Jeffsarabusing.wordpress.

com
[G.R. No. 129433. March 30, 2000]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff,
vs.
PRIMO CAMPUHAN Y BELLO, accused.

Facts:

Campuhan was a helper in the business of the family of the victim, a 4-year-old girl.
One time, the mother of the victim heard the latter cry, “Ayoko!”, prompting her to
rush upstairs. There, she saw Campuhan kneeling before the victim, whose pajamas
and pany were already removed, while his short pants were down to his knees.
Campuhan was apprehended. Physical examination of the victim yielded negative
results. No evident sign of extra-genital physical injury was noted. Her hymen was
intact and its orifice was only .5 cm in diameter.

Trial court found him guilty of statutory rape and sentenced him to death.

Issue:

Whether or not Campuhan is guilty of statutory rape.

Held: NO.

The gravamen of the offense of statutory rape is carnal knowledge of woman below
12 as provided in RPC 335(3). The victim was only 4 years old when the
molestation took place, thus raising the penalty from “reclusion perpetua to death”
to the single indivisible penalty of death under RA 7659 Sec. 11, the offended party
being below 7 years old. In concluding that carnal knowledge took place, full
penetration of the vaginal orifice is not an essential ingredient, nor is the rupture of
hymen necessary; the mere touching of external genitalia by the penis capable of
consummating the sexual act is sufficient to constitute carnal knowledge. But the
act of touching should be understood as inherently part of the entry of penis into the
labias of the female organ, and not mere touching alone of the mons pubis or the
pudendum (the part instantly visible within the surface).

Absent any showing of the slightest penetration of the female organ, i.e., touching of
either labia by the penis, there can be no consummated rape; at most, it can only be
attempted rape, if not acts of lasciviousness.

Here, the prosecution failed to discharge its onus of proving that Campuhan’s penis
was able to penetrate the victim’s vagina however slight. Also, there were no
external signs of physical injuries on the victim’s body to conclude that penetration
had taken place.

Issue #2:
What crime did Campuhan commit?

Held #2: ATTEMPTED RAPE.

Under RPC 6 in relation to RPC 335, rape is attempted when the offender
commences the commission of rape directly by overt acts, and does not perform all
acts of execution which should produce the crime of rape by reason of some cause
or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance. All the elements of
attempted rape are present in this case.

The penalty of attempted rape is 2 degrees lower than the imposable penalty of
death for the crime of statutory rape of minor below 7 years. Two degrees lower is
reclusion temporal, which is 12 years 1 day to 20 years.

Applying ISLAW, and in the absence of aggravating or mitigating circumstance, the

maximum penalty shall be medium period of reclusion temporal (14 years 8 months
1 day to 17 years 4 months), while the minimum is the penalty next lower in degree
– prision mayor (6 years 1 day to 12 years).

Issue #3:

May there be a crime of frustrated rape?

Held #3: NO.

In People vs Orita, SC finally did away with frustrated rape. Rape was consummated
from the moment the offender had carnal knowledge of the victim. All elements of
the offense were already present and nothing more was left for the offender to do.
Perfect penetration was not essential; any penetration of the female organ by the
male organ, however slight, was sufficient.

For attempted rape, there was no penetration of the female organ because not all
acts of execution were performed or the offender merely commenced the
commission of the felony directly by overt acts.