REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

FIRST JUDICIAL REGION

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
Branch 64
Baguio City

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

Plaintiff,

Criminal Case No. 34356

-versus- FOR: RAPE

JESSIE BLAIRE G. LAMPITOC,

Accused.
x-------------------------------------------x

MEMORANDUM FOR THE PLAINTIFF

The STATE, by the undersigned state prosecutor, and in

compliance with the Order of this Honorable Court, respectfully
submits this Memorandum in support of its case, and, states:

PREFATORY STATEMENT

On April 3, 2017, accused Jesse Blaire G. Lampitoc a.k.a “Tatay

Amboy”, were charged before the Office of the City Prosecutor -
Baguio City of the crime of Statutory Rape under Article (Art.) 266-A of
the Revised Penal Code (RPC), the pertinent portion of which reads:

That on February 14, 2017at 11:00 AM, in the City of Baguio, and
within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the said accused, with
lewd and unchaste designs, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and
feloniously grabbed a knife and pointed it to the neck of JULIA T.
TORRES who is minor of 10 years while she was while she was

Page 1 of 13
cooking their lunch and threatened her not to shout or else the accused
will stab her. The accused, there and then, willfully, unlawfully, and
feloniously, had carnal knowledge of the said JULIA T. TORRES
against her will and by means of force, violence, intimidation and
threats.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

In order that this Honorable Court may be enlightened and

guided in the judicious disposition of the above-entitled case, cited
hereunder the material, relevant and pertinent facts of the case to wit:

a. The accused Jesse Blaire G. Lampitoc a.k.a “Tatay Amboy”,

Filipino, 40 years of age, and with residence at No. 1 Kias,
Baguio City, is the common law husband of Juliana T. Torres;

b. On February 14, 2017, at around 11:00 AM, I was barely 10

years old and playing outside our house with my playmates
AAA, BBB, and CCC when Tatay Amboy, my step-father called
my attention and instructed me to enter the house and cook our
lunch, because my mother went to the market;

c. While I was busy wiping the kitchen sink, waiting for the rice to
boil, Tatay Amboy suddenly appeared behind me, grabbed me
and made me sit in the kitchen sink facing him;

d. When I asked Tatay Amboy what he is doing, he grabbed a

knife and pointed it to my neck and he told me “Huwag kang
mag-ingay, walang ring makaririnig sa iyo. Sasaksakin kita
kapag sumigaw ka!”;

e. Shocked and frightened by the series of events, I was unable to

shout for help;

f. Subsequently, he placed the knife beside the sink so as to have

full control over me;

Page 2 of 13
 g. Tatay Amboy then grabbed my skirt up and pulled my
underwear down while his other hand is covering my mouth;

h. He spread my legs apart, pulled down his own pants together

with his underwear and suddenly grabbed my waist; and then I
felt that his penis was poking my vagina;

i. Tatay Amboy then pushed himself towards me and I felt

excruciating that pain in my vagina;

j. When I felt the pain, I tried to struggle for freedom while biting
his palm which was covering my mouth. It was then that I heard
a loud noise of the door being forcibly opened;

k. My mother abruptly came by screaming which made Tatay

Amboy stop his carnal act. She pushed Tatay Amboy away and
then carried me away from him;

l. Thereafter, due to the loud screams of my mother, our

neighbors came by and held Tatay Amboy in custody to the
barangay;

m. Appalled by what happened, my mother and I went to the police

station to report the crime committed by Tatay Amboy against
my person. The police took my sworn statement, a copy of
which is hereto attached and made an integral part hereof as
Annex “A”.

n. Thereafter, I was examined by a medico legal expert form

Baguio General Hospital. The Medico Legal Certificate is also
attached hereto as Annex “B”;

STATEMENT OF ISSUE

Whether the accused Jessie Blaire Lampitoc is guilty of

Rape under Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code.

Page 3 of 13
 DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE

1. Sinumpaang Salaysay ----------------------------Exhibit “A”

(Details such as name, age, and address of the
suspect/person arrested, time and place of an incident, name of the
officer who responded to the incident and name of the victim
/complaining person).

