Ortega v.

People
1. What is the nature of the crime committed and how was it committed?
The nature of the crime committed is a grave offense because the penalty of rape is
Reclusion Perpetua, which may have a duration from 20 years and 1 day to 40
years. It was told that 14 year old petitioner Ortega raped the 8 year-old victim AAA,
on three different occasions. The first two occasions happened when AAA and BBB
were left for two nights to stay in the residence of Luzviminda Ortega the mother of
petitioner because MMM had to attend to the needs of her other son in the hospital.
During the first night, the petitioner then went to the room where his mother, sister
and AAA were sleeping. He then woke up the victim and led her to their sala and
then raped her there. The next day, after noticing that they were left alone, the
petitioner brought AAA inside the comfort room and raped her again. AAA narrated
how she felt pain after the petitioner inserted his penis into her vagina. In both of
these instances, AAA was threatened not to tell her parents, otherwise she would get
hurt. That is why AAA kept silent about the incidents.
The last occasion occurred when the petitioner went to AAA’s house in order to
watch television with the victim and her siblings. While everyone else is busy,
petitioner asked AAA to come with him inside her siblings’ room. After which the
petitioner pulled AAA behind the door, he then removed his pants and underwear
and also AAA’s shorts and underwear. From a standing position the petitioner again
inserted his penis to the victim’s vagina.

2. How did the RTC rule on the case?

The RTC ruled that defense of denial that was used by the petitioner forfeited over
the positive identification as the perpetrator of the crime. The Court finds the
petitioner guilty beyond reasonable doubt as principal by direct participation of the
crime Rape without aggravating or mitigating circumstance, he will also be penalized
of two Reclusional Temporal in its medium period, he can apply for Indeterminate
Sentence. The accused must pay for the moral damages he has caused to the
victim.
3. What are the errors that the petitioner seeks to be corrected? How was it
addressed by the Court?
There are a few errors in the accusations done by the defense party as per the
petitioner, one of which is that if it is actually true that he inserted his fingers and his
penis into AAA's vagina it would have left abrasions, wounds and/or lacerations on
the victim's genitalia. However, this was contradicted by the medical report of Dr.
Katalbas who conducted a medical examination a day after the incident. The reports
have shown that there were no signs or indications that AAA was raped or molested.
Another argument is that why would the petitioner do such an act inside the house of
AAA, where there is a huge possibility to get caught due to the reaction that can be
made by AAA. Lastly, the petitioner said that the main reason why he was being
accused is because MMM wants to extort money from him and his family.
4. How did the court rule on the accused’s age of criminal liability? Discuss.
The Court presumed that the provisions of Section 64 of Republic Act 9344 cannot
be applied by the petitioner because he is now 25 years old and not qualified as a
child. Furthermore, the petitioner can benefit from the provision of Section 38 under
R.A 9344 which provides suspension if found guilty.
5. How did the court interpret the transitory provisions of RA 9344?
Under Section 64, if a child is under 15 years old at the time he committed the crime
any case filed against him should immediately be dismissed. The said child should
be referred to the LSWDO or any social worker, he must also undergo rehabilitation
or reformation. The CICL must undergo proceedings if he is not wilñing to be
admitted in any rehabilitation program. Under Section 65, the family court shall
decide whether or not his detention is still necessary and then must be transferred in
the Bahay Pag-Asa. Under Section 67, whenever a child reaches 18 years old, what
happens next should be decided through consultation of the LSWDO or any social
worker. The CICL can apply for probation if he qualifies under the provisions of the
Probation Law. Lastly the CICL who have been convicted and serving the sentences
provided by the Sec. 68 stated that those who below at the age of 18 yrs old at the
time he commit the commission of crime and they were convicted at the same time
they serving their sentences they besides benefit the retroactive application provided
by the this Act. Lastly, Section 68 states that all those who committed a crime that
are 18 years old and below they would benefit retroactive application provided by the
said act.

6. How did the court explain the intent of RA 9344?

The court explains the intent of RA 9344 is to protect the children because they are
part of the vulnerable sectors, to protect and prevent them from committing crimes
once again, and it lets the children recognize their rights to be assisted, provide
proper care, protection in all forms of abused, neglect, cruelty, exploitation and other
factors that may affect their behavior.