People of the Philippines vs.

Cesar Atento

Contention of the State:

Complainant Glenda Aringo, who was sixteen years old at the time of commission of the
alleged offense, claimed that Cesar Atento, her neighbor, a 39-year old store keeper with a wife and
eight children, raped her five separate times. The first time was when she went to Atento’s store,
where she was cajoled into coming inside the house, downstairs, where Atento succeeded in
deflowering her. Glenda speaks of four other times when she was raped. It was later (presumably
because her hymen had healed) that she felt tickled and described the act of coitus as “masarap”. She
say she never told anybody about Atento’s attacks on her because he had threatened her life. But
could not conceal her condition anymore because she was pregnant.

Defense of the Accused:

Atento denies the charge against him p, saying it was pure harassment concocted by a
relative of the girl who wanted to eject him from the land where his house was erected. Insisting that
Glenda was a girl of loose morals, he says h had twice seen her in sexual congress with a man and
that she had once offered her body to his 13 year old son for a fee of P5.00.

Also, Glenda’s description of the act as “masarap”, means victim is pleasured by the act.

Resolution of the SC:

Glenda’s description of the act of coitus as pleasurable would have destroyed the whole
case against Atento, but for one significant fact. The girl is a mental retardate. Glenda is inter alia
with an intellectual capacity between the ages of nine to twelve years old. As such, her intellectual
functioning is within the mentally defective level: fund of information is inadequate, her judgement
is unsound, her thinking and working capacity is poor. However, in the midst of all these, Glenda
was found capable of telling the truth.

Art. 335 of the RPC provides, “Rape is committed by having carnal knowledge of a
woman under any of the following circumstances: 1) by using force or intimidation; 2) when the
woman is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; and 3) when the woman is under 12 years of
age, even though neither of the circumstances mentioned in the two next preceding paragraph shall
be present.”

It has not been clearly established that Atento employed force or threat against Glenda to
make her submit to his lust. Nevertheless, there is no question that Atento is guilty of rape upon
Glenda under par. 2 because the girl was deprived of reason. Alternatively, he is liable under par. 3
because his victim had the mentality of a girl less than 12 years old at the time she was raped.
 In any event, whether under par. 2 or par. 3 of Art. 335 of the RPC, Atento deserves to be
punished for the rape of Glenda.

People of the Philippines vs Primo Campuhan

Contention of the State:

As provided for under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code as amended by RA 7659, an
automatic review of the case is brought before the SC. That on May 27,1997, Campuhan was
convicted of statutory rape and sentenced by the court a quo to the extreme penalty of death. The
conviction was based on the statement of Mal Corazon Pamintuan, the mother of the victim Chrystel,
saying that on April 25,1996, she found the accused kneeling down on his 4-year old and “forcing
his penis into Chrystel’s vagina.”.

Defense of the Accused:

The accused kept his innocence and contested that Pamintuan’s statements were not credible
for the latter has ill will against him. Also, medical certificate shows negative results. Moreover, the
victim’s testimony that Campuhan’s penis only touches her vagina, but did not penetrate, proves
that the crime charged shall not be consummated rape.

Resolution of the SC:

The records reviewed failed to show the proof whether Campuhan’s penis was able to
penetrate Chrystel’s vagina. Failure to prove such penetration, even the slightest one, cannot be
considered consummated rape, however, only attempted rape, if not acts of lasciviousness. Also,
there were no signs of injuries on the witness’ body to conclude a medical perspective that a
penetration has taken place. In rape cases, it is important that a valid testimony and medical
certificate complements each other, for relying ,may create unwarranted or mischievous results. It is
necessary to carefully establish a proof that the penis, in reality, entered the labial threshold of the
female organ to accurately conclude that the rape was consummated.

WHEREFORE, the decision of the court on convicting Campuhan guilty of statutory rape is
MODIFIED. Hence, convicted of attempted rape instead.