2. Medical Certificate----------------------------------Exhibit “B”

(This medical certificate is issued by Dr. Estrella Herras of
Baguio General Hospital (BGH) after conducting a medical
examination of the victim. This medical certificate shows that Julia T.
Torres has hymenal lacerations which tend to show that she has been
forced to have sexual intercourse with the accused).

3. Information--------------------------------------------Exhibit “C”
(This is a sworn, written accusation of a crime to prove the
facts of the raped incident that transpired at Kias, Baguio city)

4. Judicial Affidavit of the expert witness------Exhibit “D”

(This is a sworn statement of Dr. Estrella Herra who conducted
the medical examination of the complainant. Her testimony shows that
Julia T. Torres has hymenal lacerations which tend to show that she
has been forced to have sexual intercourse with the accused.)

TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE

1. Testimony of Barangay Captain of Kias, Baguio City – to

prove that the accused was held in custody on February, 14, 2017.

2. SPO1 Alberto Del Rosario- to prove that the accused was

turned over to the police station during the day of February 14, 2017.

Page 4 of 13
 ARGUMENT/ DISCUSSION

Jessie Blaire G. Lampitok is guilty of Rape under Article 266-A

of the Revised Penal Code since the element of force and
intimidation is sufficiently proven by the complainant.

Under the new provision, rape can be committed in two ways:

1. Article 266–A paragraph 1 refers to Rape through sexual

intercourse, also known as “organ rape” or “penile rape.” The
central element in rape through sexual intercourse is carnal
knowledge, which must be proven beyond reasonable doubt.

2. Article 266–A paragraph 2 refers to rape by sexual assault,

also called “instrument or object rape,” or “gender–free rape.” It
must be attended by any of the circumstances enumerated in
subparagraphs (a) to (d) of paragraph 1.

Pertinently, the elements of rape under paragraph 2 of Art. 266-A of

the Code as amended by Republic Act No. 8353 are (1) that the
offender commits an act of sexual assault; (2) that the act of sexual
assault is committed by inserting his penis into another person’s mouth
or anal orifice; or by inserting any instrument or object into the genital
or anal orifice of another person; (3) that such act is accomplished by
using force or intimidation; or when the woman is deprived of reason
or otherwise unconscious; or by means of fraudulent machination or
grave abuse of authority; or when the women is under 12 years of age
or demented.

The above-cited elements of the crime of rape had been sufficiently

established.

The act of sexual assault is committed by inserting any

instrument or object into the genital or anal orifice of another
person;

The defendant’s allegation that the crime of rape could not have
happen because the accused had a Total Penectomy wherein the
genitalia had to be removed due to “Fournier Gangrene” is without
merit. One of the significant amendment introduce by Republic Act
No. 8353 is the pronouncement that the insertion of any instrument,

Page 5 of 13
object, or any part of the human body other that the sexual organ into
the genital or anus of another person as rape and not merely acts of
lasciviousness (People v. Campuhan, G.R. No. 129433, March 30,
2000).

The Court has held time and time that testimonies of rape
victims who are young and immature deserve full credence,
considering that no young woman, especially of tender age, would
concoct a story of defloration, allow an examination of her private
parts, and, thereafter, pervert herself by subjecting herself to a public
trial, if she was not motivated solely by the desire to obtain justice for
the wrong committed against her. Youth and immaturity are generally
badges of truth. A young girl’s revelation that she had been raped,
coupled with her voluntary submission to medical examination and
willingness to undergo public trial where she could be compelled to
give out the details of an assault on her dignity, cannot be so easily
dismissed as mere concoction. (People vs. Arnel Macafe y
Nabong, G.R. No. 185616, November 24, 2010).

