IGNOMINY

80. PEOPLE vs TORREFIEL

CA-GR No. 659-R

November 29, 1947

45 OG 803

Principles Involved: Ignominy- a circumstance pertaining to the moral order, which adds disgrace and obloquy to
the material injury caused by the crime. This aggravating circumstance is applicable when the crime committed is
against chastity.

FACTS:

December 17, 1942, 5:00 p.m. Torrefiel and Ormeo were on their way to the USSAFE headquarters in the
mountains. They passed by Eady’s residence and talked to him at the balcony to ask for khakis. Eady had none
except what he had on.

Ceferina Cordero also came to the balcony and inquired about their mission. She scolded Torrefiel and
Ormeo because all their belongings have been looted by USSAFE soldiers. Torrefiel threatened her with slapping;
brought out revolver. Eady and Cordero were charged with being fifth columnists as they refused to give aid to them.
Subsequently they were taken to the USSAFE headquarters.

Torrefiel took charge of Eady and Ormeo took charge of Cordero. Their hands were free but were
blindfolded. Cordero called to Eady every now and then to know if he was following. After a while Eady did not
respond anymore so they stopped to wait for them. Torrefiel had taken the wrong way so he went back to a
guardhouse and left Eady there. He tried to find a way to overtake Ormeo and Cordero but was unsuccessful. At the
guardhouse, he discovers Eady had escaped. Torrefiel followed a different route enabling him to find Ormeo and
Cordero. Ormeo rushed back to the guardhouse upon discovering that Eady had escaped; Cordero was left with
Torrefiel.

As Cordero was about to urinate, Torrefiel pushed her and carried her to a log and laid her on it and raped
her. Torrefiel began to unbutton his pants and wound cogon leaves around his genitals. It was visible to Cordero as
her blindfold had fallen down a little. Pressing her neck so she would remain silent, Torrefiel proceeded to have
intercourse with her. Ormeo, taking advantage, also had sex with her. The soldiers desisted from bringing Cordero to
their headquarters and returned her to their house. A servant informed Cordero that Eady had gone away. Upon
Eady‘s return, Cordero informed him that she was abused by Torrefiel.

ISSUE: Whether there are any aggravating circumstances

HELD:

YES.

Trial Court erred in accepting the aggravating circumstance of NOCTURNITY –this was entirely unexpected
as the ordeal started early in the afternoon.

IGNOMINY is present.

The novelty of the act of winding cogon grass on his genitals before raping the victim augmented the wrong
done by increasing its pain and adding moral disgrace thereto.
81. THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee,
vs.
JAIME JOSE Y GOMEZ, ET AL., defendants. JAIME JOSE Y GOMEZ, BASILIO PINEDA, JR., alias "BOY," EDGARDO
AQUINO Y PAYUMO and ROGELIO CAÑAL Y SEVILLA, defendants-appellants

February 6, 1971

G.R. No. L-28232

37 SCRA 450

PER CURIAM

Principles Involved: Aggravating circumstances- that means be employed or circumstances brought about which
add ignominy to the natural effects of the act.

Relevant Laws cited: ART. 335. When and how rape committed.

Facts:

The complainant, Magdalena "Maggie" de la Riva, was, at the time of the incident, 25 years old and single;
she graduated from high school in 1958 at Maryknoll College and finished the secretarial course in 1960 at St.
Theresa's College. She is also a movie actress by profession.

It was that at about 4:30 o'clock in the morning of June 26, 1967, Miss De la Riva, homeward bound from
the ABS Studio on Roxas Blvd. was driving her car accompanied by her maid Helen Calderon. She was already near
her destination when a car with four identified appellants came abreast of her car and tried to bump it. She stepped
on her brakes to avoid a collision, and then pressed on the gas and swerved her car to the left, but because the driver
of the other car (Basilio Pineda, Jr.) also accelerated his speed, the two cars almost collided for the second time.
Forthwith, Pineda stopped the car which he was driving, jumped out of it and rushed towards her.

