Ruling:
Yes. Further, the defense of consensual sex must be established by strong evidence in order to be worthy of judicial acceptance. Notably, apart from accused-appellant's allegation that he and AAA were sweethearts, no love letter, memento or picture was presented by him to prove that such romantic relationship existed. While Vergara testified on his knowledge of the supposed relationship, he admitted that his basis was merely the information previously given by accused- appellant and that he really had no personal knowledge concerning the same. And as correctly observed by the Court of Appeals, even supposing that the sweetheart theory is true, a love affair does not justify rape, for the beloved cannot be sexually violated against her will for love is not a license for lust.
The absence of bruises and contusions does not negate the commission of rape. As held in People v. Dado (G.R. No. 87775, June 1, 1995): The absence of finger grips, contusions, bruises or scratches on; the different parts of Eden's body does not negate the commission of rape. It is not necessary that the victim should bear marks of physical violence sustained by reason of the persistence of the sexual attacker, nor is the exertion of irresistible force by the culprit an indispensable element of the offense. Corollarily, Eden's failure to shout or offer tenacious resistance cannot be said to render voluntary her submission to the lustful criminal act of appellant.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. ROBERTO GARBIDA G.R. No. 188569, July 13, 2010, Velasco, Jr., J.
The only elements of statutory rape are: (1) that the offender had carnal knowledge of a woman; and (2) the such woman is under twelve (12) years of age.
Facts:
AAA's biological father and mother separated after the birth of AAA and another child. AAA's mother married Roberto Garbida and had children of their own. While at home, Garbida suddenly pulled AAA into a room and undressed her. Garbida had sexual intercourse with AAA, even as AAA's mother witnessed the act who tried to intervene but was unsuccessful. The act was repeated and the AAA’s mother who again intervened failed to do so. They reported the crime and Garbida was arrested and was charged with rape in 7 separate amended informations for each act of sexual intercourse with AAA. Garbida admitted having sexual intercourse with AAA but he claimed that the acts of sexual intercourse were consensual. The RTC found Garbida liable for 7 counts of statutory rape but the circumstances of minority and relationship were not proved beyond reasonable doubt. AAA's birth certificate was not presented as well as the marriage certificate between Garbida and AAA's mother. The RTC also ruled that the offense was aggravated by ignominy since the omission was done in the presence AAA’s mother. The CA modified the penalty imposed reclusion perpetua due to the abolishment of the death penalty.
Issue:
Page 89 of 116
Ruling:
Yes. The acts were committed by accused-appellant in April of 1997, before RA 8353, the Anti-Rape Law of 1997, took effect on October 22, 1997 and amended the provisions of the Revised Penal Code on the crime of rape. Thus, Article 335(3) of the Revised Penal Code defining how statutory rape is committed is the applicable law. The very act of sexual intercourse was established, in fact admitted by accused-appellant. The age of AAA was established before the RTC to be 11 years. The acts of accused-appellant fall squarely under Art. 335 of the Revised Penal Code, as the elements of the crime of statutory rape have been sufficiently proved. We held in People v. Lopez (G.R. No. 179714, October 2, 2009): “It must be remembered that under the law and prevailing jurisprudence, the gravamen of the offense of statutory rape as provided under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code is the carnal knowledge of a woman below twelve years old. The only elements of statutory rape are: (1) that the offender had carnal knowledge of a woman; and (2) the such woman is under twelve (12) years of age.”
The voluntary submission of AAA, even if the Court were convinced that such is the case, to the sexual desires of accused-appellant will not relieve him of criminal liability. As she was 11 years old at the time, she could not give consent, and if she had indicated in any way to accused- appellant that she consented to having sexual intercourse with him, there is no reason for him, were he not morally depraved, to take advantage of her consent. Sexual congress with a girl under 12 years old is always rape.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. ARTURO PALER G.R. No. 186411, July 5, 2010, Velasco, Jr., J.
A mental condition of retardation deprives the complainant of that natural instinct to resist a bestial assault on her chastity and womanhood. For this reason, sexual intercourse with one who is intellectually weak to the extent that she is incapable of giving consent to the carnal act already constitutes rape; without requiring proof that the accused used force or intimidation in committing the act.
Facts:
AAA has a mental condition akin to that of a 5 years old child. AAA went home after attending classes which is at the eastern portion of the cemetery. While she was walking along the path near the Chinese pagoda, Arturo Paler pulled her to the side of the pagoda. Arturo had sexual intercourse with AAA who felt pain. AAA went home after what happened without telling anyone about the incident. The same incident happened again. AAA told her aunt about what happened who later helped her in filing the case. AAA underwent 3 medical examinations. AAA also underwent a psychological examination in which it was reported that AAA's mental condition is classified as severely retarded. It was noted that AAA's IQ is equivalent to that of a 5-year-old child and needs to be under continued counseling to help her develop the skills needed to enable her to perform her daily living as a normal person. Paler denied the charges against him. The RTC found him guilty and was affirmed by the CA which upheld AAA’s credibility despite AAA’s mental capacity.
Page 90 of 116
Issue:
Whether or not the testimony of Paler is guilty of rape despite the fact of AAA’s mental retardation was not alleged in the informations.
Ruling:
Yes. In Article 256 of the Revised Penal Code, carnal knowledge of a woman who is a mental retardate is rape. In this circumstance, what needs to be alleged in the information and proven during trial are the facts of appellant's carnal knowledge of the victim, and the victim's mental retardation. However, such is not the situation here. In the case at bar, appellant was charged with rape through force and intimidation. For conviction to lie, it is necessary for the prosecution to prove two elements--that appellant had carnal knowledge of the victim and that such act was done through force or intimidation. Clearly, contrary to appellant's claims, an allegation in the Information of the victim's mental retardation was not necessary.
Appellant attacks the victim's capacity to testify based on her weak mental condition. However, as correctly held by the appellate court, mental retardation, by itself, does not disqualify a person from testifying. What is essential is the quality of perception, and the manner in which this perception is made known to the court. In this case, records show that despite the victim's mental retardation, she testified in a straightforward and categorical manner that appellant had raped her.
Appellant's carnal knowledge of the victim was established by her categorical narration of the incident. The victim clearly recounted how appellant pulled her in a secluded portion of the cemetery, removed her clothes, and had sexual intercourse with her. Aware that appellant had committed an act she describes as "niyotnak" and "eyot", she said that she felt pain after the incident. Her testimony is supported by the medico-legal findings of lacerations on her hymen. Lacerations, whether healed or fresh, are the best physical evidence of forcible defloration.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. MARIANO OFEMIANO G.R. No. 187155 February 1, 2010, Velasco, J.
The victim’s inability to remember the exact dates of the rape should not be taken against her. The exact time of the commission of the crime of rape is not a material ingredient of this crime.
Facts:
AAA, BBB’s eldest daughter, live with BBB and her lover accused-appellant Mariano Ofemiano. On the very night of AAA’s arrival and the following days thereafter, Ofemiano sexually molested her. AAA reported to her mother BBB what Ofemiano was doing to her but BBB did not believe her daughter. But when AAA had the chance, she told her aunt what Ofemiano was doing to her. The aunt immediately reported the matter to the authorities. RTC and the CA convicted Ofemiano with rape. Hence, this case. Ofemiano argues that it was unlikely that the complaining witness did not struggle to free herself or scream for help, considering that her mother and siblings were sleeping beside her and could easily be awakened. Likewise, accused-appellant questions the
Page 91 of 116