PEOPLE v.

ROMEO JALOSJOS (2001)

Facts
Rape is a crime against human dignity, punishable by reclusion perpetua or death, particulary odious when committed against a minor. There were six other cases where the Jalosjos was acquitted of the charges of acts of lasciviousness for failure of the prosecution to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Eleven year old Rosilyn Delantar accused Romeo G. Jalosjos of sexual impropriety against her on the dates of June 18 & 20, 1996, at the Ritz Towers, Makati City. The rest of the information provided for lascivious conduct only. Allegedly, he paid Php10k, Php5k & Php5k on different dates. She was pimped by her homosexual adopted father Simplicio Delantar since the age of 9 (she was born in 1985) and first met Jalosjos in February 1996. He let her stay nights in his condominium unit and repeatedly kept trying to have sex with her, saying, After all, I am your daddy until, on the dates mentioned, he succeeded. This went on for some months until Rosilyn ran away in August 1996, when she was taken to DSWD and the NBI conducted an investigation into her rape claims. Jalosjos claimed that it was his brother Dominador who Rosilyn met and he was in the province allegedly at the time the sexual advances took place. This issue was allegedly crafted by his political enemies to put him at a disadvantage. chadosorio He was found guilty and sentenced to reclusion perpetua and Php50k for each count of rape (2), and reclusion temporal and Php20k damages for each count of acts of lasciviousness (6).

Issues
1. [Main Case] Is the reliance of the trial court on the witnesss credibility sufficient to hand him such sentence? chadosorio 2. [Offshoot Case] Can a legislator perform his duties thru legislative sessions and committee meetings despite having been incarcerated due to a nonbailable offense?

Decision
(Ynares-Santiago, ponente)

1. Is the reliance of the trial court on the witnesss credibility sufficient to hand him such sentence?
Petitioner: "Falsus in uno falsus in omnibus (false in part, false in everything). The fact that the trial court accepted his alibi means that Rosilyns story was concocted in part, and therefore her whole testimony falls. Plus, its not

even justified that Rosilyn was a minor because we shouldnt rely on her birth certificate, which was expunged from the NSO. chadosorio SC: It is perfectly reasonable to believe the testimony of a witness with respect to some facts and disbelieve it with respect to other facts. In People vs. Keller, it was seen that Testimony may be partly credited and partly rejected. --- Trier of facts are not bound to believe all that any witness has said; they may accept some portions of his testimony and reject other portions, according to what seems to them, upon other facts and circumstances to be the truth Even when witnesses are found to have deliberately falsified in some material particulars, the jury are not required to reject the whole of their uncorroborated testimony, but may credit such portions as they deem worthy of belief. No woman would accuse someone of defloration if she did not want the culprit apprehended and punished, because of the accompanying shame of the investigation to prove such accusation. Her hesitation and uncertainty to answer some of the questions were how rape victims answered in real life, and not mere acting. The fact that Rosilyn did not specify rape in her affidavits against Jalosjos does not mean that it never occurred, because rape is too much of a technical term for such a young child. In People v. Campuhan, rape is consummated by the slightest penetration of the female organ, i.e., touching of either labia of the pudendum by the penis. There need not be full and complete penetration of the victims vagina for rape to be consummated. There was no case originally against Jalosjos, because the original case filed was against the pimp Simplicio Delantar, it was just that Jalosjos was identified in the pictures. Since rape is a crime against persons, any prosecutor can move on with legal action, not necessarily the victim herself. It is settled that in cases of statutory rape, the age of the victim may be proved by the presentation of her birth certificate. However, even assuming the absence of a valid birth certificate, there is sufficient and ample proof of the complainants age in the records, like baptismal certificate, hospital records (Jose Fabella Memorial Hospital: master list if births, date and time of pregnant mothers confinement), et cetera. chadosorio

2. Can a legislator perform his duties thru legislative sessions and committee meetings despite having been incarcerated due to a non-bailable offense?
Petitioner: His functions as a representative of the First District of Zamboanga del Norte, whose electorate chose him by mandate of sovereign will, should not be impeded by the constraints of a pending criminal case. chadosorio He cited Aguinaldo v. Santos:

The Court should never remove a public officer for acts done prior to his present term of office. To do otherwise would be to deprive the people of their right to elect their officers. When a people have elected a man to office, it must be assumed that they did this with the knowledge of his life and character, and that they disregarded or forgave his fault or misconduct, if he had been guilty of any. It is not for the Court, by reason of such fault or misconduct, to practically overrule the will of the people. I will not escape, given the chance to perform my legislative duties. Besides, Ive been allowed to leave before to attend to my legislative functions. This must not hinder my ability to serve my constituents. The duty to the legislative ranks highest in government. SC: The higher the rank, the greater should the obedience be, not the entitlement to exemption. Confinement pending appeal does not remove the rights of him being a public officer. Its merely to protect society. Public self-defense is an example and a warning to others. It is the injury to the public which State action in criminal law seeks to redress, and since rape is a criminal offense, the person must be answerable to procedures governing criminal law. chadosorio The first time the case was filed he only came forward after a long period of time hiding due to the pleas of his fellow HoR members. There is no guarantee that he will not go into hiding again. His securing of permission to leave the prison before was based on a case-to-case basis due to emergencies, and should not be considered the rule. Giving him a 5-day week (regular Congress sessions) would virtually make him a free man. His incarceration does not prevent him from filing bills and resolutions: his two fully-manned offices in Batasan Hills and New Bilibid Prison attest to that. The people who voted for Jalosjos, knowing that he has been convicted, know of the fact of his incarceration, and it is their belief that he can fulfill his duties regardless of his sentence. It does not mean that just because the people voted for him he was automatically believed to be innocent by them. The equal protection of laws apply to this case, meaning that people in similar circumstances must be treated by the law similarly. Jalosjos should not be given privilege due to his position, and must be treated the way other convicted people are treated. There are 250 HoR members and 24 senators. Congress will function well despite the absence of a small number of its members. Therefore, being a congressman does not remove one from criminal liability. Imprisonment is not merely the loss of freedom, but also a place of rehabilitation and change as well. It includes the curtailing of certain rights and privileges, and election to public office does not excuse one from the consequences of ones actions, once proven contrary to law. chadosorio Motion denied. Gonzaga-Reyes, concur: The Bill of Rights provides

All persons, except those charged with offenses punishable by reclusion perpetua when evidence of guilt is strong, shall, before conviction, be bailable by sufficient sureties, or be released on recognizance as may be provided by law. The right to bail shall not be impaired even when the privilege of the writ of habeas corpusis suspended. Excessive bail shall not be required. Rule 114 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure, Sec. 7. Capital offense or an offense punishable by reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, not bailable. No person charged with a capital offense, or an offense punishable by reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, when evidence of guilt is strong, shall be admitted to bail regardless of the stage of the criminal prosecution. The Constitution A Senator of Member of the House of Representatives shall, in all offenses punishable by not more than six years imprisonment, be privileged from arrest while the Congress is in session. No Member shall be questioned nor be held liable in any other place for any speech or debate in the Congress or in any committee thereof. chadosorio The petitioner, having been sentenced to reclusion perpetua, is not subject to legislative immunity. Motion denied.