Undaunted, Pineda opened the door of Miss De la Riva's car and grabbed the lady's left arm. The girl held on
tenaciously to her car's steering wheel and, together with her maid, started to scream. Her strength, however,
proved no match to that of Pineda, who succeeded in pulling her out of her car. They both tried to escaped but the
appellants were able to sped away in the direction of the Broadway St.. The maid was left behind.

The complainant was made to sit between Jaime Jose and Edgardo Aquino at the back seat; Basilio Pineda,
Jr. was at the wheel, while Rogelio Cañal was seated beside him. Miss De la Riva entreated the appellants to release
her; but all she got in response were jeers, abusive and impolite language. Jose put one arm around the complainant
and forced his lips upon hers, while Aquino placed his arms on her thighs and lifted her skirt. The girl tried to resist
them.

Aquino took a handkerchief from his pocket and, with the help of Jose, blindfolded Miss De la Riva. Not long
after, the car came to a stop at the Swanky Hotel in Pasay City. The blindfolded lady was led out of the car to one of
the rooms on the second floor of the hotel.

They ordered De la Riva to disrobe. Reluctantly, she did as directed, but so slowly did she proceed with the
assigned task that the appellants cursed her and threatened her again with the Thompson and the acid. They started
pushing Miss De la Riva around.
 This ordeal lasted for about ten minutes, during which the complainant, in all her nakedness, was asked
twice or thrice to turn around. Then Pineda picked up her clothes and left the room with his other companions. The
complainant tried to look for a blanket with which to cover herself, but she could not find one.

Very soon, Jose reentered the room and began undressing himself. He pushed her backward and pinned her
down on the bed. Miss De la Riva and Jose struggled against each other; and because the complainant was putting up
stiff resistance, Jose cursed her and hit her several times on the stomach and other parts of the body. Jose succeeded
in having carnal knowledge of the complainant. He then left the room. The other three took their turns. Aquino,
Pineda and Canal hit the complainant on different parts of the body and also succeeded in abusing the complainant.

Mention must be made of the fact that while each of mention must be made the four appellants was
struggling with the complainant, the other three were outside the room, just behind the door, threatening the
complainant with acid and telling her to give in because she could not, after all, escape what with their presence.

After the appellants had been through with the sexual carnage, they gave Miss De la Riva her clothes, told
her to get dressed and put on her stockings to give the impression that nothing had happened to her. She was
warned not to inform the police. The appellants then blindfolded Miss De la Riva again and led her down from the
hotel room. Appellant Canal accompanied her to the taxicab.

When Miss De la Riva reached home, her mother, her brother-in-law Ben Suba, as well as several PC officers,
policemen and reporters, were at the house. Upon seeing her mother, the complainant ran toward her and said,
"Mommy, Mommy, I have been raped. All four of them raped me."

Thus, on the fourth day after the incident, Miss De la Riva, accompanied by her lawyer and by some
members of the family, went to the Quezon City Police Department Headquarters, filed a complaint and executed a
statement wherein she narrated the incident and gave descriptions of the four men who abused her. In the
afternoon of the same day, the complainant submitted herself into a medico-internal examination by Dr. Ernesto
Brion, NBI Chief Medico-Legal Officer.

Pat. Pascual received a telephone call from the police headquarters to the effect that one of the suspects had
been apprehended. That evening, the complainant and Pat. Pascual proceeded to the headquarters where Miss De la
Riva identified appellant Jaime Jose as one of the four men who abducted and raped her.

Jose admitted that he knew about, and was involved in, the incident. He named the other line appellants as
his companions, that upon the initiative of Pineda, he and the other three waited for Miss De la Riva to come out of
the ABS Studio; that his group gave chase to the complainant's car; that it was Pineda who blindfolded her and that
only Pineda and Aquino criminally assaulted the complainant.

After the apprehension of Jose, the other three soon fell into the hands of the authorities. Miss De la Riva
pointed to Pineda and Cañal as among the four persons who abducted and raped her.

In the statement of Cañal, he confirmed the information previously given by Jose but the complainant
yielded her body to him on condition that he would release her. Pineda also admitted his participation however, he
would make it appear, that the complainant voluntarily acceded to having sexual intercourse with him.

