Scribd
Upload
78 views3 pages

Case Digest

The petitioner was charged with rape through sexual assault of a 10-year old boy. He denied the allegations. The Court affirmed the conviction, arguing that: 1) the testimony of child victims are generally credible; 2) absence of physical evidence does not negate the possibility of penetration; and 3) the elements of rape through sexual assault were proven beyond reasonable doubt. The Court held that rape of a child is clearly child abuse, and the penalty for lascivious conduct of a victim under 12 is higher than acts of lasciviousness.

Uploaded by

Jun Jac Dol
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
78 views3 pages

Case Digest

The petitioner was charged with rape through sexual assault of a 10-year old boy. He denied the allegations. The Court affirmed the conviction, arguing that: 1) the testimony of child victims are generally credible; 2) absence of physical evidence does not negate the possibility of penetration; and 3) the elements of rape through sexual assault were proven beyond reasonable doubt. The Court held that rape of a child is clearly child abuse, and the penalty for lascivious conduct of a victim under 12 is higher than acts of lasciviousness.

Uploaded by

Jun Jac Dol
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

Ricalde v.

People of the Philippines


G.R. No. 211002. January 21, 2015
SECOND DIVISION, LEONEN
Rape through sexual assault; Penalty of rape through sexual
assault when the victim under 12 years of age

Even men can become victims of rape.

Petitioner was charged with rape through sexual assault by allegedly


committing said act to a 10-year-old boy. He denied the allegations
against him and argues: (1) the existence of reasonable doubt in his
favor as the medico-legal testified that he found “no physical signs of
external signs of recent trauma in the victim’s anus” or any trace of
spermatozoa; (2) the victim’s inconsistent testimony raises doubt on
his guilt; and (3) that assuming he committed an offense, the court
should have applied the “variance doctrine” which would have made
him guilty for the lesser offense of acts of lasciviousness.

Is accused’s guilt proven beyond reasonable doubt?

YES. The gravamen of the crime of rape is the violation of the victim’s
dignity. The degree of penetration is not important. Rape is an “assault
on human dignity.” Rape under the second paragraph of Article 266-A
is also known as “instrument or object rape,” “gender-free rape,” or
“homosexual rape.” The gravamen of rape through sexual assault is
“the insertion of the penis into another person’s mouth or anal orifice,
or any instrument or object, into another person’s genital or anal
orifice.”

In affirming petitioner’s conviction, the Court argues firstly that in a


long line of cases, the court has given full weight and credit to the
testimonies of child victims. Their youth and immaturity are generally
badges of truth and sincerity. Complainant, then only 10 years old,
had no reason to concoct lies against petitioner. The court has also
held that leeway should be given to witnesses who are minors,
especially when they are relating past incidents of abuse. Further, a
victim need not identify what was inserted into his or her genital or
anal orifice for the court to find that rape through sexual assault was
committed.

Secondly, the absence of spermatozoa or traces thereof in the victim’s


anal orifice does not negate the possibility of an erection and
penetration. This court has explained the merely corroborative
character of expert testimony and possibility of convictions for rape
based on the victim’s credible lone testimony. In any case, the
medico-legal explained that his negative finding of trauma in the anal
orifice does not remove the possibility of an insertion considering the
flexibility of the sphincter.

Lastly, no variance exists between what was charged and what was
proven during the trial. The prosecution established beyond reasonable
doubt all elements of the crime of rape through sexual assault.
Rape is rape. Rape of a child is clearly, definitely, and universally child
abuse. The imposable penalty under R.A. 7610, Section 5(b) for
lascivious conduct when the victim is under 12 years of age shall be
reclusion temporal in its medium period, a penalty higher than the
imposable penalty for acts of lasciviousness under Article 336 of the
RPC.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy