Title
Supreme Court
People vs. Jalosjos
Case
G.R. No. 132875-76
Decision Date
Nov 16, 2001
A congressman convicted of statutory rape and acts of lasciviousness against an 11-year-old girl, affirmed by the Supreme Court with increased penalties and damages.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 177232)

Key Dates

• Sexual incidents: June 14–22, 1996; additional encounters June 29, July 2, July 20, 1996.
• Filing of informations: December 16, 1996.
• Arraignment: January 29, 1997.
• NBI forensic examination: August 23, 1996.
• RTC conviction: unpublished date.
• Supreme Court decision: November 16, 2001.

Applicable Law and Constitutional Basis

• 1987 Constitution: presumption of innocence (Art. III, Sec. 14), due process (Art. III, Sec. 1), state policy to protect the family and minors (Art. II, Secs. 12–15).
• Revised Penal Code (RPC):
– Art. 335(3), statutory rape (victim under 12 years).
– Art. 336, acts of lasciviousness.
• Republic Act No. 7610 (Child Abuse Law), Sec. 5(b), lascivious conduct with a child exploited in prostitution.
• Republic Act No. 7659, amending Art. 335 as regards statutory rape.
• Jurisprudence on child‐witness credibility, penetration sufficiency, and official-records evidence.

Factual Background

The victim, Rosilyn, was prostituted by her guardian, Simplicio Delantar, from the age of five. In February 1996, she was introduced by Suarez to Congressman Jalosjos, who offered to “adopt” her and launch an acting career. He brought her to his Makati condominium on multiple evenings and mornings between June 14 and 22, 1996. On those occasions he kissed her lips, fondled her breasts, inserted his finger into her vagina, pressed and rubbed his penis (“idinikit-dikit,” “itinutok,” “idiniin-diin”) against her labia, and ejaculated on her thighs. Similar acts recurred on June 29, July 2 and July 20, 1996. Rosilyn eventually escaped and filed charges.

Charges, Trial and Verdict Below

RTC Makati, Branch 62, Criminal Case Nos. 96-1985 to 96-1993 etc.:
• Two counts of statutory rape (Art. 335(3), RPC) – conviction.
• Twelve counts of acts of lasciviousness (Art. 336 RPC in relation to R.A. 7610, Sec. 5(b)) – six convictions (96-1987 to 96-1993), six acquittals (96-1991, 96-1994 to 96-1998).
Sentence imposed:
• Statutory rape – reclusion perpetua each, P50,000 moral damages each.
• Acts of lasciviousness – indeterminate 8 years 8 months 1 day to 15 years 6 months 20 days each, P20,000 moral damages each.

Issues on Appeal

  1. Credibility of the minor complainant amid alleged inconsistencies and omissions.
  2. Application of falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus doctrine.
  3. Victim’s inability to identify accused in pretrial photographs.
  4. Victim’s age as under or over twelve at the time of offenses.
  5. Sufficiency of proof of carnal knowledge (penetration).
  6. Validity of accused’s alibi and denial defenses.

Assessment of Victim’s Credibility

• Falsus in uno doctrine is not absolute; trial court best observes demeanor and resolves credibility (People v. Yanson-Dumancas).
• Complainant’s detailed, spontaneous, consistent in-court testimony outweighed minor hesitations typical of child witnesses.
• Pretrial affidavits lacked legal terminology (“rape”) but omissions reflect victim’s unfamiliarity with technical definitions, not falsity.
• In-court positive identification cures weak out-of-court photo lineups (People v. Vasquez; People v. Timon).
• Minor’s imperfect estimation of age and failure to note a mole are immaterial to facial recognition of accused.

Proof of Penetration and Carnal Knowledge

• Jurisprudence holds that slightest penetration of labia suffices to consummate rape (People v. Campuhan; People v. Mangalino; People v. Galimba).
• Victim’s use of “idinikit-dikit,” “itinutok,” “idiniin-diin” and the pain felt “inside my vagina” establish actual contact/pressure of accused’s penis against her labia.
• Repeated descriptions across separate dates demonstrate consummation beyond mere lascivious contact.

Victim’s Age and Documentary Evidence

• Birth certificate and baptismal certificate (May 11, 1985) corroborated by Jose Fabella Memorial Hospital records (Cord Dressing Book, Master List of Live Births, patient file) establish that victim was eleven at the time.
• Even assuming cancellation of civil‐registry document, hospital records are official entries admissible under Rule 44, P.D. 651, and conclusively prove her date of birth.

Alibi and Denial Defenses

• Acquittals affirmed where accused proved absence (counts June 29–July 3 in Dipolog/Dapitan).
• For incidents June 14–22 (morning and evening), accused presented no evidence of absence or physical impossibility of being in Makati.
• Flight schedule (9:40 a.m. PAL) did not preclude morning acts on June 16; defense of alibi must fail where timetable does not exclude presence.

Constitutional and Statutory Rape Principles

• Under the

    ...continue reading

    Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
    Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.