PEOPLE vs ENTRAMPAS

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs JUANITO ENTRAMPAS   

G.R. NO. 212161

March 29, 2017

FACTS:

Accused-appellant Juanito Entrampas (Entrampas) and BBB were common-law spouses. They co-habited for eight years, from 1995 to 2003. AAA, BBB’s daughter from previous relationship, lived with them. She look up to Entrampas as her adoptive father.

Sometime in February 2003, at about 5:00 pm., in a rural sitio of Barangay Bawod, San Isidro, Leyte. AAA arrived from school to cook for her family. She was interrupted by Entrampas and was asked to go to the room upstairs. The 11-year old girl obeyed.

Once in the room, Entrampas forced AAA to lie down on the floor. She was warned by the accused-appellant that if she shouted he would kill her. She was also warned that if she told her mother about what he was about to do, he would kill them.

Entrampas took off the child’s panty, undressed himself, and inserted his penis into her vagina. AAA felt pain as he penetrated her. Her vagina bled. She cried and pleaded him to stop.

As he consummated the act, she noticed a knife on the wall within his reach. She become more fearful. After satisfying himself, he again warned the child that he would kill her and her mother if she informed anyone about the incident.

The incident occurred again a week later in February 2003. Entrampas told AAA to lie down , penetrated her vagina, and then left her. Over the following months, Entrampas repeatedly raped AAA, who out of fear, and remained silent.

In July 2003 BBB observed some changes in her daughter’s body. AAA’s belly had become noticeably bigger. Entrampas and BBB went to BBB’s brother, CCC, on September 2003, To confess the crime he had committed against AAA. Entrampas allegedly felt remorseful and told CCC to kill him for avenge AAA. CCC immediately reported the matter to the police

ISSUES:

Whether or not, accused-appellant Juanito Entrampas is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of two (2) counts of statutory rape.

HELD:

Yes, the accused-appellant Entrampas is guilty beyond reasonable Doubt of two (2) statutory rape. On the two(2) charges of qualified rape, AAA clearly and consistently communicated how the accused-appellant threatened and forced her into having sexual congress with him. Her failures to resist the sexual aggression and to immediately report the incident to the authorities or her mother do not undermine her credibility. The silence of the rape victim does not negate her sexual molestation or make her charge baseless, untrue , or fabricated. A minor cannot be expected to act like an adult or a mature experienced woman who would have a courage and intelligence to disregard the threat to her life and complain immediately that she had been sexually assaulted.

Forced and intimidation must be appreciated in light of the victim’s perception and judgement when the assailant committed the crime. In rape perpetrated by close kin, such as the common-law spouse of the child’s mother, actual force or intimidation need not be employed. While accused-appellant was not a biological father of AAA. She considered him as a father since she was a child. Moral influence or ascendancy added to the intimidation of AAA. It enhanced the fear that cowed the victim into silence. Accused-appellant’s physical superiority and moral influence depleted AAA’s resolved to stand up against her foster father. The threats to her and her mother’s lives, as well as the knife within accused-appellant’s reach, further prevented her for from resisting her assailant. As accused-appellant sexually assaulted AAA, she cried and pleaded him to stop. Her failure to shout or to tenaciously repel the acussed-appellant does not mean that she voluntarily submitted to his dastardly act.

Accused-appellant’s act amounted to statutory rape through carnal knowledge under Article 266-A(1)(d) of the Revised Penal Code, as amended: Article 266-A. Rape, When and How Committed. Rape is Committed- 1) By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances:

a). Through force, threat, or intimidation;

b). When the offended party is deprived of a reason otherwise unconscious;

c). By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority; and

d). When the offended party is under twelve (12) years of age or is demented, even though none of the circumstances mentioned above be presented.

Acussed-appellant also committed the crime with the aggravating/qualifiying circumstance that he was the common-law spouse of AAA’s mother. Under Article 266-B (1) of the Revised Penal Code, as amended: Article 266-B. Penalties. –Rape under paragraph 1 of the next preceding article shall punisher by reclusion perpetua.

The death penalty shall also be imposed if the crime of rape is committed with any of the following aggravating/qualifying circumstances:

1). When the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age and the offender is a guardian or the common –law spouse of the parent of the victim.

WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing premises, the Regional Trial Court Decision dated December 6, 2008 and Court of Appeals Decision Dated November 6, 2013 are hereby AFFIRMED with the following MODIFICATIONS:

Judgement is hereby rendered finding the accused, Juanito Entrampas, in Criminal Case Nos. CN-04-457 and CN-04-458, guilty beyond reasonable doubt if the crime of statutory rape as charged in the information and as defined and penalized in article 266-A of the Revised penal Code.