PEOPLE VS.
TUMIMPAD
FACTS:
1. Accused-appellant Constable Moreno L. Tumimpad and co-accused Constable Ruel C. Prieto were
charged with the crime of rape committed against a 15-year old Mongoloid child in a complaint dated
on May 24, 1991, signed by her mother. Accused-appellant pleaded not guilty to the crime charged.
Due trial ensued.
2. At the time of the incident, the victim Sandra Salcedo was 15 years old but has a mind of a 5-year
old child. She was the daufhter of Lt. Col. Teofisto Salcedo and Pastora Salcedo. Col. Salcedo was then
Provincial Commander of Misamis Oriental. He had four security men assigned to him, two of whom
were accused Constable Prieto and accused-appellant Tumimpad. In the two-storey officer’s quarters
the Salcedo family resides, the upper storey was occupied by the family while the lower storey was
occupied by the security men.
3. On August 7, 1989, Sandra complained of constipation to which her mother brought her to a doctor
for a check-up. The minor was given medication but she only became irritable and moody in the next
few days. The next day, she saw Tumimpad coming out of the kitchen. Sandra told her mother,
“Mama, patayin mo ‘yan, bastos.”
4. Sandra was brought to a doctor for a second check-up. The urinalysis result revealed she was
pregnant. Further examinations in different hospitals were done, all confirming Sandra’s pregnancy.
The fetus gestational age was equivalent to 17.1 week. Sandra gave birth to a baby boy named Jacob
Salcedo on January 11, 1990.
5. During the trial, the accused moved that a blood test, both "Major Blood Grouping Test" and
"Pheno Blood Typing" be conducted on the offended party, Sandra’s child Jacob and the two
accused. The result of the test conducted by the Makati Medical Center showed that the baby, Jacob
Salcedo, has a type "O" blood, Sandra Salcedo type "B," accused Ruel Prieto type "A" and accused-
appellant type "O.” Mrs. Salcedo then filed the complaint. Testimonies of the victim, the mother and
relatives were brought about.
6. Trial court convicted Moreno Tumimpad of the crime charged but acquitted the other accused,
Ruel Prieto, on reasonable doubt, stating he has a different blood type from that of the child.
7. Tumimpad contended that the court erred in convicting the accused-appellant based on major
blood grouping test known as ABO and RHS test, not a paternal test known as chromosomes or HLA
test.
ISSUE:
W/N the lower court erred in convicting Tumimpad based on the result of the blood test.
RULING:
Accused-appellants' culpability was established mainly by testimonial evidence given by the victim
herself and her relatives. The blood test was adduced as evidence only to show that the alleged
father or any one of many others of the same blood type may have been the father of the child. As
held by this Court in Janice Marie Jao vs. Court of Appeals:
Paternity — Science has demonstrated that by the analysis of blood samples of the mother, the child,
and the alleged father, it can be established conclusively that the man is not the father of a particular
child. But group blood testing cannot show only a possibility that he is. Statutes in many states, and
courts in others, have recognized the value and the limitations of such tests. Some of the decisions
have recognized the conclusive presumption of nonpaternity where the results of the test, made in
the prescribed manner, show the impossibility of the alleged paternity. This is one of the few cases in
which the judgment of the Court may scientifically be completely accurate, and intolerable results
avoided, such as have occurred where the finding is allowed to turn on oral testimony conflicting with
the results of the test. The findings of such blood tests are not admissible to prove the fact of
paternity as they show only a possibility that the alleged father or any one of many others with the
same blood type may have been the father of the child.
Whereby, the accused-appellant’s guilt of the crime of rape having been proven beyond reasonable
doubt, and the decision appealed from is hereby affirmed.
