Vicky Ty vs. People (G.R. No.

149275)

Facts: Tys mother was confined in Manila Doctor's Hospital to which a medical bill amounting to 600,000 pesos was made to be paid to TY, after signing a contract of responsibility with the hospital. Ty, issued 7 checks to cover the said expenses, all of ? TC held Rene Siao guilty as principal by induction of rape and imposed upon which were dishonored for being drawn against a closed a account. Manila Doctors him the penalty of reclusion perpetua and indemnification of PhP50K. Gimena was Hospital then instituted criminal actions against Ty for violation of BP22. acquitted for having acted under the impulse of uncontrollable fear of an equal, if not greater injury. In her defense she alleged that she issued the checks involuntarily because her mother threatened to commit suicide due to the inhumane treatment she allegedly HELD: SC respected TCs finding of facts and found any inconsistencies in the suffered while confined in the hospital. She further claimed that no consideration witnesses testimonies inconsequential considering that they referred to trivial was obtained by her because all the checks were made as payment to the medical matters w/c have nothing to do w/ the essential fact of the commission of rape, that bills. is carnal knowledge through force and intimidation. Ergo, even if it was pointed out that in all 3 positions, Gimena ejaculated 3x in a span of less than 30 mins, w/c does Issue: Whether or not valuable consideration exists. not conform to common experience, rape was still present from the evidence because rape is not the emission of semen but the penetration of the female Held: Under Section 24 of the Negotiable Instruments Law, it is presumed that genitalia by the male organ. Penetration, however slight, and not ejaculation, is valuable consideration exist upon the issuance of a check in the absence of what constitutes rape. Moreover, even if the house was occupied by many people evidence to the contrary.Valuable consideration is any benefit, interest or profit at the time of the crime, rape was still committed because lust is no respecter of time accruing to the party. The use of the hospital facilities and services may be deemed and place. And Estrellas and Gimenas decision not to flee proves only the fear and as such. intimidation that they were under because Siao was after all their amo or employer who threatened to kill them or their family if they did not succumb to his demands. CASE DIGEST ON PEOPLE v. SIAO [327 SCRA 231 (2000)] The governing law is Art 335 RPC as amended by RA 7659 w/c imposes the penalty ? On May 27, 1994, at about 3PM, accused-appellant Rene Siao in his of reclusion perpetua to death, if committed w/ the use of a deadly weapon. The TC residence ordered Reylan Gimena, his familys 17yr old houseboy, to pull Estrella overlooked and did not take into account the aggr circumstance of ignominy and Raymundo, their 14yr old housemaid, to the womens quarters. Once inside, sentenced accused-appellant to the single indivisible penalty of reclusion perpetua. appellant Siao pushed her to the wooden bed and asked her to choose one among It has been held that where the accused in committing the rape used not only the a pistol, candle or a bottle of sprite. Appellant lit the candle and dropped the melting missionary position i.e. male superior, female inferior but also the dog position as candle on her chest. Estrella was made to lie down on her back on the bed w/ her dogs do, i.e. entry from behind, as was proven in the case, the aggr circumstance of head hanging over one end. Appellant then poured sprite into her nostrils as she ignominy attended the commission thereof. was made to spread her arms w/ his gun pointed to her face. Appellant Siao then tied her feet and hands w/ an electric cord or wire as she was made to lie face down However, the use of a deadly weapon serves to increase the penalty as opposed to on the bed. As Siao pointed his pistol at her, he ordered Estrella to undress and a generic aggr circumstance w/c only affects the period of the penalty. This commanded her to take the initiative on Gimena. Not understanding what he meant, nonetheless should be alleged in the information, because of the accuseds right to appellant motioned to her poking the gun at her temple. Gimena was then ordered be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him. Considering that to remove his shorts. He did not do so but only let his penis out. Appellant Siao the complaint failed to allege the use of a deadly weapon, the penalty to be spread the arms of Estrella and made her lie down spread-eagled. She felt dizzy reckoned w/ in determining the penalty for rape would be reclusion perpetua, as and shouted for help twice. Siao then ordered Gimena to rape Estrella. At first, prescribed for simple rape. Simple rape is punishable by the single indivisible Gimena refused because he has a sister. However, Siao said that if they would not penalty of reclusion perpetua, w/c must be applied regardless of any mit/aggr obey, he would kill both of them. circumstance w/c may have attended the commission of the deed. Hence, the penalty of reclusion perpetua imposed by the TC is correct. ? Both Gimena and Estrella were forced and intimidated at gunpoint by Siao to have carnal knowledge of each other. They performed the sexual act because they Siao is further ordered to pay the offended party moral damages, w/c is were afraid they would be killed. Siao commanded Gimena to rape Estrella in 3 diff automatically granted in rape cases w/o need of any proof, in the amount of positions (i.e. missionary position, side-by-side and dog position as narrated vividly PhP50K. Furthermore, the presence of the aggr circumstance of ignominy justifies in the case), pointing the handgun at them the whole time. Thereafter, Siao warned the award of exemplary damages pursuant to Art 2230 CC. Judgment affirmed w/ them, If you will tell the police, I will kill your mothers. modification of damages awarded.

? Appellant Siao, for his defense, denies the whole event. He asserts that she retaliated through this accusation because Estrella herself was accused of stealing many of his familys personal effects.