PEOPLE VS ECHEGARAY

FACTS:

RTC rendered judgment finding accused LEO ECHEGARAY Y PILO guilty beyond reasonable doubt
of the crime of RAPE as charged in the complaint, aggravated by the fact that the same was
commited by the accused who is the father/stepfather of the complainant, he is hereby sentenced to
suffer the penalty of DEATH, as provided for under RA. No. 7659.

Victim RODESSA ECHEGARAY is a ten-year old girl and a fifth-grader. The victim lives with her
family in a small house located at No. 199 Fernandez St., Barangay San Antonio, San Francisco Del
Monte, Quezon City with her parents are Rosalie and Leo Echegaray (accused/step-father).

Sometime in the afternoon of April 1994, while Rodessa was looking after her three brothers in their
house as her mother attended a gambling session in another place, she heard her father, the
accused-appellant in this case, order her brothers to go out of the house. As soon as her brothers
left, accused-appellant Leo Echegaray approached Rodessa and suddenly dragged her inside the
room (p. 12, ibid). Before she could question the appellant, the latter immediately, removed her
panty and made her lie on the floor (p. 13, ibid). Thereafter, appellant likewise removed his
underwear and immediately placed himself on top of Rodessa. Subsequently, appellant forcefully
inserted his penis into Rodessa's organ causing her to suffer intense pain (pp. 14-15, ibid). While
appellant was pumping on her, he even uttered. "Masarap ba, masarap ba?" and to which Rodessa
answered: "Tama na Papa, masakit" (p. 16, ibid). Rodessa's plea proved futile as appellant
continued with his act. After satisfying his bestial instinct, appellant threatened to kill her mother if
she would divulge what had happened. Scared that her mother would be killed by appellant,
Rodessa kept to herself the ordeal she suffered. She was very afraid of appellant because the latter,
most of the time, was high on drugs (pp. 17-18, ibid.). The same sexual assault happened up to the
fifth time and this usually took place when her mother was out of the house.

Issue:

Is the crime committed by Leo Echegaray considered as Statutory Rape?

Ruling:

YES. The court rule that, The accused-appellant in this case is charged with Statutory Rape on the
basis of the complaint, dated July 14, 1994. The gravamen of the said offense, as stated in
paragraph 3, Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, is the carnal knowledge of a woman below
twelve years old.   Rodessa positively identified his father accused-appellant, as the culprit of
24

Statutory Rape. Her account of how the accused-appellant succeeded in consummating his grievous
and odious sexual assault on her is free from any substantial self-contradiction. It is highly
inconceivable that it is rehearsed and fabricated upon instructions from Rodessa's maternal
grandmother Asuncion Rivera as asserted by the accused-appellant.

The court cited the case of People v. Guibao. The testimony of the victim who was only 12 years old
at the time of the rape as to the circumstances of the rape must be given weight, for testimony of
young and immature rape victims are credible . No woman especially one of tender age, practically
only a girl, would concoct a story of defloration, allow an examination of her private parts and
thereafter expose herself to a public trial, if she were not motivated solely by the desire to have the
culprit apprehended and punished.
Under Section 11 of Republic Act No. 7659 often referred to as the Death Penalty Law, Art. 335 of
the Revised Penal Code was amended, to wit:

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

1. When the victim is under eigthteen (18) years of age and the offender is a parent,

ascendant, step-parent, guardian, relative by consanguinity or affinity within the third
civil degree, or the common-law spouse of the parent of the victim.

In rape cases, a broken hymen is not an essential element thereof.   A mere knocking at the doors
18

of the pudenda, so to speak, by the accused's penis suffices to constitute the crime of rape as full
entry into the victim's vagina is not required to sustain a conviction.   In the case, Dr. Freyra, the
19

medico-legal examiner, categorically testified that the healed lacerations of Rodessa on her vagina
were consistent with the date of the commission of the rape as narrated by the victim to have taken
place in April, 1994.