It is not impossible for the child to have mistaken the accused’s finger
as his penis which entered the genital of the victim. The defense
allegation regarding the victim’s inconsistency in depicting the actual
scene during the vicious moment of rape stating that it is impossible
that a penis entered the genitalia of the victim because of the
accused’s Total Penectomy is a frail attempt to dismiss the credibility
of the victim. Citing the cases of People v. Saludo where the court
ruled that rape is a painful experience which is oftentimes not
remembered in detail. For such an offense is not analogous to a
person’s achievement or accomplishment as to be worth recalling or
reliving; rather, it is something which causes deep psychological
wounds and casts a stigma upon the victim, scarring her psyche for
life and which her conscious and subconscious mind would opt to
forget. Thus, a rape victim cannot be expected to mechanically keep
and then give an accurate account of the traumatic and horrifying
experience she had undergone.

Courts have often reiterated that minor inconsistencies with no

material effect on the charge will not warrant the dismissal of the case
not the rejection of the testimony of the victim itself. No one expects
rape victims to remember with precision every detail of the crime
(People vs. Orilla, 422 SCRA 620 [2004]). Errorless recollection of a
harrowing experience cannot be expected of a witness, especially
when she is recounting details from an experience so humiliating and
painful as rape (People vs. Tonyacao, 433 SCRA 513
Page 6 of 13
[2004]). Inconsistencies in a rape victim’s testimony do not impair her
credibility, especially if the inconsistencies refer to trivial matters that
do not alter the essential fact of the commission of rape (People vs.
Borromeo, 430 SCRA 533 [2004]). Victims certainly do not cherish
keeping in their memory an accurate account of the dates, number of
times, and the manner in which they were sexually violated (People
vs. Mantis, 433 SCRA 236 [2004]).

By using force and intimidation

Intimidation must be viewed in the light of the victim’s

perception and judgment at the time of ape and not by any hard and
fast rule. It’s enough that it produces fear – fear that if the victim does
not yield to the bestial demand of the accused, something would
happen to her at the moment or thereafter (People v. Tabugoca, 285
SCRA 312, 332 [1998]); (People v. Metin, G.R. No.140781, may 8,
2003). Intimidation includes the moral kind such as the fear caused
by threatening the girl with a knife or pistol (People v. Garcines, 57
SCRA 653, citing 2 Cuello Calon, Codigo Penal, 12 Ed. 537).

As discussed by the Supreme Court, Statutory rape is

committed by sexual intercourse with a woman below 12 years of age
regardless of her consent, or the lack of it, to the sexual act. Proof of
force, intimidation or consent is unnecessary as they are not
elements of statutory rape, considering that the absence of free
consent is conclusively presumed when the victim is below the age of
12 (People Vs. Cadano Jr., G.R. No. 207819, March 12, 2014 ).

Furthermore, the Supreme Court has ruled that the moral

ascendancy or influence exercised by the accused over the victim
substitutes for the elements of physical force or intimidation in cases
of rape. The Court has applied this rule to rapes committed by
stepfathers against their stepdaughters (People v. Vitor, 245 SCRA
392 [1998]; People v. Robles, 170 SCRA 557 [1090]).

In this case the accused, a 40 year old man, has an undeniable

moral ascendancy over the accused who was a mere 10 year old girl
during the incident. This is aggravated by the fact that the accused
grabbed a knife and pointed it to the neck of the complainant and
threatened her life saying “Huwag kang mag-ingay, walang ring
makaririnig sa iyo. Sasaksakin kita kapag sumigaw ka!”.

The effects of threats and intimidation aside, appellant being

the common-law spouse of the victim’s mother, moral ascendancy
Page 7 of 13
substituted for intimidation. Indeed, in rape committed by a close kin,
such as the victim's father, stepfather, uncle, or the common-law
spouse of her mother, it is not necessary that actual force or
intimidation be employed; moral influence or ascendancy takes the
place of violence or intimidation (People Vs. Ruben Corpuz, G.R.
No. 175836 January 30, 2009).

STATUTORY RAPE: When the girl is under 12 years of age

Statutory rape is committed by sexual intercourse with a

woman below twelve (12) years of age regardless of her consent, or
the lack of it, to the sexual act. To convict an accused of the crime of
statutory rape, the prosecution carries the burden of proving (1) the
age of the complainant; (2) the identity of the accused; and (3) the
sexual intercourse between the accused and the complainant
(People v. Layco, Sr., G.R. No. 182191; May8, 2009, citing People
v. Mingming, G.R. No. 174195, December 10, 2008)

Carnal knowledge of a girl under 12 years old is statutory rape.