In his medical report Dr. Brion noted the presence of multiple contusions and bruises on different parts of
the complainant's body, as well as of genital injuries. The injuries, according to Dr. Brion, could have been caused
blows administered by a closed fist or by the palm of the hand, and could have been inflicted on the subject while
she was being raped.

ISSUE:

What kind of rape was committed?

HELD:

Undoubtedly, it is that which is punishable by the penalty of reclusion perpetua to death, under paragraph 3,
Article 335, as amended by Republic Act No. 4111.

As regards, therefore, the complex crime of forcible abduction with rape, the first of the crimes committed,
the latter is definitely the more serious; hence, pursuant the provision of Art. 48 of the Revised Penal Code, the
penalty prescribed shall be imposed in its maximum period. Consequently, the appellants should suffer the extreme
penalty of death. In this regard, there is hardly any necessity to consider the attendance of aggravating
circumstances, for the same would not alter the nature of the penalty to be imposed.

Nevertheless, to put matters in their proper perspective and for the purpose of determining the proper
penalty to be imposed in each of the other three crimes of simple rape, the following aggravating circumstances
must be considered: (a) nighttime, appellants having purposely sought such circumstance to facilitate the
commission of these crimes; (b) abuse of superior strength, the crime having been committed by the four appellants
in conspiracy with one another (c) ignominy, since the appellants in ordering the complainant to exhibit to them her
complete nakedness for about ten minutes, before raping her, brought about a circumstance which tended to make
the effects of the crime more humiliating; and (d) use of a motor vehicle.

Of the three principal-appellants (Jose, Aquino and Cañal), none of them may claim aggravating
circumstances has been offset by the mitigating circumstance. Appellant Pineda should, however, be credited with
the mitigating circumstance of voluntary plea of guilty, a factor which does not in the least affect the nature of the
proper penalties to be imposed, for the reason that there would still be three aggravating circumstances remaining.

Wherefore, the judgment under review is hereby modified as follows: Jaime G. Jose, Basilio Pineda, Jr., and
Eduardo P. Aquino are pronounced GUILTY of the complex crime of forcible abduction with rape, and each and every
one of them likewise convicted of three (3) of the crimes of rape.

82. THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee

vs.
MICHAEL J. BUTLER, accused-appellant.

January 27, 1983

G.R. No. L-50276

120 SCRA 281

GUERRERO, J.:

PRINCIPLES INVOLVED : Treachery and Abuse of Superior Strength.

In People vs. Casillar,

This Court said that the essence of this circumstance is that advantage is taken by the offender of this
physical strength which is relatively superior to that of the offended party. The fact that the offender is
strong does not of itself prove its existence.

RELEVANT LAWS CITED

Art. 15 of the RPC, Art 192 of P.D. 603

FACTS:

Michael J. Butler, an American Negro serving as a seaman in the U.S. Navy since February 3,1975 (he was
born on September 4, 1957), committed murder on August 8, 1975 when he killed a hostess, Enriquita Alipo 26, a
native of Bugasong, Antique, in her residence at 8 Fontaine Street, Olongapo City, as proven by his extrajudicial
confession which was corroborated by evidence of the corpus delicti.

On August 7, 1975, Butler and the victim, Enriquita Alipo alias Gina Barrios were together at Colonial
Restaurant in Olongapo City. They were seen together by Lilia Paz, and entertainer and friend of the victim, who
claimed to have had a small conversation with the accused, and by one Rosemarie Juarez, also a friend of the victim.
At about 1:00 of the same evening, the accused and the victim left the said restaurant, after the latter invited
Rosemarie Juarez to come to her house that night.

Emelita Pasco, the housemaid of the victim, testified that, at about 11:30 p.m. or so of August 7, 1975, her
mistress (Gina Barrios) came home with the accused-appellant. The victim and accused-appellant immediately
entered the victim's bedroom. Shortly thereafter, the victim left her bedroom holding an Id card and a piece of
paper, and on the piece of paper, the victim purportedly wrote the following words: MICHAEL J. BUTLER, 44252-
8519 USS HANCOCK. Said words were copied from the ID Card.

Then she rushed back to her bedroom after instructing Pasco to wake her up the following morning.
Rosemarie Juarez, came to the former's house and after having a small conversation, also left.

