RAPE CASE NANAMAN?!
when the victim is under the custody of the police or military
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ALFONSO BALGOS,
Alias "Lupog," accused-appellant.
RAPE AND ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS
Art. 335. When and how rape is committed. — Rape is committed by
having carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following
circumstances:
1. By using force or intimidation;
2. When the woman is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; and
3. When the woman is under twelve years of age, even though neither of
the circumstances mentioned in the two next preceding paragraphs shall
be present.chanrobles virtual law library
The crime of rape shall be punished by reclusion perpetua.
Whenever the crime of rape is committed with the use of a deadly
weapon or by two or more persons, the penalty shall be reclusion
perpetua to death.chanrobles virtual law library
When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the victim has become
insane, the penalty shall be death.chanrobles virtual law library
When rape is attempted or frustrated and a homicide is committed by
reason or on the occasion thereof, the penalty shall be likewise
death.chanrobles virtual law library
When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, a homicide is committed,
the penalty shall be death.
RA 7659:
The death penalty shall also be imposed if the crime of rape is committed
with any of the following attendant circumstances:
1. when the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age and the
offender is a parent, ascendant, step-parent, guardian, relative by
consanguinity or affinity within the third civil degree, or the
common-law-spouse of the parent of the victim.
2.
authorities.
3. when the rape is committed in full view of the husband, parent,
any of the children or other relatives within the third degree of
consanguinity.
4. when the victim is a religious or a child below seven (7) years
old.
5. when the offender knows that he is afflicted with Acquired
Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) disease.
6. when committed by any member of the Armed Forces of the
Philippines or the Philippine National Police or any law
enforcement agency.
7. when by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the victim has
suffered permanent physical mutilation."
Special Aggravating Circumstance: Inherent in the crime, special
circumstances. n. in criminal cases, particularly homicides, actions of the
accused or the situation under which the crime was committed for which
state statutes allow or require imposition of a more severe punishment.
Special Aggravating Circumstance: Rape Case with Regard to a Child Below
7yrs. of age.
ISSUE: WON the penalty of
A rape case was filled against Alfonso Balgos alias “Lupog”(Respondent).
Where it was alleged that Criselle Fuentes(victim) a person of age 6 was
raped by the respondent. He was penalized under Article 355 sub. Par. 3 of
the revised penal code as amended by Act 7659.
On October 8, 1995 at around 2 in the afternoon, the victim went to the
house of the respondent in order to have a play date with the nieces of the
respondent who were, Michelle and Waday. The house of the respondent
was situated by the river as such the three were playing by the window of
the house in order to watch crabs in the vicinity. After sometime the
respondent asked her nieces to go buy food and upon leaving the house
the respondent unzipped his river and and forced the victim to hold his
penis. The two returned and the respondent then asked the two to buy
more food in order to pursue his carnal desires. The respondent tried twice
to fulfil his carnal desires but to no avail. It is important to note that the
respondent was only able to put his penis inside the opening of the
victim’s vagina. He was only deterred from the act when he saw that his
nieces were returning; where he made the victim put her underwear and
covered her with a blanket. Upon the return of the two the victim was still
covered in the blanket.
The victim did not tell anyone of the crime but fortunately for her two
playmates informed her brother of the said incident; which was then
relayed to the mother of the victim. The mother of the victim asked her
two playmates with regard to the incident and it was confirmed that the
crime of rape indeed happened and upon confronting the victim herself
she cried and attested that she was raped by the respondent.
The incident was reported to the Baranggay Captain, where he was
accompanied by two of his officials in order to apprehend the victim for
questioning. The respondent denied the allegations and the victim in turn
recounted the story for everyone to hear. The Baranggay captain in turn
told the victim and the to direct themselves to the proper authorities.
Medico Legal has proven that there was a lacerations on the victim’s
genitals.
The respondent however contested the fact that he did not use his penis
to pursue his sexual desires but it was his finger that was used. He further
supported his claim by saying that if it was his genitals there would have
been a wider circumference in laceration.
The trial court believed the testimony of the victim; The trial court also
noted four circumstances that pointed towards the criminal culpability of
the accused-appellant. First, his admission that he asked Michelle and
Waday to buy food and leave the house showed his intention to create an
opportunity to commit his "beastly act" against Crisselle.[28] Second, his
disposition to play with young girls revealed his libidinal predilection"
which he wanted gratified even on young girls like Crisselle.[29] Third, his
admission that he was sexually aroused exposed his lustful desire for
flesh.[30] Fourth, his failure to show that Crisselle was motivated by ill-will
in fabricating her accusation lent credence to the testimony of his
victim.[31] In the light of these observations, the trial court convicted the
accused-appellant of the crime of rape and imposed the supreme penalty
of death.
Held: The trial is court correct in imposing the supreme penalty of death
on the accused-appellant. Under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code as
amended by Section 11 of Republic Act No. 7659,[55] the penalty of death
shall be imposed if the crime of rape is committed against a child below
seven (7) years of age. In the present case, there is no dispute that the
victim was six (6) years of age when the accused-appellant had carnal
knowledge with her. The victim's age was duly established by the
prosecution, through the testimony of the victim's mother, Criselda
Fuentes, and further corroborated by Crisselle's Certificate of Live Birth.
Four members of the Court maintain their position that Republic Act No.
7659, insofar as it prescribes the death penalty, is unconstitutional;
nevertheless they submit to the ruling of the Court, by a majority vote,
that the law is constitutional and that the death penalty should be
accordingly imposed.