People of the Philippines v Salvador Golimlim @ Badong

G.R. No. 145225; 2 April 2004; Carpio Morales, J

Digest by: Joyce
Topic: Disqualification by Reason of Immaturity

FACTS:
1. Salvador Golimlim alias “Badong” was found by RTC Sorsogon to be guilty beyond reasonable doubt of
rape and imposed the penalty of reclusion perpetua.
2. Appellant pleaded not guilty during arraignment.
3. Private complainant Evelyn Canchela (Evelyn) is a mental retardate.
4. Badong is the husband of Evelyn's Aunt, Jovita, who is the sister of her mother. Evelyn was left under
the care of the spouses Badong and Jovita when she went to Singapore to work as a domestic helper.
5. Evelyn was raped by her Uncle Badong at the conjugal residence when they were left alone because her
Aunt had to meet someone. Her uncle had sexual intercourse with her while holding a knife.
6. Evelyn told her Aunt about what happened but her Aunt didn't believe her and in fact she even scolded
her.
7. Later on Evelyn's sister, Lorna, fetched her from Sorsogon and brought her to Manila. Lorna noticed
Evelyn's growing belly. Physical exam in a hospital confirmed that she was pregnant.
8. The sisters went back to Sorsogon so they can file a complaint against Badong. Evelyn was also
examined by the Municipal Health Officer of Bulan, Sorsogon. Complaint was filed with the MTC of
Sorsogon.
9. Badong denied the accusation and said that Evelyn's mind is not normal and she had intercourse with
other men.

ISSUE:
WON Evelyn should be disqualified as a witness since she is a mental retardate – NO

HELD:
WHEREFORE RTC Decision AFFIRMED. Badong is guilty of rape. Evelyn is not disqualified as a witness. Accused
is guilty of Rape under Art. 335 par. a (using force and intimidation) since Evelyn’s mental retardation was not
alleged in the Information

RATIO
1. See RULE 130 sections 20 and 21
2. RTC gave credence to Evelyn's testimony
a. Despite her weak and dull mental state she was consistent in her claim that her Papay Badong had carnal
knowledge of her and was the author of her pregnancy, and nobody else
b. She remains consistent that her Papay Badong raped her only once
c. That the contradictory statements she made in open court relative to the details of how she was raped,
although would seem derogatory to her credibility and reliability as a witness under normal conditions, were
amply explained by the psychiatrist who examined her and supported by her findings
d. Despite her claim that several persons laid on top of her (which is still subject to question considering that
the victim could not elaborate on its meaning), the lucid fact remains that she never pointed to anybody else
as the author of her pregnancy, but her Papay Badong. Which only shows that the trauma that was created in
her mind by the incident has remained printed in her memory despite her weak mental state. Furthermore,
granting for the sake of argument that other men also laid on top of her, this does not deviate from the fact
that the accused had sexual intercourse with her.
3. The RTC judge's assessment of the credibility of witnesses’ testimonies is accorded great respect on
appeal in the absence of grave abuse of discretion on its part, it having had the advantage of actually
examining both real and testimonial evidence including the demeanor of the witnesses
4. People v. Trelles:
 A mental retardate or a feebleminded person is not, per se, disqualified from being a witness, her mental
condition not being a vitiation of her credibility. It is now universally accepted that intellectual weakness, no
matter what form it assumes, is not a valid objection to the competency of a witness so long as the latter can
still give a fairly intelligent and reasonable narrative of the matter testified to
5. SC said disqualifying a witness just because of mental incapacity seems inept and primitive.
6. In a long line of cases, the SC has upheld the conviction of the accused based mainly on statements
given in court by a victim who is a mental retardate.
7. Dr. Chona Belmonte, a medical specialist at the Psychiatric Department of the Bicol Medical Center,
who examined Evelyn said that although she was suffering from moderate mental retardation with an
IQ of 46, she is capable of perceiving and relating events which happened to her. Dr. Belmonte testified
in court.
a. Dr. Belmonte said that Evelyn was consistent with her story with the exception of the time and
date. Evelyn's answers were also spontaneous.
b. Dr. Belmonte said that Evelyn was not able to provide some details while testifying in court because
of the court's atmosphere and because there's a lot of people
c. Dr. Belmonte said that she is not coached because there is no inconsistency in her answer even
though they framed the questions in different ways when they examined her.
NOTE: Case reproduced transcript of Evelyn's answer. She is able to describe clearly what happened to her.
Q: Why were you able to say that it is Papay Badong who is the father of your child Johanna?
A: Because then I was left at Mamay Bita’s house, although I am not there now.
Q: And that house where you were left is also the house of your Papay Badong?
A: Yes ma’am.
Q: What did Salvador Golimlim or your Papay Badong do to you that’s why you were able to say that he is the
father of your child?
A: I was undressed by him.
Q: What did you do after you were undressed?
A: I was scolded by the wife, Mamay Bita.
Q: I am referring to that very moment when you were undressed. Immediately after your Papay Badong
undressed you, what did you do?
A: He laid on top of me.
Q: What was your position when he laid on top of you?
A: I was lying down.
xxx
Q:What else did he do? Please describe before this Honorable Court the sexual intercourse which you are
referring to which the accused did to you.
A: ‘Initoy’ and he slept after that. (to Court) Nevertheless, may we request that the local term for sexual
intercourse, the word ‘Initoy’ which was used by the witness be put on the record, and we request judicial notice
of the fact that ‘initoy’ is the local term for sexual intercourse.
8. Sexual intercourse with a woman who is a mental retardate constitutes statutory rape which does not
require proof that the accused used force or intimidation in having carnal knowledge of the victim for
conviction.
a. The fact of Evelyn’s mental retardation was not, however, alleged in the Information and, therefore,
cannot be the basis for conviction.
b. Force and intimidation were alleged in the Information and was adequately proven.
c. The mental faculties of a retardate being different from those of a normal person means that the
degree of force needed to overwhelm him or her is less. Hence, a quantum of force which may not
suffice when the victim is a normal person, may be more than enough when employed against an
imbecile.
9. Art. 335 of the RPC, when the crime of rape is committed with the use of a deadly weapon, the penalty
shall be reclusion perpetua to death. In the case at bar, however, although there is adequate evidence
showing that appellant indeed used force and intimidation, it was not the case with respect to the use
of a deadly weapon.