The following day, August 8, 1975, at about 4:00 a.m., Pasco rose to wake her mistress as instructed. She
knocked at the door. She found that the victim was lying on her bed, facing downward, naked up to the waist, with
legs spread apart, with a broken figurine beside her head.

Pasco informed Patrolman de los Reyes that the accused Butler slept with the victim the previous night, and
the former gave the latter the piece of paper where the name of the accused was written.

The latent print examination report showed that there were three fragmentary latent prints that were lifted
from the cellophane wrapping of the figurine. This particular print was found Identical with the accused's left middle
fingerprint on thirteen points.

On the same day, officers of the Olongapo Police Department informed the NISRA in Subic Bay that an
American Negro by the name of Michael J. Butler on board the USS Hancock- was a suspect in a murder case. After
being located, the accused was brought to the legal office of the ship. Witt Identified himself, showed his credentials
and informed the accused that he was a suspect in a murder case. Then Witt informed the accused of his
constitutional rights to remain silent and right to counsel. Then the accused was searched, handcuffed, and was
brought to NISRA office. There, the investigation and interrogation were conducted.

The accused admitted that they started arguing about his five pesos. He thought she was going to do
something dangerous to him, so he grabbed her and they started wrestling on the bed. That she grabbed him by the
throat and he picked up a statue of Jesus Christ that was sitting on a bedside stand and he hit her in the head.

The result of that investigation was thus a document taken from the accused consisting of three pages,
signed and initialed on all pages by him and containing a statement that he was aware of his constitutional rights,
and a narration of the facts that happened on August 7, 1975.

Dr. Roxas later testified that anal intercourse was had with the victim after her death as indicated by the
partly opened anus and the presence of spermatozoa in it. He testified that the anus would have automatically and
completely closed had the intercourse occurred, while the victim was still alive.

ISSUE:
 I. Whether or not the trial court erred in finding the accused guilty of the crime of murder qualified by
abuse of superior strength, with aggravating circumstances of treachery and scoffing at the corpse of
the victim;
II. Whether or not the trial court erred in appreciating treachery and abuse of superior strength
simultaneously and separately;

HELD:

I. NO

The prosecution maintains that there is abuse of superior strength as can be deduced from the fact that the
victim was slender, only 4'11" in height while the accused is about 6 feet tall and 155 lbs that the accused took
advantage of this unequal physical condition when he struck the victim with the figurine which made the victim
unconscious, after which he shoved and pressed the victim's mouth and nose against the bed mattress.

It is not only the notorious advantage of height that the accused had over his hapless victim, he being 6 feet tall
and weighing 155 lbs. while the girl was only 4 ft 11 inches tall, but also fits strength which he wielded in striking
her with the figurine on the head and in shoving her head and pressing her mouth and nose against the bed
mattress, which pressure must have been very strong and powerful to suffocate her to death and without risk to
himself in any manner or mode whatsoever that she may have taken to defend herself or retaliate since she was
already struck and helpless on the bed, that convinced us to find and rule that the crime committed is murder with
the qualifying circumstance of abuse of superior strength.

II. YES

The evidence on record, however, is not sufficient to show clearly and prove distinctly that treachery attended
the commission of the crime since there was no eyewitness account of the killing. The extra-judicial confession of the
accused merely stated, thus: "I thought she was going to do something dangerous to me so I grabbed her, and we
started wrestling on the bed. She grabbed me by the throat and I picked up a statue of Jesus Christ that was sitting
on the bedside stand and I hit her in the head. She fell flat on her face." Although the figurine was found broken
beside her head, the medical report, however, do not show any injury or fracture of the skull and no sign of
intracranial hemorrhage.

However, the case against the accused-appellant was dismissed because the Court was fully satisfied that
the accused. appellant has behaved properly and has shown his capability to be a useful member of the community.
It is of no moment that the accused had not been specifically committed by the court to the custody or care of the
Department of Social Welfare then, now the Ministry of Social Services and Development, or to any training
institution operated by the government or duly-licensed agencies as directed under Article 192 of P.D. 603.

