People vs. Butiong Gr. No. 168932

Facts:

This case involves a man who had sexual intercourse with a woman who, although 29 years of age, was a mental retardate with the mentality of a six- to seven-year old.

In the evening of October 7, 1998, AAA, then a 29-year-old mental retardate, was invited by Butiong, her long-time neighbor, to go over to his house because he would give her something. AAA obliged. He locked the door as soon as she had stepped inside his house, and then took off his shorts and the shorts of AAA. He led her to the sofa, where he had carnal knowledge of her.

Upon reaching home, AAA forthwith told her older sister what had happened. Her sister brought AAA to the police station and later on to the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI). AAA underwent a series of Psychological Test with result showed that she had a mild level of mental retardation, and that her mental age was that of a child aged from six to seven years.

The RTC rendered judgment finding Butiong guilty of Rape.

Issue:

Whether or not the accused is guilty of rape.

Rulings:

Yes. Rape is essentially a crime committed through force or intimidation, that is, against the will of the female. It is also committed without force or intimidation when carnal knowledge of a female is alleged and shown to be without her consent. This understanding of the commission of rape has been prevalent in both the common law and the statutory law systems.

There are four modes of committing the crime of rape as provided in paragraph 1, Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, applied in his case, namely:

a.     Through force, threat or intimidation;

b.     When the offended party is deprived of reason or is otherwise unconscious;

c.      By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority;

d.     When the offended party is under 12 years of age, or is demented, even though none of the circumstances first mentioned is present.

Carnal knowledge of a mental retardate is rape under paragraph 1 of Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 8353 because a mental retardate is not capable of giving her consent to a sexual act. Proof of force or intimidation is not necessary, it being sufficient for the State to establish, one, the sexual congress between the accused and the victim, and, two, the mental retardation of the victim. It should no longer be debatable that rape of a mental retardate falls under paragraph 1, b), of Article 266-A, supra, because the provision refers to a rape of a female “deprived of reason,” a phrase that refers to mental abnormality, deficiency or retardation.