Heinous

The death penalty has been abolished by the 1987 Constitution because it is a “cruel, degrading and inhuman punishment.” But if there are “compelling reasons involving heinous crimes,” Congress may provide for its imposition (Article III, Section 19 (1). Thus Congress passed RA 7659 imposing the death penalty on, among others, the crime of rape if the victim is under 18 years old and the offender is a parent. This is shown in this case of Angelu.

Angelu was less than a year old when her parents separated and she was entrusted under the care and custody of her maternal grandmother, Lola Beth. Fifteen years later however, her father Nato whom Angelu had not seen, much less known, suddenly showed up and asked Lola Beth’s permission to take her for a vacation.  Angelu and Nato first stayed in the house of Nato’s father, her Lolo Gimo. Two months later however they transferred to the house of Nato’s uncle after Nato had an altercation with his brother Tonyo over the inheritance of some properties.

Because they were the only occupants of said house, the doting Nato laid down beside Angelu, threatened her to keep quiet by poking an ice pick at her side, then removed her shorts and panty and succeeded in having sexual intercourse with her after committing acts of lasciviousness on her despite her plea for mercy due to extreme pain. Nato also threatened to kill her should she reveal to anyone what happened to her.

For the next 20 days, Nato did not molest Angelu. But when they moved to another house built by Nato himself, he raped Angelu again by stuffing her mouth with a towel and tying her hands around the slats of the bamboo floor. Angelu tried to resist by kicking him but desisted when she realized that a two feet long gulok was pointed at the side of her body. The following morning about 3 a.m. when her hands were no longer tied but with the gulok still pointed at her side, Nato sexually assaulted her again despite her plea for mercy.

For the next eight days this pattern of sexual assaults was repeated by Nato twice, in the evening and early morning even if Angelu had menstruation. Angelu’s pleas for mercy and for an end to the sexual abuse fell on Nato’s ears deafened by animal lust. Because of Nato’s threats to kill her and ashamed to tell her cousins of the sexual abuses, and feeling alone in a strange place, she just kept quiet and told them only about the physical beatings of her father. Then she tried to disclose Nato’s sexual assaults to her grandfather but Nato followed her and burst into the scene to cut off the disclosure.

On the eighth day of her sexual molestation by Nato, when the sun was up and he was out at work, Angelu gathered enough courage to escape by borrowing money from Lui, a neighbor. But she missed her ride and had to roam around until she met Jomar who informed her of the schedule of rides and invited her to his house in the meanwhile. His father caught up with her at the house and told her to return home. But Angelu was able to escape and went to the hills. When she returned the following day, she told Jomar’s wife what Nato had done to her. She was then brought to the Barangay Captain and the police and was later subjected to physical examination which found that she was positive for defloration due to obliterated “vaginal rugosities.”

So 11 complaints for rape were filed against Nato for the 11 days that he willfully, feloniously and unlawfully had sexual intercourse with her daughter with lewd designs and through violence and intimidation.

The prosecution presented Angelu who narrated the sexual assaults done to her in a clear, direct, straightforward, positive and spontaneous manner although she admitted that she was not raped in the second to the last evening. Also presented were the Barangay Captain and the policeman who confirmed what Angelu reported to them.

For his defense, Nato simply denied the accusation and declared that Angelu filed the charges in retaliation for the beatings he inflicted upon her as she was stubborn and indolent. He also insinuated that Angelu could have lost her virginity to her boyfriend while staying with her Lola Beth.

But the trial court still found Nato guilty of 10 counts of rape and sentenced him to death on each count with payment of corresponding moral and exemplary damages.

This decision was automatically elevated to the Supreme Court (SC) for review. And the SC said that the RTC’s ruling giving full faith and credence to Angelu’s testimony should be upheld as it was in a better and unique position to personally hear the witnesses and observe their deportment, conduct and attitude. Angelu’s positive and assiduous declarations of rape and identification of the offender definitely prevailed over Nato’s inherently weak and uncorroborated defense of denial and imputation of lack of credibility on Angelu. A teenaged, unmarried lass does not ordinarily file a rape complaint against anybody, more so against her father, if it is not true.

Nato’s imputation that Angelu is a liar and hardheaded lacks probative value as it is mere hearsay. Angelu’s failure to disclose the sexual assaults to her cousins and grandfather does not also cast doubt on the truthfulness of her testimony because of Nato’s threats to her, the regular physical beatings inflicted on her and her embarrassment of having suffered such sexual ignominy.

The alleged cohabitation with Angelu’s supposed boyfriend that could have caused her defloration is absolutely irrelevant. Virginity is not an element of rape under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code. So Nato is really guilty of 10 counts of rape and should be sentenced to death for each count (People vs. Sacapao. G.R. 130525, September 3, 1999).

*      *      *

Email: [email protected].