The Court approved the recommendation of the Ministry that "Michael Butler be given a chance to enjoy his
life fully outside the jail, thus promoting Ms best interest and welfare"; "that Mr. Michael Butler is now fully
rehabilitated, it is our recommendation that he be given an opportunity to live happily and prove himself outside the
Brig" "with the above findings and Mr. Butler's desire to start life anew, this Final Report is submitted."

83. THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee,

vs.
RAFAEL SAYLAN alias PAEL, accused-appellant.

June 29, 1984

G.R. No. L-36941

130 SCRA 159

ABAD SANTOS, J.:

Principles Involved: “superiority is inherent in the crime of rape or is absorbed in the element of force."

FACTS:

Eutropia A. Agno, a married woman and a resident of Barrio Malinao, Gingoog City, was a classroom teacher
of the Malinao Elementary School.

On January 23, 1971, Eutropia went to the public market in Gingoog City to buy foodstuffs for her family and
thereafter, she proceeded to the store of her mother to fetch her five-year old daughter Nilsonita. On their way
home, Eutropia and Nilsonita boarded a passenger jeepney and noticed that the other passengers were Rudy
Gonzales, a grade I pupil, the appellant, Rafael Saylan, and a couple whom she did not know.

The jeepney went only as far as Malinas citrus farm because the road to Barrio Malinao was not passable by
vehicles. It was almost 6:30 o'clock in the evening when the jeepney arrived at the Malinas citrus farm and so all the
passengers alighted and had to walk all the way to Barrio Malinao which was about three and a half kilometers
away.

Later on, the couple separated from the group and took the road leading to their house while Eutropia's
group took the opposite road. The appellant, however, joined the group of Eutropia and when they reached the place
where the road was plain, appellant who was then walking side by side with Eutropia suddenly pulled out a dagger
about eight inches long and pointing it at the latter.

Appellant placed his right arm around the neck of Eutropia with the dagger pointed at her left breast, after
which he dragged Eutropia at some distance. When they reached the junction of the trail for men and a trail for
carabaos, he ordered everybody to stop and told the children to stay behind and threatened to kill them.

Thereafter, appellant again dragged Eutropia by her hand and brought her towards a creek near a coconut
tree which was about five meters away. Subsequently, appellant placed himself on top of the victim and inserted his
penis into her vagina and succeeded in having sexual intercourse with her.

After the third intercourse, appellant ordered Eutropia to stand up and then he bent her body downwards
with her hands and knees resting on the ground. When the latter was already in this position, appellant then placed
himself behind her, inserted his penis into her vagina and executed a push and pull movement in the dog's way of
sexual intercourse

After performing this uncommon way of sexual intercourse, appellant ordered Eutropia to he down again
which the latter reluctantly obeyed because appellant's dagger was always pointed at her and thereafter he had
carnal knowledge of her for the fifth time.

Afterwards, Eutropia and appellant returned to the place where the children were left. After walking some
distance, Eutropia saw the house of her friend "Ben" and upon approaching the said house, she shouted, "Ben, Ben,
please give me hot water". Eutropia immediately went upstairs together with the children and the appellant.

At about 10 o'clock that evening, her husband was already there. Eutropia then told her husband that she
was raped by the appellant

The accused did not deny having had sexual intercourse with Mrs. Agno; in fact he admitted that he
copulated with her for three successive times in the early evening of January 23, 1972, but he claimed that it was
with her consent.
ISSUE:

Whether or not, accused’s offense of rape was attended by aggravating circumstance of ignominy

HELD:

YES

The version of the complainant has indicia of credibility. For her version bared her shame to a small
community and her exposure was necessary only because she had to reveal the truth.

The trial court held that there was ignominy because the appellant used not only the missionary position,
i.e. male supenor female inferior, but also "The same position as dogs do" i.e., entry from behind. The appellant
claims there was no ignominy because "The studies of many experts in the matter have shown that this 'position' is
not novel and has repeatedly and often been resorted to by couples in the act of copulation.

The judgment of the trial court is in accordance with the facts and the law but it cannot be affirmed
completely because of the lack of the necessary number of votes.

WHEREFORE, the judgment under review is modified in the sense that the appellant shall suffer the penalty
of reclusion perpetua instead of death.