GR 101801 03; (May, 1995) (Digest)
G.R. No. 101801 -03 May 2, 1995
People of the Philippines vs. Eduardo “Eddie” Tami alias “Jojo”
FACTS
On February 27, 1990, complainant Amelita Dequito and her six teenage companions were walking home in General Santos City after a local event. At Silway Bridge, accused-appellant Eduardo Tami and his co-accused Mohammad “Glo” Bagatao, armed with a gun, accosted the group. Bagatao pistol-whipped two male companions and ordered the group to leave. Tami then specifically instructed Bagatao to leave a girl behind, forcibly pulling Amelita Dequito away from the group. Her companions, helpless, proceeded to report the abduction to the police.
Bagatao and Tami, with Bagatao pointing a gun at her, brought Dequito to Acharon Beach. There, Bagatao, with Tami present and assisting, forcibly undressed her. Bagatao then raped her. Subsequently, Tami also raped her. Afterwards, they brought her to another location where Bagatao raped her a second time. Finally, they transported her to a different house where Tami raped her again. She was released the following morning.
ISSUE
The core issue is whether the accused-appellant, Eduardo Tami, is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the complex crime of forcible abduction with rape, and of multiple separate counts of rape.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the legal characterization and the damages. The Court held that the initial act constituted the complex crime of forcible abduction with rape. The legal logic is that forcible abduction is a continuing crime, and when rape is committed during its perpetration, the two crimes fuse into one single, indivisible complex crime under Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code. The abduction facilitated the subsequent sexual assaults.
However, the Court ruled that the three subsequent rapes committed after the first complex crime were distinct and separate offenses. The rationale is that the forcible abduction had already been consummated with the first rape at the beach. The later rapes, committed in different locations after a clear lapse of time and a change of venue, were no longer part of a continuous abduction but were independent criminal acts. Therefore, Tami was correctly penalized with five penalties of reclusion perpetua: one for the complex crime of forcible abduction with rape, and three more for the subsequent separate rapes he committed (with the fourth separate rape attributed to his co-accused Bagatao). The Court also increased the award of moral damages from P25,000 to P50,000 for each count of rape.