Question:

Estibal was charged for the crime of rape of his 13-year-old daughter, AAA. On the evening of
the morning after the alleged rape, AAA, assisted by her mother, BBB, went to the office of the
Barangay Security Force (BSF) and reported the incident to BSFs Estudillo and Perlas. The case
was referred to the police station where P03 Cobardo took down the sworn statement of AAA.
Based on the sworn statement, AAA first revealed her ordeal to her cousin DDD. With DDD’s
help, BBB confronted her daughter AAA, who told her that Estibal did not only rape her that
morning, but had sexually abused her several times. During pre-trial, AAA and her mother, BBB.
desisted saying that AAA had already forgiven her father. Relying on P03 Cobardo’s testimony
of what AAA narrated to her, the RTC considered the spontaneity of the declarations made by
AAA as confirmed by P03 Cobardo as part of the res gestae, and convicted Estibal.
On appeal, Estibal maintained that the testimony of P03 Cobardo and the BSFs, not being
victims or witnesses to the “startling occurrence” of rape, cannot create the hearsay exception
of res gestae.
Decide on whether or not the testimony of P03 Cobrado and BSFs were part of res gestae which
is an exception to the hearsay rule.

Answer:
No, the testimony of P03 Cobrado and BSF’s were not part of res gestae.
The essential requisites to admit evidence as part of the res gestae are the following: There is a
startling occurrence, a statement was made while the event is taking place, or immediately
prior or subsequent thereto, the statement was made before the declarant had time to contrive
or devise falsehood and the statement relates to the circumstances of the startling event or
occurrence.
The test of admissibility of evidence as a part of the res gestae is therefore, whether the act,
declaration, or exclamation is so intimately interwoven or connected with the principal fact or
event that it characterizes as to be regarded as a part of the transaction itself, and also whether
it clearly negatives any premeditation or purpose to manufacture testimony.
In this case, AAA’s statements to the barangay tanod and the police do not qualify as part of res
gestae in view of the missing element of spontaneity and the lapse of an appreciable time
between the rape and the declarations which afforded her sufficient opportunity for reflection.
Hence, the testimony of Po3 Cobrado was not part of res gestae.