CASE DIGEST

People of the Philippines versus Leo Echegaray

G.R. No. 117472. June 25, 1996

Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements in Legal Medicine

College of Law, University of San Agustin

Submitted to:
Atty. Cynthia Cabangal-Ng, M.D.
Course Professor
College of Law, University of San Agustin

Submitted by:

Ann Margaret Dy
Paul Vincent J. Gerano
Rosie Garcia
Leomel H. Pasquin
Justine Mae Patricio

LlB – 3A

October 21, 2018

1
 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. LEO ECHEGARAY
(G.R. No. 117472. June 25, 1996)

FACTS OF THE CASE:

This is an appeal before the Court of Appeals. LEO ECHEGARAY Y PILO was accused of
the crime of RAPE, committed as follows:

That on or about the month of April 1994, in Quezon City, Philippines, the above-named
accused, by means of force and intimidation, did then and there, willfully, unlawfully and
feloniously have carnal knowledge of the undersigned complainant his daughter, a minor, 10 years
of age, all against her will and without her consent, to her damage and prejudice.

Complainant RODESSA ECHEGARAY is a ten-year old girl and a fifth-grader, born on

September 11, 1983. Rodessa is the eldest of five siblings. She has three brothers aged 6, 5 and
2, respectively, and a 3-month old baby sister. Her parents are Rosalie and Leo Echegaray, the
latter being the accused-appellant himself. The victim lives with her family in a small house.

On the account of alleged rape, the accused asserted that he has a big sexual organ which when
used to a girl 11 years old like Rodessa, the said female organ will be 'mawawarak. It was
corroborated by another witness who testified that the rape was just figment of Rodessa’s mother’s
dirty mind borne out of an interest over a disputed lot.

The lower court dismissed the defense of alibi and lent credence to the straightforward
testimony of the ten-year old victim to whom no ill motive to testify falsely against accused-
appellant can be attributed. The lower court likewise regarded as inconsequential the defense of
the accused-appellant that the extraordinary size of his penis could not have insinuated itself into
the victim's vagina and that the accused is not the real father of the said victim. It also reasoned
out that a 10-year old is not capable of filing a rape case against her own alleged father simply on
account of her alleged interest over the disputed lot

ISSUE:

Whether or not the RTC overlooked the fact that the healed lacerations at 3 and 7 o’clock
could not have been due to the pumping of the penis of the accused to the vagina of private
complainant, hence it erred in holding that accused committed the crime charged, notwithstanding
vehement denial.

HELD:

With respect to the second assigned error, the records of the instant case are bereft of clear
and concrete proof of the accused-appellant's claim as to the size of his penis and that if that be the
fact, it could not have merely caused shallow healed lacerations at 3:00 and 7:00 o'clock. In his
testimony, the accused- appellant stated that he could not have raped Rodessa because of the size
of his penis which could have ruptured her vagina had he actually done so. This Court gives no
probative value on the accused-appellant's self-serving statement in the light of our ruling in the
case of People v. Melivo, supra, that:

2
 "The vaginal wall and the hymenal membrane are elastic organs capable of
varying degrees of distensibility. The degree of distensibility of the female
reproductive organ is normally limited only by the character and size of the
pelvic inlet, other factors being minor. The female reproductive canal being
capable of allowing passage of a regular fetus, there ought to be no difficulty
allowing the entry of objects of much lesser size, including the male
reproductive organ, which even in its largest dimensions, would still be
considerably smaller than the full-term fetus.

xxx xxx xxx

In the case at bench, the presence of healed lacerations in various parts of the
vaginal wall, though not as extensive as appellant might have expected them
to be, indicate traumatic injury to the area within the period when the incidents
were supposed to have occurred."

In rape cases, a broken hymen is not an essential element thereof. A mere knocking at the
doors of the pudenda, so to speak, by the accused's penis suffices to constitute the crime of rape as
full entry into the victim's vagina is not required to sustain a conviction. In the case, Dr. Freyra,
the medico-legal examiner, categorically testified that the healed lacerations of Rodessa on her
vagina were consistent with the date of the commission of the rape as narrated by the victim to
have taken place in April, 1994.

The fact that the ten-year old Rodessa referred to the accused-appellant as "Papa" is reason
enough to conclude that accused-appellant is either the father or stepfather of Rodessa. Thus, the
act of sexual assault perpetrated by the accused on his young victim has become all the more
repulsive and perverse. The victim's tender age and the accused-appellant's moral ascendancy and
influence over her are factors which forced Rodessa to succumb to the accused's selfish and bestial
craving. The law has made it inevitable under the circumstances of this case that the accused-
appellant face the supreme penalty of death. The CA affirmed the decision of conviction by the
RTC.

ADDENDUM:

On the account of the abovementioned case, another case was brought before the
Supreme Court involving the accused questioning the validity of the Death Penalty for which he
would suffer. In PP vs. Echegaray (G.R. No. 117472, February 7, 1997) the Supreme Court
decided with finality the imposition of death to Echegaray. This however sparked a massive
debate on whether the government should carry on with the same penal provision or abolition
thereof.

Echegaray filed a motion for appeal, which was likewise denied on 19 January 1999.
Less than a month later, Echegaray was executed via lethal injection on 5 February 1999.
Witnesses reported his last words to have been:

"Sámbayanáng Pilipino, patawarin ako sa kasalanang ipinaratang ninyo sa akin.

Pilipino, pinatáy ng kapwa Pilipino."

3
 PEER RATING AND SELF-ASSESSMENT

Class Attendance Participation Knowledge

In the Group Gained and its Future Total
Activity Application to Law
Practice
40% 10% 50%
Gerano - 39 Gerano - 10 Gerano - 49
Peer Garcia - 38 Garcia - 10 Garcia - 50 97.5
Ann Rating Pasquin - 39 Pasquin - 10 Pasquin - 48
Margaret Patricio – 40 Patricio – 10 Patricio – 47
Dy
Average: 39 Average:10 Average: 48.5
Self-
Rating 38 9 47 94

Dy - 38 Dy - 9 Dy - 48
Paul Peer Garcia - 37 Garcia - 10 Garcia - 47 96
Vincent Rating Pasquin - 39 Pasquin - 10 Pasquin - 48
Gerano Patricio – 39 Patricio – 10 Patricio – 49

Average: 38.25 Average: 9.75 Average: 48

Self- 37 9 47 93
Rating

Dy - 38 Dy - 9 Dy - 48
Peer Gerano - 36 Gerano - 9 Gerano - 48
Rosie Rating Pasquin - 39 Pasquin - 10 Pasquin - 48 95.75
Garcia Patricio – 39 Patricio – 10 Patricio – 49

Average: 38 Average: 9.5 Average: 48.25

Self- 38 10 47 95
Rating

Dy – 37 Dy – 9 Dy – 48
Peer Garcia - 36 Garcia - 10 Garcia - 45
Leomel Rating Gerano - 36 Gerano - 9 Gerano - 48 94
Pasquin Patricio – 39 Patricio – 10 Patricio – 49

Average: 37 Average: 9.5 Average: 47.5

Self- 39 9 48 96
Rating

Dy – 36 Dy – 9 Dy – 48
Peer Garcia - 36 Garcia - 9 Garcia - 47
Justine Rating Gerano - 36 Gerano - 9 Gerano - 48 94
Mae Pasquin – 40 Pasquin – 10 Pasquin – 48
Patricio
Average: 37 Average: 9.25 Average: 47.75

Self- 38 9 49 96
Rating