Republic of the Philippines

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
NATIONAL PROSECUTION SERVICE
OFFICE OF THE PROVINCIAL PROSECUTOR
Province of Surigao Del Norte
Surigao City

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Complainant,
Case no. 324
-Versus- For: Rape (Art . 335,par
(3),
Revised Penal Code)

PO1 JOSE A. GONZALEZ,

Respondent,

X--------------------------------------------------/
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES )
SURIGAO CITY ) S.S.
SURIGAO DEL NORTE )

DEFENSE PRE-TRIAL BRIEF

PO1 Jose A. Gonzales (“Accused”), by and through Counsel,

respectfully submits the following Pre-Trial Brief pursuant to the
Rules of Procedure and Evidence, and states as follows:

1. SUMARRY OF STATEMENT OF FACTS

1. PO1 JOSE A. GONZALEZ, who is the respondent of a criminal

complaint filed by ROGER DIMAAMPAO on behalf of his girlfriend
AREOLA MARRIE L. MALIBUGAN has no basis and sufficient evidence
that the said victim was a minor at the time of the commission of an
offense and at same time Raped by the allege defendant.

2. That the precise year allege in the complaint, that was 2016
to 2018, respondent PO1 JOSE A. GONZALEZ was being assigned in
the Office of Police Station PNP PRO 13 CARAGA in Butuan City of
which PO1 ARTURO S. VERTOSO his co-workmate in the said office.

3. That during 2016 to 2018, the respondent was living in the

apartment together with respondent’s wife and PO1 ARTURO
VERTOSO as his neighbor at the said place and at the same time his
co-workmate in Butuan City and it was physically impossible for the
respondent to commit a crime of rape in the allege year against the
said minor allege in the complaint.

4. That both PO1 JOSE A. GONZALES and PO1 ARTURO

VERTOSO, know the girl name AREOLA MARRIE L. MALIBUGAN who
is a claimed victim of the said case because she is one of their friend
from Surigao City bringing her to Gaisano Capital Surigao to go
shopping. Additionally, the witness Arturo Vertoso stated that she is
not a minor looking but a claimed lady during that time.

5. That the defendant haven't done anything wrong against

the said woman. On the other hand, He has shown his sincere regard
to the lady and very well performed his responsibilities like that of a
true friend to her.

6. And that was the only time that JOSE and ARIOLA MARRIE
meet and see each other.

2. ISSUE TO BE TRIED

Whether or not respondent committed a crime of Statutory

Rape under (Art . 335,par (2), Revised Penal Code)?

3. APPLICABLE LAWS AND JURISPRUDENCE

1. Revised Penal Code defines RAPE:

Article 335. When and how Rape is committed.
Rape is committed by having carnal knowledge of a woman under
any of the following circumstances:
1) By using force or intimidation;
2) When the woman is deprived of reason or otherwise
unconscious; and
3) When the woman is under (12) twelve years of age or is
demented.

2. The elements that would constitute the crime of RAPE under

Art. 266-A, par. 1 (a) of RA 8353 are:
A) Carnal knowledge
B) Force or intimidation and the commission of the act without
consent, or
C) Against the will of the victim

In this case, there is no evidence presented by the complainant

that the respondent committed (3) three sexual encounters against
the allege minor. Hence, it is safe to say that this case is prematurely
filed by the complainant, which ought to be dismissed.

3. One who alleges a fact has the burden of proving it, sincere
mere allegations is not evidence. Equally, it is a basic rule in evidence
that he who alleges must prove his case or claim by degree of evidence
required.

4. DOCUMENTS TO BE PRESENTED
 1. Counter-Affidavit of the Respondent----------Exhibit “A”
(This is a sworn statement of PO1 JOSE A. GONZALEZ to prove the
facts of the alleged rape filed by the complainant ROGER
DIMAAMPAO transpired at Surigao City on 2016- 2018)

2. Affidavit of Witness ---------------------------Exhibit “B” (This

is a sworn statement of PO1 ARTURO VERTOSO to prove that there is
no raped that transpired at Surigao City on 2016-2018.)

5. NAME OF WITNESS

PO1 ARTURO VERTOSO – his testimony will provide for the

facts of being impossible to commit the crime rape of his co-
workmate PO1 JOSE A. GONZALEZ alleged in the complaint. He will
detail to the court what really transpired on the year 2016-2018

6.CONCLUSION

Mr. JOSE A. GONZALEZ reiterates his plea of not guilty and

the dismissal of the case. From the foregoing, it is clear that this
case cannot prosper. And so, Respondent, prays that this case be
dismissed for utter lack of basis, and all other equitable reliefs prayed
for.

WHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons, the Defense

respectfully requests that the Trial accept the foregoing request as
fully dismissed under the Rules of Procedure and Evidence.

ATTY. JINGLE MERRY G. GERANDOY

Counsel of the Defendant
IBP lifetime Member No. 088516
PTR No. 6554392, Jan. 2, 2020
Roll of Attorney No. 52976, 3/20/19
MCLE Compliance No. VII-0036549 valid until April 2020
P. Reyes, Surigao City

And

ATTY. BEMAR F. CARANAY

Co-counsel
IBP lifetime Member No. 689543
PTR No. 1578964, Jan. 2, 2020
Roll of Attorney No. 52976, 3/20/19
MCLE Compliance No. VI-0013258 valid until April 2020
Magallanes street, Surigao City

Copy Furnished:
ATTY. JOSE ROLLY GONZAGA
Assistant City Prosecutor
Purok 6, brgy. San Juan
Surigao City, Surigao Del Norte