PEOPLE V SIAO The claim of the appellant that the filing of the case, was form of revenge due
filing of the case, was form of revenge due to the
327 SCRA 269
Accused is being charged for the crime of rape together with Reylan Gimena but the
latter was acquitted.
FACTS:
 Private complainant Estrella Raymundo was employed as a maid in the
appellant’s house.
 Likewise, Reylan Gimena was a house boy.
 Appellant ordered Gimena to pull Estrella to the women’s quarters.
 There she poked a gun at Estrella, then he did things to her like dropped a
melting candle to her chest and pouring a bottle of sprite to her nostrils.
 He then tied her feet with electric cord as she was made to lie face down.
 She then was ordered to undress.
 He then commanded Gimena to remove his shorts but he refused rather he let
his penis out.
 Appellant ordred Gimena to rape Estrella
 But when he refused, he was threatened that if they don’t he will kill both of
them.
 Estrella was made to suck his penis and thereafter performed sexual act in
front of Siao watching while the gun was pointing at them.
 Accused asked them to do the act in three (3) times and three different
positions.
 They tried to call for help but when the sister of the accused came knocking
he just ignored them and proceeded.
 Shortly, appellant told them to go to the boys room. They complied with his
order tearfully, after he followed them laughing all the while. Appellant then
warned them: "If you will tell the police, I will kill your mothers."
 After the incident, she then asked if they would be allowed to go home, and
on their way home they met a man who then reported it to the authorities.
DEFENSE
 Accused made up stories that there has been several incident of lost
things in the house (money, jewelry) and the victim was allegedly to be
the one who took them
 The filing of the said case was due to these incidents.
HELD:
Ester Raymundo and Reylan Gimena were forced and intimidated at gunpoint by
accused-appellant Rene Siao to have carnal knowledge of each other.
incidents of stealing in the household. Court ruled
“We cannot see how a 14-year old girl from the rural area could fabricate such charges
borne out of a desire for revenge”
Thus, the accused questioned the inconsistencies in the testimony of both Estrella and
Reylan.
1. Ester testified that Reylan pulled her to the womens quarter, while Reylan testified that when
he entered the room Ester was already tied up in the bed;
2. Ester testified that she was lying "face down" on the bed, while Reylan testified that she was
lying "face upward";
3. Ester testified that before being made to undress, accused-appellant Rene Siao wound
electrical wire around her neck and Gimena made no mention of this;
4. Ester testified that Gimena ejaculated while performing the sexual acts while Gimena
testified that he did not ejaculate; and lastly,
5. Ester testified that she had sought help from her cousin Joy Raymundo on the way out from
the womens quarter while Reylan testified that she just walked slowly towards the mens quarters
as ordered by accused-appellant.
Thus, the court ruled that the inconsistencies has nothing to do in the essential fact of
the commission of rape.
He also contends that it is impossible for the two to perform such acts in the presence
of another person. Hence,
They were easily intimidated and cowed into submission by accused-appellant, who
aside from being their "amo" or employer, was menacingly threatening to kill them or
their family with a gun if they did not do as he commanded them to do.
Accused appellant is hereby guilty of rape as principal by induction with the use
of deadly weapon.
The penalty is reclusion perpetua but the trial overlooked the presence of
aggravating circumstance of IGNOMINY
It has been held that where the accused in committing the rape used not only the
missionary position, i.e. male superior, female inferior but also the dog position
as dogs do, i.e. entry from behind, as was proven like the crime itself in the instant
case, the aggravating circumstance of ignominy attended the commission
thereof.[24]