G.R. No.

121211, April 30, 2003

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, appellee,

PER CURIAM:

FACTS:

Complainant Ellen Vertudazo and her children lived in a rented house in Barangay Punta, Ormoc City.
He and his family had just moved into the neighborhood on 15 July 1994. He did not know the respondent
personally, although he knew him as one of their neighbors.

Later that evening, October 1, 1994, at approximately 1 a.m., the complainant heard someone call his name. She
unknowingly opened the door, thinking that Venancio her brother-in-law who used to stay with them in the
apartment. After that, the appellant entered the house and poked the complainant in the neck with a knife. She tried
to get away from the appellant but he grabbed her and said he would kill her if she did not comply with his demands.
Overcome with fear, the complainant gently complied with the orders of the appellant, who kissed her lips, breasts
and all parts of her body. He laid her down on the concrete floor and was able to gain carnal knowledge of her. In
the morning of the same day, complainant reported the incident to the barangay captain and the police. After
learning about the incident, her husband, who works in Saudi Arabia, immediately came home.

As a result of the traumatic experience, the complainant submitted to psychiatric treatment in Tacloban City. She
was first brought to Dr. Go and his psychosis was already acute and chronic. The complainant talked to himself and
each time he didn't listen to anyone and just looked out the window. Dr. Go concluded that the appellant suffered
from psychosis, a type of mental disorder caused by the overwhelming trauma of the rape. Dr. Go argued that the
applicant had not fully recovered from his psychosis and that without continued treatment, the candidate may
experience relapse and completely loses all aspects of functioning.

In the version of the appellants, the appellants were neighbors but claim to be lovers. He further testified that he met
the complainant for the first time in the last week of August 1994 at a convenience store. Later, around 8 in the
evening, he and the complainant talked in front of the gate of that apartment. When she told the complainant that she
wanted to court her, the complainant said, "That's up to you." Encouraged by the complainant's response, he
returned at midnight and knocked on the door of her apartment. The complainant looked through the curtains and
went down to the first floor. After entering the house, he sat next to the sofa, put his hand on the shoulder of the
appellant, who was already sitting next to him and touched his ears. He then removed his shirt and kissed the
applicant's breasts, breasts and thighs. Instead, complainant advised them to move to the cement floor because the
couch was noisy. He got excited after moving to the floor and therefore took off his pants. The intercourse happen
four more times until October 1, 1994 without the use of force or knife.

The district court rendered a decision on May 22, 1995, part of which is as follows:

Roy, guilty of rape as defined in Sections 2 and 3 of Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by
Republic Act 7659.
Considering the aggravating circumstances of living and driving at night without mitigating circumstances,
substitute whether, and according to Section 63 of the Revised Penal Code, this court judges the same Roneto
Degamo, a.k.a.

Roy is ordered to pay 30,000 pesos (30,000.00) and court costs in favor of Ellen Vertudazo.
Since the penalty imposed is death, the Warden of the Ormoc City Prison is ordered to immediately execute Roneto
Degamo the penalty DEATH. As this was punishable by death, an automatic review by the Supreme Court.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the insanity of the complainant is a qualifying circumstances under Republic Act No. 765931
provides that when by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the victim has become insane, the penalty shall be
death.

HELD:

Yes. Though there is no ruling for the temporary insanity with the penalty of Death, the complainant suffer from
insanity. It is without any doubt that when the victim's resultant insanity as a qualifying circumstance in rape cases,
it did not intend or impose as a condition that the insanity must be of permanent nature, or that it should have been
manifested by the victim before the filing of the complaint of information, before, during or after trial.

It is innately difficult to define the criteria for when insanity may be regarded as a qualifying circumstance. The
courts must decide in each individual case whether the victim's insanity was caused by the rape. It is sufficient to say
that the victim's resulting insanity in rape cases must at the very least be visible at the time the complaint or
information is filed, or at any time later before the decision is rendered, in which case the information may be
amended as necessary. The explanation for this is simple. Rape is invariably a painful and traumatic experience for
the victim, who inevitably experiences immeasurable psychological and emotional harm . Rape victims, like other
crime victims, deal with the trauma caused by the act in different ways. While one person can experience shock or
despair right after and then bounce back, another person might take longer to experience these same symptoms and
remain out of sorts. Undoubtedly, it is impossible to fully comprehend or quantify the psychological and emotional
harm that rape does to the victim.

Hence, the qualifying circumstance of insanity had already attached notwithstanding the recovery of the victim from
her illness. The penalty of death is imposable.