Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 15 views

    Facts: The Victim Evelyn Obligar Garganera A 5-Year Old Together With Her Younger Brother

    Uploaded by

    Mara Clara
    This case involves the sexual assault of a 5-year old girl named Evelyn. The prosecution argued that the 19-year old defendant, Joeral Galleno, sexually assaulted Evelyn when he found her home alone. Medical experts testified that Evelyn had lacerations and bleeding in her vaginal area consistent with sexual assault. The defendant claimed the sexual contact did not occur. The court affirmed the defendant's conviction, finding that the victim's testimony, supported by her family and medical experts, established that she was assaulted despite minor inconsistencies that could be explained by her young age.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Facts: The Victim Evelyn Obligar Garganera A 5-Year Old Together With Her Younger Brother

    Uploaded by

    Mara Clara
    15 views2 pages
    This case involves the sexual assault of a 5-year old girl named Evelyn. The prosecution argued that the 19-year old defendant, Joeral Galleno, sexually assaulted Evelyn when he found her home alone. Medical experts testified that Evelyn had lacerations and bleeding in her vaginal area consistent with sexual assault. The defendant claimed the sexual contact did not occur. The court affirmed the defendant's conviction, finding that the victim's testimony, supported by her family and medical experts, established that she was assaulted despite minor inconsistencies that could be explained by her young age.

    Original Title

    70. People v. Galleno

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involves the sexual assault of a 5-year old girl named Evelyn. The prosecution argued that the 19-year old defendant, Joeral Galleno, sexually assaulted Evelyn when he found her home alone. Medical experts testified that Evelyn had lacerations and bleeding in her vaginal area consistent with sexual assault. The defendant claimed the sexual contact did not occur. The court affirmed the defendant's conviction, finding that the victim's testimony, supported by her family and medical experts, established that she was assaulted despite minor inconsistencies that could be explained by her young age.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    15 views2 pages

    Facts: The Victim Evelyn Obligar Garganera A 5-Year Old Together With Her Younger Brother

    Uploaded by

    Mara Clara
    This case involves the sexual assault of a 5-year old girl named Evelyn. The prosecution argued that the 19-year old defendant, Joeral Galleno, sexually assaulted Evelyn when he found her home alone. Medical experts testified that Evelyn had lacerations and bleeding in her vaginal area consistent with sexual assault. The defendant claimed the sexual contact did not occur. The court affirmed the defendant's conviction, finding that the victim's testimony, supported by her family and medical experts, established that she was assaulted despite minor inconsistencies that could be explained by her young age.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 2

    PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs.

    JOERAL GALLENO, EXPERT TESTIMONY

    Facts: The victim Evelyn Obligar Garganera a 5-year old together with her younger brother,
    3-year old Eleazar, live under the care and custody of their uncle, Emetario Obligar, and aunt,
    Penicola Obligar.The accused-appellant, is 19-year old Joeral Galleno. On August 16, 1994,
    Emetario and Penicola left their residence to work at sugarcane plantation and the only persons
    left in the house were Evelyn and Eleazar.

    At around 4 o'clock in the afternoon, Galleno passed by the Obligars' residence and
    found the two children left to themselves. The prosecution and the defense presented
    conflicting versions on what occurred at said residence. However, the result is undisputed.
    Evelyn sustained a laceration in her vagina which result in profuse, life-threatening bleeding due
    to her tender age.

    For the prosecution, the victim herself testified that Galleno took advantage of the
    situation by sexually molesting her. After lowering her shorts, he made Evelyn sit on his lap,
    facing him. The penetration caused the child's vagina to bleed, making her cry in pain. Emeterio
    and Penicola also testified that when they came home from work, they arrived to find Evelyn
    crying. Emetario noticed that there was blood in Evelyn's dress and she was pressing a rug
    against her genital organ. Dr. Alfonso D. Orosco, the Rural Health Physician reported, upon
    examining Evelyn, that he found (1) clotted blood, and (2) a vaginal laceration.

    On August 18, 1994, Emeterio brought Evelyn to the Roxas Memorial General Hospital
    were she was examined by resident physician Dr. Ma. Lourdes Lañada. Dr. Lañada, testified that
    she found that "there was a 3 cm. lacerated wound at the left anterior one-third of the vagina"
    and "the presence of about 10-15cc of blood" at the vaginal vault. Dr. Lañada recommended
    that evelyn be admitted for confinement in the hospital because the wound in her vagina,
    which was bleeding, had to be repaired. The following day, Evelyn was examined at Roxas
    Memorial General Hospital again where she was attended to by Dr. Machael Toledo, the
    resident physician on duty, who found blood clots and minimal bleeding in the genital area. Dr.
    Toledo " … pack(ed) the area to prevent further bleeding and (he) … admitted the patient for
    possible repair of the laceration and blood transfusion because she has anaemia 2ndary to
    bleeding."

    The trial deemed the following circumstances significant in finding accused-appellant


    culpable for the crime of Statutory Rape.

    Hence, the instant appeal and review.


    Issue: Whether or not the Trial Court erred in giving full weight and credence to the testimonies
    of the medical doctors.

    Ruling: No.

    As a general rule, witnesses must state facts and not draw conclusions or give opinions.
    It is the court's duty to draw conclusions from the evidence and form opinions upon the facts
    proved. However, conclusions and opinions of witnesses are received in many cases, and are
    not confined to expert testimony, based on the principle that either because of the special skill
    or expert knowledge of the witness, or because of the nature of the subject matter under
    observation, of for other reasons, the testimony will aid the court in reaching a judgment.

    In the case at bar, the trial court arrived at its conclusions not only with the aid of the
    expert testimony of doctors who gave their opinions as to the possible cause of the victim's
    laceration, but also the testimony the victim herself. In other words, the trial court did not rely
    solely on the testimony of the expert witnesses. Such expert testimony merely aided the trial
    court in the exercise of its judgment on the facts. Hence, the fact that the experts enumerated
    various possible causes of the victim's laceration does not mean the trial court's interference is
    wrong.

    As regards the inconsistencies in Evelyn's declaration, particularly as to what really


    caused the laceration, we are convinced that the child, due to her tender age, was just
    confused.

    As regards accused-appellant's argument that the victim's testimony is just a concocted


    story of what really happened, we apply the rule that the revelation of an innocent child whose
    chastity was abused deserves full credence (People vs. Cagto, 253 SCRA 455 [1996]). We
    likewise consider the fact that her uncle and aunt, virtually her foster parents, themselves
    support her story of rape. It is unnatural for a parent to use her offspring as an engine of malice,
    especially if it will subject a daughter to embarrassment and even stigma (People vs.
    Dones,supra.)

    WHEREFORE, finding the conviction of accused-appellant justified by the evidence on record,


    the assailed decision is hereby AFFIRMED in toto. SO ORDERED.

    You might also like