‘Injuries don’t suggest rape in Subic case’

The injuries sustained by the private complainant in the rape case against four United States Marines do not suggest that she is a victim of sexual assault, an expert witness for the defense told the Makati City regional trail court (RTC) yesterday.

Forensic obstetrician and gynecologist Teresita Sanchez corroborated most of the opinions presented by forensic pathologist Raquel Fortun, who testified for the prosecution.

However, she disagreed with her on the conclusion that the injuries on the alleged victim’s body and genitalia are consistent with rape.

"I do not find any injury to suggest that there was rape," Sanchez, on direct examination, told the court noting that in rape, there should have been contusions on the inner knees and thighs.

Citing literature and illustrations, she said a rape victim sustains these injuries when the attacker forces her legs open.

Sanchez, the defense’s third witness, was questioned about the medico-legal findings of Dr. Rolando Ortiz of the James Gordon Memorial Hospital.

She agreed that the contusions on the private complainant’s right forearm, left arm, and legs may have been caused by many things — including finger pressure or being bumped.

She also agreed with Fortun that injuries in a woman’s genitalia because of sexual intercourse do not automatically mean rape, because such injuries can be sustained both in consensual and non-consensual sex.

But Sanchez disagreed with Fortun on the point that, in the case at hand, based on the medico-legal findings, the injuries were consistent with rape.

She also testified that if Nicole had a blood alcohol level of 400 to 500 milligrams, based on what she drank on the night of the alleged sexual assault, that would have created an emergency situation in which Nicole could have become comatose or died.

During the hearing, The Star counted at least 20 objections posed by State Prosecutor Hazel Decena-Valdez, one of the five government lawyers handling the case.

She repeatedly stood and asked the court to rule against improper, baseless and immaterial points on which Sanchez was being asked to testify.

Spectators in the gallery silently cheered for her as she raised her voice against leading questions and improperly laid queries, especially those that dealt with information the prosecution did not dwell on when presenting its set of evidence.

Valdez objected several times against allowing the defense witness to counter the opinions of prosecution witnesses, saying Sanchez is being presented to make an opinion based on assumed facts and not based on the opinions of others.

She also asked Branch 139 Judge Benjamin Pozon to stop the defense witness from talking about matters she is not questioned about.

Courtroom observers smiled at Valdez as she made a victory punch when Sanchez admitted to the court that she already answered a question that was repeated.

In a post-hearing interview, Senior State Prosecutor Emilie Fe delos Santos said Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez has decided not to replace them after Nicole’s camp sought their replacement.

Nicole earlier asked the DOJ to replace the government lawyers handling the case for their allegedly "poor performance." — With Jose Rodel Clapano