Previous 4 / 15 Next

Decision 4 G.R. No. 229862 ZZZ further narrated that at around 10:00 a.m. on April 12, 2006, DDD and AAA were eating breakfast after they had finished washing clothes. AAA then went up the second floor of their house and slept, while he was then installing an electric bulb in the kitchen. When BBB arrived, she opened the door at once. 20 AAA "was surprised because [BBB] was shouting as if she was dreaming." 21 BBB asked ZZZ if he raped AAA, which he denied. He was around 12 meters away from AAA, holding a hammer on the window. BBB then went to AAA and pinched her "bulog[.]" 22 Afterwards, BBB grabbed a hose and whipped ZZZ, who was able to parry the strike. BBB then went out with AAA only to return the following morning. 23 ZZZ claimed that BBB was influenced by her cousins to accuse him. 24 The cousins were allegedly mad at him and wanted BBB and him to separate since he was "not a useful person." 25 On cross-examination, ZZZ stated that the house's window and door were always shut because the house was still unfinished. He restated that when BBB arrived, she saw him standing by the window and AAA sitting at a corner of their house. He reiterated that BBB whipped him with a hose. 26 He added that when he saw AAA crying, he thought that she would not pinpoint him as her rapist "because her conscience [was] bothered. " 27 On August 8, 2008, AAA executed her Affidavit of Recantation and Desistance, 28 praying that the rape case be dismissed. She claimed that her declarations during the direct and cross-examinations "were done under duress and that she was afraid of the authorities at that time[.]" 29 Maintaining that ZZZ did not rape her, she claimed that she was forced by a certain EEE to file the rape case. On cross-examination, AAA testified that she was not compelled by the prosecutor to testify. Contrary to her Affidavit, she also admitted that she was not under duress when she was presented as a witness. She recalled crying during the direct examination and pointing to ZZZ as her rapist when she was asked. EEE, she added, was their neighbor. 30 20 21 22 23 24 2s 26 27 28 29 30 Id. at 43. Id. Id. Id. Id. Id. Id. Id. Id. at 43 and rollo, p. 6. Id. at 43. Id. f

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

People v. ZZZ

Jurisprudence

Case number: G.R. No. 229862

Date of decision: Jun 19, 2019

Year of decision: 2019

GBV Case Type

Child Rape
Minor
Rape

Nature of the case: The accused, who is the common-law spouse of the victim’s mother by means of force and intimidation, had carnal knowledge of the victim, a minor fourteen (14) years old, against her will in Bayawan City, Negros Oriental. The accused argues that the crime of statutory rape was not proven because the prosecution failed to sufficiently establish victim’s minority, which the trial court also noted. He further avers that since the case does not involve statutory rape, the presence of force, intimidation, threat, fraud, or grave abuse of authority must be established in the alleged crime's commission. He contends that the prosecution failed to show these circumstances. The court is not convinced. The accused’s argument that force, intimidation, threat, fraud, or grave abuse of authority was not present has no leg to stand on. The Court ruled that abuse of moral influence is the intimidation required in rape committed by the common-law father of a minor. Thus, the accused is found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of rape, as punished under Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code. He is sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua.

Summary of outcome: The offender is sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua and ordered to pay the victim 1) Seventy-Five Thousand Pesos (P75,000.00) as moral damages; (2) Seventy-Five Thousand Pesos (P75,000.00) as civil indemnity; and (3) Seventy-Five Thousand Pesos (P75,000.00) as exemplary damages. All damages awarded shall be subject to interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the finality of the Decision until its full satisfaction.

Observatory: Gender-Based Violence

Ponente: LEONEN, J.:

Long title: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. ZZZ, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.DECISION

Geolocation 1

Latitude: 9.384035

Longitude: 122.789224

: Geolocation 1

Primary Documents

ZZZ.pdf
English
Download View

Commission on Human Rights

Select target paragraph3

People v. ZZZ

Primary Documents

Notifications