REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

5th Judicial Region
Branch 0
Legazpi City

People of the Philippines,

Plaintiff,
-versusJudas Balasubas,
Accused.
x--------------------------------------x
MEMORANDUM
The PROSECUTION thru the undersigned counsel and unto this Honorable Court
most respectfully alleges:
I.

PREPATORY STATEMENT

Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not mean such a degree of proof as,
excluding possibility of error, produces absolute certainty. Moral certainty only is
required, or that degree of proof which produces conviction in an unprejudiced mind
(Sec. 2 Rule 133, Rules of Court)
While it is true that the accused is afforded by the Constitution of presumption
of innocence such presumption is not forever. It ends when it is overcome in a final
conviction. And even though it is the duty of the prosecution to prove the guilt of the
accused beyond reasonable doubt, the prosecution is not required to show the guilt of
the accused with absolute certainty. Only moral certainty is demanded or that degree
of proof which, to an unprejudiced mind, produces conviction.
II.
The parties to this case are:

THE PARTIES

a. CONCHITA NABIKTIMA- The victim/private offended party of the crime of rape,

a 13 year old high school student of University Catholic School in the
Municipality of Tiwi Albay and a resident thereof.
b. JUDAS BALASUBAS- The accused, a fourth year college student of Public
School in Municipality of Legazpi City Albay, and a resident of Tiwi Albay.

III. STATEMENT OF THE FACTS

As stipulated and approved in the Pre-trial Conference, the facts of the case are as
follows:
1.
That victim/private offended party CONCHITA NABIKTIMA is a thirteen
(13) years old high school student of University Catholic School in the Municipality of
Tiwi Albay, and a resident of Tiwi Albay;
2.
That the accused JUDAS BALASUBAS of legal age, a fourth year college
student of University of Public School in Municipality of Legazpi City Albay, and a
resident of Tiwi Albay;
3.

That the victim Conchita is a known neighbor of the accused, Judas;

4.
That the victim Conchita was raped by the accused Judas in the early
morning around 6:00-7:00am of January 20, 2016 in the residence of Conchita
Nabiktima at Brgy. Ligmanan Tiwi Albay;
5.
That on January 20, 2016 the victim Conchita was alone when the
accused Judas entered in the house of Conchita without the permission;
6.
That the victim Conchita while sleeping the accused Judas entered
inside her room;
7.
That the accused Judas kissed her, mashed her breast and touched her
private parts;
8.
That the victim Conchita was awakened, then the accused Judas
immediately cover her mouth by his palm;
9.
That the victim Conchita was threatened by the accused Judas that if
she will shout the accused will kill her;
10.
Conchita;

That the accused Judas inserted his penis to the organ of the victim

11.
That the victim Conchita felt pain in her all over her body particularly in
her private parts
12.
That on January 25, 2016, a police blotter was made by victim, Conchita
accompanied by her mother, Pacita Nabiktima alleging the crime of rape committed
against Judas Balasubas.

13.
That on January 25, 2016 a police line-up was made in the Tabaco City
Police Station and victim Conchita identified the accused Judas Balasubas as the
perpetuator of the alleged crime of rape.
IV.

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

For the orderly exposition and comprehension of the many occurrences of the present
controversy this matrix is presented:
a. January 25, 2016 - A police blotter was made by victim Conchita accompanied
by her mother Pacita Nabiktima alleging the crime of rape committed against
the person of Judas Balasubas
b. February 5, 2016- The accused, Judas Balasubas filed his Counter-Affidavit.
c. February 10, 2016- A resolution was issued by the Provincial Prosecutor finding
probable cause on the complaint filed.
d. March 15, 2016- Information was filed in the Court.
e. March 20, 2016- A warrant of arrest was issued against accused, Judas
Balasubas
f. April 15, 2016 - The court set the accused for arraignment and a plea of Not
Guilty was made by the accused.
g. May 10, 2016 - The court ordered the mandatory trial conference where victim
Conchita nabiktima and accused, Judas Balasubas appeared before the court.
h. June 10, 2016- The court sets the case for trial proper. The Prosecution
presents as witness Conchita Nabiktima and victim/private offended party who
positively identified accused, Judas Balasubas as the perpetuator of the crime
of rape.
i. June 15, 2016- Continuation of Prosecutions presentation of evidence.
Presentation of expert witness, Dr. Bitoy Quack medico legal of PNP Crime Lab,
Camp Ola, Legazpi City who presented Medico Legal Report No. A-0001-01 and
concluded that that victim suffers hymenal lacerations and the swelling of the
labia minora indicating that victim had a rough sexual activity or a forceful
intercourse.
j. September 20, 2016- Prosecution filed a written offer of testimonial and
documentary evidences and manifests the resting of its case.
k. January 05, 2017 - Court orders Accused to file Comment to the Formal Offer
of Evidence of Prosecution.
l. January 10, 2017 - Accused filed a Comment to Formal Offer of Evidence of
Prosecution.
m. January 20, 2017- Court orders the admission of Prosecutions offer of
evidence.
n. January 25, 2017 - Defense presentation of evidence. Presentation of witness,
the accused Judas Balasubas who testify before the court and made denial of
the alleged offense against him. Thereafter Defense manifests its oral formal
offer of evidence.