Consent of the offended party is immaterial as she is presumed not to
have any will of her own, being of tender age. The fact that the
offended party is under 12 years old at the time of the commission of
the crime is an essential element of the crime and must be proved
beyond reasonable doubt. In statutory rape, violence or intimidation is
not required, and the only subject of inquiry is whether carnal
knowledge took place (People Vs. Luis Aycardo, G.R. No. 168299
October 6, 2008).

a. The age of the complainant

The crime was committed against the victim in February 14,

2017 when the victim was only 10 years old.

b. The identity of the accused

The victim categorically and without a doubt identified Jesse

Blaire G. Lampitoc a.k.a “Tatay Amboy” as her assailant. The
defense of the accused that he was in Qatar from February 11, 2017
to February 16, 2017 together with a certain Margaux B. Buenavista
is pure ALIBI. Accused alibi and denial are weak defenses especially
when weighed against the victim’s positive identification of him as the
malefactor (People vs. Joel Crisostomo y Malliar , G.R. No.
196435 January 29, 2014). The determining factor is that AAA
positively identified him as the person who covered her mouth;

Page 8 of 13
removed her panty; inserted his penis in her vagina; and threatened
her bodily harm if she would shout and reveal the rape (People VS.
Bangsoy G.R. No. 204047, January 13, 2016).

Consequently, appellant's defense of denial and alibi must

crumble in the face of the victim’s positive and clear identification of
him as the perpetrator of the crime. Denial and alibi cannot be given
greater evidentiary value than the testimonies of credible witnesses
who testify on affirmative matters. Positive identification destroys the
defense of alibi and renders it impotent, especially where such
identification is credible and categorical (People Vs. Bandin, G.R.
No. 176531 April 24, 2009). Where in this case, Julliana fully and
positively identified her Tatay Amboy to be her perpetrator and
corroborated by the testimony of her mother who witness the alleged
offense.

RULE OF EVIDENCE AND PERTINENT LAWS APPLICABLE

The allegation that the accused was in Qatar on February

14, 2017.

The accused admitted the fact that he was held in custody by

the Barangay officials on February 14, 2017 contrary to his contention
that he was in Qatar. Rule 8 section 10 and 11 respectively provides
that:

Sec. 10. Specific denial.

A defendant must specify each material allegation of fact

the truth of which he does not admit and, whenever practicable,
shall set forth the substance of the matters upon which he relies
to support his denial. Where a defendant desires to deny only a
part of an averment, he shall specify so much of it as is true
and material and shall deny only the remainder. Where a
defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form
a belief as to the truth of a material averment made in the
complaint, he shall so state, and this shall have the effect of a
denial.

Page 9 of 13
 Sec. 11. Allegations not specifically denied deemed
admitted.

Material averment in the complaint, other than those as to

the amount of unliquidated damages, shall be deemed admitted
when not specifically denied. Allegations of usury in a complaint
to recover usurious interest are deemed admitted if not denied
under oath.

Therefore, the rule on evidence that is applicable is

Sec. 4. Judicial admissions.

An admission, verbal or written, made by the party in the

course of the proceedings in the same case, does not require
proof. The admission may be contradicted only by showing that
it was made through palpable mistake or that no such
admission was made.

The defense of accused is that during the incident of February

14, 2017, he was not present because he went to Qatar, and presented
airline tickets to prove it. This however cannot stand alone; the airline
tickets presented by accused would not conclusively say that he used
those tickets. Anybody can procure those tickets and accused could
assume he use it. There are no other wit, by the defense to corroborate
that he really was in Qatar. The Supreme Court ruled in the case of
People vs. Garma 271 SCRA 517; it is settled ruled that alibi cannot
prevail over a positive identification.

Accused’s girlfriend corroborated his alibi that he was on Qatar

on February 14, 2017, This however cannot be accepted. Alibi
becomes less plausible as a defense when it is mainly established by
the accused himself and his immediate friends and not by credible
persons. ´ People vs. CA 273 SCRA 328. If it were true that accused
went to Qatar, there would have been numerous ways and means to
prove it other than presenting airline tickets.

