasig with spouses Zaldy and Corazon Cedeo
with three children and three boarders. There were three rooms separated only by curtains. The
Saladinos slept on a bed while Lourdes slept on a mattress on the floor.
September 1995-Conrado woke Lourdes up (from the mattress on the floor; she was feeling
sick) to make her transfer to the bed.
Rosita was about to go to work (10pm-6am shift at the factory). Conrado conducted (what a
verb for hinatid, haha) her to the jeepney stop and returned to the room after about 15mins.
(Will make this as clinical as possible, craaaaaaaaap) He laid down beside Lourdes. 25mins later,
he fondles her breasts. Poked kitchen knife at her waist, threatened to kill her if she shouted.
Dropped knife, pinned Lourdess hands to her belly, removed her shorts and underwear with his
free hand. Removed his own shorts and underwear, went on top of her, inserted penis into
vagina. Lourdes struggled and he slipped out a few times, he re-inserted every time. Shit (bestial
movements) went on for about 50mins, accdg to Lourdes.
She was able to push him away; he warned her not to tell anyone or else he would kill her.
Lourdes told Rosita, Rosita did not believe her. Lourdes told Corazon Cedeo. Corazon made the
Saladinos leave.
After sometime, Rosita invites Lourdes back to the new house. Lourdes goes back because she
wanted to finish school and she needed money.
17 Dec 1996, 7am. Lourdes was sleeping in the living room. Conrado held her at knifepoint,
threatened her to silence. He forced sex again; she cried and struggled but her efforts were in
vain.
Lourdes told Rosita, she didnt believe her again. Lourdes told Corazon, Corazon advised her to
wait for her mother (Elena), who was spending Christmas in Manila. Lourdes could not tell her
mother. Elena spent 11 days in Pasig. On 28 Dec 1996, all four went to Batangas.
1 Jan 97, Lourdes and the Saladinos went back to Pasig. 2 Jan 97, 7am, Conrado raped Lourdes
again. 3 Jan 97, Conrado attempts to rape Lourdes again. He dropped the knife, Lourdes was
able to free herself from his grasp and she kicked him. She ran to the bathroom and stayed
there until he left the house. She packed her clothes and went to Corazons house. She also told
her mother about the sexual abuse and Elena brought Lourdes home to Batangas.
 Elena had Lourdes examined. Not a virgin anymore. They filed a case in Pasig City Prosecutors
office. Lourdes underwent another physical exam; it was revealed that she had deep-healed
lacerations.

Testimony of the Accused

1995 Sept, Conrado alleged that he was drunk. Said Lourdes was aware of what was happening
but she did not show a reaction.
Said they left the old house because they did not have privacy.
When Lourdes followed the Saladinos in their new home, Saladino said he avoided contact
with Lourdes but he said she was seducing him (parang tinutukso niya akofeeling mo lang
yan, koya). Said he gave in and fondled her at least once a week; kissed her everyday before
going to work. Said he did not have sex with her since he was afraid shed get pregnant. Said
Lourdes gets angry when he didnt have sex with her.

Lower court meted Saladino 3 death penalties, along with moral damages and indemnity.

ISSUES:

Which of the two narrations deserve greater weight? (In other words, who should the court
believe?)
In relation to the topic at hand, was Saladino liable for an impossible crime (recall how the
fourth time did not happen)? (What is an impossible crime?)

RULING/RATIO:

The SC believed Lourdes, based on the fact that she was candid, straightforward, and firm.
Saladino was said to be evasive and uncertain. (In other words, SC judged based on body
actions.) SC also went on about how humiliating this experience was but she still went for it
(wtf, diba lang. And this case was in 2001!). This case was judged based on the credibility of
Lourdes.
On the topic of impossible crime, recall par (2) of Art 4 which defines impossible crimes:
- (1) act performed would be an offense against persons or property
- (2) act was done with evil intent
- (3) its accomplishment is inherently impossible or that the means employed are either
inadequate or ineffectual
- (4) the act performed should not violate any other provision in the RPC
Answers to the requisites of impossible crime:
(1) It was a crime against persons
(2) It was done with evil intent
(3) On the question of WoN the means employed were inadequate or ineffectual:
The 4th time, Saladino once again forced Lourdes (like how he did for the first three
times) but she was able to get away. I think this constitutes frustrated rape. A frustrated felony
is when the means employed were adequate, but the result is different from that which is
intended. Meaning, in this case, Saladino forced her (adequate means) but she got away (result
different from what was expected, given the adequate means). Take this with a grain of salt,
though. Since this is my own interpretation and Im not sure what Im talking about just yet, I
really think I might be wrong.
(4) Dont know the RPC provisions yet.

Interesting note: All 14 justices of the SC concurred with this Decision.