V. ISSUES
The sole issue of this case is whether or not the accused Judas Balasubas is guilty of
the crime of Rape under Art. 266-A of the Revised Penal Code.

VI. ARGUMENTS
The crime of rape is committed by a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a woman
under any of the circumstance enumerated in Art. 266-A of the Revised Penal Code.
The basic element of rape is carnal knowledge or sexual intercourse, not ejaculation.
Carnal knowledge is defined as the act of a man having sexual bodily connections with
a woman. This explains why the slightest penetration of the female genitalia
consummates the rape. As such, a mere touching of the external genitalia by the penis
capable of consummating the sexual act already constitutes consummated rape.
(People v. Jalosjos, G.R. Nos. 132875-876, November 16, 2001, 369 SCRA 179, 198)
In the case of People v. Malibiran, G.R. No. 173471, March 17, 2009, 581 SCRA 655,
666-667. The court held a rape victim, who testifies in a categorical, straightforward,
spontaneous and frank manner, and remains consistent, is a credible witness.
Moreover, when the offended parties are young and immature girls, as in this case,
where the victim was only nine years old at the time the rape was committed, courts
are inclined to lend credence to their version of what transpired, not only because of
their relative vulnerability, but also because of the shame and embarrassment to
which they would be exposed by court trial, if the matter about which they testified
were not true.
It is without a doubt that herein accused is guilty of the crime of rape against the
person of the victim, Conchita Nabiktima. Complainant's testimony was
straightforward and free from contradiction as to any material point.
Furthermore the Medical Legal report findings (Report No. A-0001-01) and marked as
Exhibit B and B-1 verifies that physical attributes of a perpetuation of the crime of
rape. The conclusion is that that victim suffers hymenal lacerations and the swelling
of the labia minora indicating that victim had a rough sexual activity or a forceful
intercourse.
The positive identification of the victim to herein accused in the police line-up
conducted on January, 2016 validate her positive identification of the perpetuator of
the crime in the person of Judas Balasubas.
While accused in his Counter Affidavit marked as Exhibit C to C-1 and his Judicial
Affidavit marked as Exhibit D to D-1 denies the allegation charged against him such
denial does not prove any merit. Accused merely presented an alibi in his affidavits
and testimony before the Court but failed miserably to substantiate such denial by
proof or evidence. Accused even failed to submit and present credible witness that will

support his alibi that on that morning of January 20, 2016 around 6:00-7:00am he
was eating his breakfast at their home and after leaves their house for school.
The court ruled in People v. Arevalo, 421 SCRA 604 that in order to merit credibility,
denial must be buttressed by strong evidence of non-culpability which herein accusedappellant failed to show. And in order for alibi to prosper, the accused-appellant must
prove not only that he was at some other place at the time of the commission of the
crime but also that it was physically impossible for him to be at the locus delicti or its
immediate vicinity.
The accused simple denial of the crime charged is inherently weak. It is negative
evidence which cannot overcome the positive testimonies of credible witnesses. For
accused-appellants denial to prevail it must be buttressed by strong evidence of nonculpability and there is none.
VII.

PRAYERS

Wherefore in view of the foregoing, the Prosecution prays that this Memorandum be
duly NOTED.
Legazpi City. February 03, 2016.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED.
PEDRO LAW OFFICE
Legazpi City, 4500.
Mobile No: 011-011-0000
Land Line No: (052) 0000-00-00
Email Add:pedrolawoffice@yahoo.gail.com
By:

Atty. Andres L. Pedro

Roll No: 0000
IBP No: 00000/01 January 2015 /Albay Chapter
PTR No: 00000 /01 January 2015 / Legazpi City
MCLE Compliance No. IV-0000/20Nov2012
MCLE Compliance No. V-000000/2Feb2015

Copy Furnish:
Atty. JUAN TAMAD

Received by: ___________________

Counsel for the Defendant

Date Received: _________________

Room 023 Happy Building,

Barangay Sagpon Daraga Albay
OFFICE OF THE PROVINCIAL PROSECUTOR
Hall of Justice, Rawis,

Received by: ___________________

Legazpi City, Albay

Date Received: ________________