This is another case illustrating that lust is no respecter of person, time or place. This is the case of kidnapping with rape which is quite unique because the victim is only five months old.
Baby Lea is the five-month-old daughter of Martina. One time when Martina went to her mother’s house to boil some water, she left Baby Lea to the care of her eldest sister Carla. But when Martina came back Lea was already missing. As Martina searched for her, a neighbor informed her that he saw an ice cream vendor carrying a baby around the time when Lea went missing.
So Martina reported the incident to the police. Later on the police received a report from a cargo truck driver who narrated to them that while on his way home, he saw a man abusing a baby on a bench in the town plaza. He noticed the baby’s private parts were bloodied so he beckoned four bystanders to help him in accosting the man. But when they returned to the plaza, the man had already left the baby lying on the bench.
Thus the police proceeded to the plaza and found the baby thereat. PO1 Lisa informed Martina about it and accompanied her to the plaza. Martina identified the baby as her daughter Lea and brought her to the hospital. After medical examination, the doctor found that Lea’s hymen had fresh lacerations and the edges are “sharp, reddened and edematous” which are indications that she was raped.
Acting on a tip the police proceeded to the Seawall Area and apprehended a suspect who was positively identified by the truck driver as the assailant who turned out to be Bruno, the ice cream vendor. When accused of kidnapping with rape, Bruno simply denied the charge and offered an alibi that when he was sleeping in his house during the alleged rape at the plaza. In fact he was aroused only when the police came and manhandled and arrested him.
After trial the lower court found Bruno guilty beyond reasonable doubt, of the crime of kidnapping with rape relying heavily on the testimony of the truck driver. He was sentence to death and to indemnify the victim the sum of P50,000 and to pay moral damages of P50,000.
Bruno appealed the decision and insisted that he is not guilty of the crime because there was no proof that he intended to restrain the victim and there was no eyewitness to the alleged carnal intercourse with Lea.
But the Court of Appeals and subsequently the Supreme Court affirmed the finding of the Lower Court. The testimony of the truck driver overwhelmingly established beyond reasonable doubt that Bruno, a private individual selling ice cream took Lea, a five-month-old baby, without the knowledge and consent of her parents which is a clear proof of intent to deprive Lea of her liberty. Rape was also proven by the testimony of the eyewitness-truck driver and the medical findings of the physician who confirmed that Lea suffered injuries in her vagina.
However in view of RA 9346 prohibiting the imposition of death penalty which was already in effect when the crime was committed in 2000, the penalty of death should be reduced to reclusion perpetua without eligibility of parole (People vs. Magno, G.R. 206972, December 2, 2015)
Email: attyjosesison@gmail.com