E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly 10 of 14 http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/62543 difference between an acquittal and a conviction for crimes characterized by lewdness. Putting into context the disquisitions above and the surrounding circumstances of the case at bar, We hold that the element that criminalizes lewdness, or the criminal circumstances of its commission were not proven beyond reasonable doubt. The facts indicate that the alleged acts of accused-appellant are in the nature of amorous advances made by an ardent lover or sexual partner, at the very least. Such conclusion can be drawn from the invitation made by the purported victim an hour before the said incident. Plainly, accused-appellant went to Jacqueline's bedroom with what he had reason to think was an invitation to a tryst. There was, however, either a change of mind or a completed teasing. The RTC erred when it concluded that no testimony supported accused-appellant's allegation that an invitation was extended to him. A review of the records would reveal that accused-appellant's allegation was supported by the testimony of Ismael Olano, neither was there any categorical denial from Jacqueline that an invitation was extended. Moreover, an analysis of the other circumstances would strengthen accused-appellant's allegation that an invitation was indeed extended. First, the doors were unusually left unlocked, giving accused-appellant the impression that Jacqueline was still expecting him. Next, when accused-appellant entered the room, Sheryl simply left the room, a reaction completely contrary to that expected of a housemaid when she finds a non-member of the household in the premises at such a late hour. On the other hand, the appellate court, practically dismissing the relevance of the invitation, concluded that the same did not mean that the purported victim would allow accused-appellant to do the alleged acts. We disagree. Although We recognize that prior consent in sexual acts does not amount to consent for subsequent sexual acts, We note that the circumstances in the case at bar call for a different treatment. The invitation indicative of the purported victim's consent must be interpreted visa-vis the incidents which occurred a few minutes before and after they parted ways. The invitation was made when Jacqueline left the gathering, which was minutes after they were fondling each other and barely half an hour before the said incident From the time the invitation was extended and until the time accused-appellant entered the room, there was no significant occurrence which could have led accusedappellant to conclude that Jacqueline changed her mind. Simply put, in the span of an hour, there was no reason for accused-appellant to believe that the invitation was withdrawn. Viewed in this light, accused-appellant's initial reaction of - "Mare, pasensiya na, pasensiya na, mali ako ng inakala sa iyo" - would make sense. It would then seem that there was a continuing acquiescence on the part of the purported victim as the fondling incident by the mango tree up to the time she reached home would constitute an unbroken chain of events. The consent was only effectively and categorically withdrawn or revoked when she pushed accusedappellant away, exclaiming "putang ina mo, bakit ka nakapasok dito?" Upon witnessing Jacqueline's initial reaction, it being very clear that the consent and invitation were being revoked right then and there, accused-appellant immediately 4/21/2020, 9:21 AM