News Ticker

Menu

Rape


ART.266A-266B.

The Anti-Rape Law of 1997 (RA 8353) now classified the crime of rape
as a Crime Against Persons. It incorporated rape into Title 8 of the
RPC.

ELEMENTS:
Rape is committed -
1. By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a woman under any of
   the following circumstances:
    a. through force, threat or intimidation;
    b. when the offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise
       unconscious;
    c. by means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority; or
    d. when the offended party is under 12 years of age or is demented,
       even though none of the circumstances mentioned above be present.

2. By any person who, under any of the circumstances mentioned in
   paragraph 1 hereof, shall commit an act of sexual assault by inserting
    a. his penis into another person’s mouth or anal orifice; or
    b. any instrument or object, into the genital or anal orifice of
       another person.

Rape committed under paragraph 1 is punishable by:
1. reclusion perpetua
2. reclusion perpetua to DEATH when:
    a. victim became insane by reason or on the occasion of rape; or
    b. the rape is attempted and a homicide is committed by reason or on
       the occasion thereof.
3. DEATH when:
    a. homicide is committed;
    b. victim is under 18 years old and offender is:
       (1) parent,
       (2) ascendant,
       (3) step-parent,
       (4) guardian,
       (5) relative by consanguinity or affinity within the 3rd civil degree,
       (6) common law spouse of victim’s parent;
    c. under the custody of the police or military authorities or any law
       enforcement or penal institution;
    d, committed in full view of the spouse, parent or any of the children
       or other relatives within the 3rd degree of consanguinity;
    e, victim is a religious engaged in legitimate religious vocation or
       calling and is personally known to be such by the offender before or
       at the time of the commission of the crime;
    f. a child below 7 years old;
    g. offender knows he is afflicted with HIV or AIDS or any other sexually
       transmissible disease and the virus is transmitted to the victim;
    h. offender is a member of the AFP, or para-military units thereof, or
       the PNP, or any law enforcement agency or penal institution, when the
       offender took advantage of his position to facilitate the commission
       of the crime;
    i. the victim suffered permanent physical mutilation or disability;
    j. the offender knew of the pregnancy of the offended party at the time
       of the commission of the crime; and
    k. when the offender knew of the mental disability, emotional disorder
       and/or physical handicap of the offended party at the time of the
       commission of the crime.

Rape committed under paragraph 2 is punishable by:
1. prision mayor
2. prision mayor to reclusion temporal when:
    a. there was use of deadly weapon, or
    b. when committed by two or more persons.
3. reclusion temporal – when the victim has become insane
4. reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua – rape is attempted and homicide is
   committed
5. reclusion perpetua – homicide is committed by reason or on occasion of rape
6. reclusion temporal – committed with any of the 10 aggravating circumstances
   mentioned above

Dividing age in rape:
1. less than 7 years old - mandatory death
2. less than 12 years old - statutory rape
3. less than 18 years old and there is relationship (e.g. parent, etc.) -
   mandatory death

Degree of Force necessary:
1. Force sufficient to consummate culprit’s purpose
2. Consider age, size and strength of parties and their relation to each other

Rape may be committed by employing intimidation(Intimidation Moral kind)

When the offender in rape has an ascendancy or influence over the girl, it
is not necessary to put up determined resistance

Rape may be proved by testimony of woman alone
1. An accusation for rape can be made with facility, is difficult to prove,
   but more difficult for person accused, though innocent, to disprove
2. Nature only two persons are involved, testimony of complainant must be
   scrutinized with extreme caution
3. The evidence for prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits, and
   cannot be allowed to draw strength from weakness of evidence for defense

Deprivation of reason contemplated by law need not be complete, mental
abnormality or deficiency is sufficient

CONSUMMATED RAPE: penetration of labia consummates the crime of rape

ATTEMPTED RAPE: intent to have carnal knowledge must be clearly shown

Multiple rape by two or more offenders each one is responsible not only for
rape personally committed, but also for rape committed by others

Rape with homicide is now a special complex crime

Rape infecting victim with gonorrhea that caused death is an illustration
of rape with homicide

Indemnity in Rape: P50,000 mandatory; if circumstances which death penalty
is authorized P75,000; Rape with homicide P100,000

Moral damages P50,000, without need of proof

Exemplary damages if crime committed with one or more aggravating
circumstances

PEOPLE vs.NEQUIA, G.R. No. 146569.10/6/03
In rape by sexual assault, the word "instrument or object" should be
construed to include a human finger.