The sexual intercourse between the accused and the

complainant

The act of sexual intercourse was proven by the direct testimony

of Julia T. Torres which is credible in itself.

Page 10 of 13
 The commission of the crime is duly corroborated by the Medico
Legal report showing that the private complainant suffered from
complete laceration with sharp coaptable border without congestion of
the hymen at 9 o’clock, a test tube with a diameter of ¾ inch entered
with slight difficulty in the vagina, and in a non-virgin state physically.

Furthermore, the fact of the sexual assault was duly corroborated

by the direct testimony of Juliana T. Torres who witnessed the incident.

The allegation that the offense was fabricated for personal

vendetta

The defendants also alleged that the charge against the accused
were fabricated stories because Julia’s mother, Juliana, wanted to
seek revenge against the accused because the accused left Juliana
for a certain Margaux B. Buenavista, and that the filing of this instant
complaint is a product of personal vendetta by Julia’s mother, due to
the accused’s refusal to return home with Juliana. This allegation
does not hold water. Contrary to the allegation of the defense, it was
Juliana who left the accused and kicked him out of the house she and
the victim are staying in because of the accused’s infidelity and
tendency to hit her whenever he is drunk. They have been living
separately since November 2016, however, the accused still goes to
Juliana’s house to eat whenever Juliana is not at home. Due to this
fact, Juliana was also unaware of the operation done to the accused.

In this case, it is highly improbable that a girl of tender years,

one not yet exposed to the ways of the world, would impute to any
man a crime as serious as rape if what she claims is not true. It is
also improbable that a mother would fabricate a story letting her child
to be exposed in issues that would put her child in a shameful
situation. The contention of the accused that he was falsely charged
due to the ill feelings of the mother should not be given credence, as
the court ruled that such kind of allegation is irrelevant to the question
of whether the crime as charged did take place (People Vs.
Jalosjos, G.R. Nos. 132875-76. November 16, 2001). In addition,
considering that no mother would concoct a story of defloration, allow
her child to undergo an examination of her private parts and
thereafter allow her child to be perverted in a public trial if she was
not motivated solely by the desire to have the culprit apprehended
and punished. (People v. Buyok, 235 SCRA 622 [1996]).

Page 11 of 13
 As it has been reiterated, it is highly improbable for an innocent
girl, who is very naïve to the things of this world, to fabricate a charge
so humiliating not only to herself but to her family. Moreover, it is
doctrinally settled that testimonies of rape victims who are of tender
age are credible. The revelation of an innocent child whose chastity
was abused deserves full credit, as the willingness of the complainant
to face police investigation and to undergo the trouble and humiliation
of a public trial is eloquent testimony of the truth of her complaint.
Therefore, the contention of the accused that the charge was
fabricated due to ill feelings or ill motives of the mother of the victim
cannot be given merit.

From the facts and evidence presented by the prosecution, it has

clearly and bluntly proved with proof beyond reasonable doubt of the
guilt by the accused in these case, Criminal Case No. 34356.

DAMAGES

MAGLAGAY NG DAMAGES

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, it is respectfully

prayed for that a JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION be rendered against
Jesse Blaire G. Lampitoc for the commission of the crime of rape
under Art. 266-A of the Code as amended by Republic Act No. 8353.

Other relief just and equitable is likewise prayed for.

Baguio City, Philippines, this 13th day of May, 2017.

Respectfully submitted.

PROS. DENVER G. GOMEZ

City Prosecutor
PTR No.1337899: 1-07-13: B.C.
IBP No. 910673: 1-07-13: B.C.
Roll No. 43631: 5-5-99- MLA
MCLE Compliance No. IV-0006885:07-17-12

Page 12 of 13
 Rm. 4, 2/F Baguio Masonic Temple
180 Cabinet Hill, Baguio City

Copy furnished through personal service:

ATTY. RANJAN KALYL U. WANGET

Counsel for the Accused
Rm. 107 De Leon Bldg., Session Rd., Baguio City

Page 13 of 13