ORDINARIO vs. PEOPLE G.R. No. 155415. 520/04 
The definition of the crime  of rape has been expanded with the enactment
of Republic Act No. 8353,  otherwise known as the Anti-Rape Law of
1997, to include not only "rape  by sexual intercourse" but now likewise
"rape by sexual assault." An  act of sexual assault under the second
paragraph of the article can be  committed by any person who, under the
circumstances mentioned in the  first paragraph of the law, inserts his penis
into the mouth or anal  orifice, or any instrument or object into the genital or
anal orifice, of  another person. The law, unlike rape under the first
paragraph of Article  266-A of the Code, has not made any distinction on
the sex of either the  offender or the victim. Neither must the courts
make such distinction.

PEOPLE vs. BALLENO G.R. No. 149075. 8/7/03
The fact that no laceration and no ruptured hymen
were found in this case, does not necessarily negate
rape. The fact that the hymen was intact upon
examination does not, likewise, belie rape, for a
broken hymen is not an essential element of rape,
nor does the fact that the victim remained a virgin
exclude the crime.

PEOPLE vs. NAVARRO, G.R. No. 137597. 10/24/03
Even the slightest contact of the penis with the labia under the
circumstances enumerated under Art. 266- A of the Revised Penal Code
constitutes rape. A flaccid penis can do as much damage as an erect
one — at least insofar as the crime of rape is concerned.

PEOPLE vs. AGSAOAY, G.R. Nos. 132125-26. 6/3/04
An unchaste woman who habitually goes out with different men may be a
victim of rape. The victim’s moral character is not among the elements
of the crime of rape. It does not negate the existence of rape.

PEOPLE vs. LALINGJAMAN, G.R. No. 132714. 6/6/01
Rape may be committed anywhere — even in places where people congregate
such as parks, along the road side, within school premises, and inside
a house where there are other occupants. The beast in him bears no
respect for time and place.

PEOPLE vs. OLAYBAR G.R. Nos. 150630-31. 101/03
The trial court has decreed the penalty of death on account of
circumstance under Article 266-A, i.e., that when "the offender knows
that he is afflicted with Human Immuno-Deficiency Virus (HIV), Acquired
Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) or any other sexually transmissible
disease and the virus or disease is transmitted to the victim," the
imposition of the extreme penalty of death would be warranted.

PEOPLE vs. DE LA TORRE G.R. Nos. 121213 & 121216-23. 1/13/04
An accused may be considered a principal by direct participation, by
inducement, or by indispensable cooperation. This is true in a charge
of rape against a woman, provided of course a man is charged together
with her. Thus, in two cases the Court convicted the woman as a
principal by direct participation since it was proven that she held down
the complainant in order to help her co-accused spouse consummate the
offense.

PEOPLE vs. ESPINOSA G.R. No. 138742 6/15/04
Absence of resistance does not mean consent. The complainant was only 14
years old when the rape took place. At her age, it could easily be
conceived that she feared the appellant and believed his threats, that
he would kill her and her family if she reported the incident to anyone.
The test is whether the threat or intimidation produces a reasonable fear
in the mind of the victim that if she resists or does not yield to the
desires of the accused, the threat would be carried out.

PEOPLE vs. MALONES, G.R. Nos. 124388-90. 3/11/04
The negative findings of spermatozoa on the medico- legal report does
not prove that no rape was committed.

PEOPLE vs. ROTE, G.R. No. 146188, 12/11/03
Where the girl is below 12 years old, the only subject of inquiry is
whether “carnal knowledge” took place. Proof of force, intimidation or
consent is unnecessary since none of these is an element of statutory
rape. There is a conclusive presumption of absence of free
consent of the rape victim is below the age of 12.

PEOPLE vs.SABARDAN, G.R. No. 132135. 5/21/04
When the original and primordial intention of the appellant in keeping
the victim in his apartment was to rape her and not to deprive her of her
liberty, the appellant is guilty only of rape under Article 335,
paragraph 1 of the Revised Penal Code, and not of the complex crime of
serious illegal detention with rape under Article 267, in relation to
Articles 335 and 48 of the Code.

PEOPLE vs. BALATAZO, G.R. No. 118027. 1/29/04
Force or intimidation may be actual or constructive. In this case, the
victim is a mental retardate. The appellant took advantage of her
condition and succeeded in having sexual intercourse with her.
Hence, he is guilty of forcible rape.

PEOPLE vs. FUCIO, G.R. Nos. 151186-95. 2/13/04
The qualifying circumstance of minority and
relationship does not include god-father relationship

PEOPLE vs. ANCHETA, G.R. No. 142431. 1/14/04
To justify the imposition of the death penalty in cases of incestuous
rape, the concurrence of the minority of the victim and her relationship
to the offender constitutes one special qualifying circumstance which
must be both alleged and proved with moral certainty.

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. MAURICIO WATIWA, G.R. No. 139400,
September 3, 2003
In Qualified Rape, the term “guardian” refers to a legal guardian as in
the case of parents or guardian ad litem or judicial guardian appointed
by the court, and not merely to an uncommitted caretaker over a
limited period of time.

PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. LAMBID G.R. Nos. 133066-67, October 1, 2003
The force or violence necessary in rape is a relative term that depends
not only on the age, size, and strength of the persons involved but also
on their relationship to each other. In a rape committed by a father
against his own daughter, the former's parental authority and moral
ascendancy substitutes for violence or intimidation over the latter who,
expectedly, would just cower in fear and resign to the father's wicked
deeds.

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. ANTHONY SANDIG G.R. No. 143124. 7/25/03
The mere assertion of a love relationship does not necessarily rule out
the use of force to consummate the crime of rape. A sweetheart cannot be
forced to have sex against her will. Definitely a man can neither demand
sexual gratification from a fiancée nor employ violence upon her, on the
pretext of love.

PEOPLE vs. JOEL AYUDA G.R. No. 128882. 10/2/03
A "sweetheart defense," to be credible, should be substantiated by some
documentary or other evidence of the relationship — like mementos, love
letters, notes, pictures and the like. Here, no such evidence was ever
presented by appellant.

PEOPLE vs. ACERO, G.R. Nos. 146690- 91. 3/17/04
A defense based on “sweetheart theory” in rape cases is not a defense at
all in rape where the victim is a mental retardate.

PEOPLE vs. OGA, G.R. No. 152302. 6/8/04
Sweetheart theory prevails as a defense in rape when it casts reasonable
doubt as to the guilt of the accused.

People v. Orita
A soldier raped a 19-year old student by poking a knife on her neck. Only
a portion of his penis entered her vagina because the victim kept on
struggling until she was able to escape. The accused was convicted of
frustrated rape.

   HELD: There is NO crime of FRUSTRATED RAPE because in rape, from the
         moment the offender has carnal knowledge of the victim, he
         actually attains his purpose, all the essential elements of the
         offense have been accomplished.

People v. Campuhan
The accused had his pants down and was on top of the 4-year old child
when the child’s mother arrived. Medical findings showed no signs of
genital injury and the victim’s hymen was intact.

    HELD: For rape to be consummated, a slight brush or scrape of the
          penis on the external layer of the vagina will not suffice.
          Mere touching of the external layer of the vagina is not the
          same as ‘slightest penetration’. Accused is only liable for
          ATTEMPTED RAPE.

People v. Atento
A 16-year old mental retardate, who has the intellectual capacity of
a 9 and 12 year old, was repeatedly raped by the accused.

    HELD: The accused was found guilty of raping a woman deprived of
          reason or otherwise unconscious, and was also held liable
          for rape under the Par. that pertains to a victim under 12
          notwithstanding the victim’s actual age. Age requirement
          was amended to refer to mental age.

People v. Gallo
Gallo was found guilty of the crime of qualified rape with the
penalty of death. The information filed against him does not allege
his relationship with the victim, his daughter, thus, it CANNOT be
considered as a qualifying circumstance.

    HELD: Special qualifying circumstances have to be alleged in the
          information for it to be appreciated. The case was reopened
          and the judgment is modified from death to reclusion perpetua.

People v. Berana
A 14-year old was raped by her brother- in-law.

    HELD: To effectively prosecute the accused for the crime of rape
          committed by a relative by affinity w/in the 3rd civil
          degree, it must be established that:
           1) the accused is legally married to the victim’s sister; and
           2) the victim and the accused’s wife are full or half-blood
              siblings. Since relationship qualifies the crime of
              rape, there must be clearer proof of relationship and in
              this case, it was not adequately substantiated.

Share This:

Post Tags:

Bigwas

I'm Bigwas, It is just an Alias. I have a degree in Criminology. I'm a blogger who loves to write about anything that cross my mind. I hope you learn something from my blog.

No Comment to " Rape "

Post Any Question Or Correction

  • To add an Emoticons Show Icons
  • To add code Use [pre]code here[/pre]
  • To add an Image Use [img]IMAGE-URL-HERE[/img]
  • To add Youtube video just paste a video link like http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0x_gnfpL3RM