A Law Each Day

Friday, May 20, 2022

More Credible Witness

This is a case of Child Trafficking punishable under Republic Act (RA) 9208 and
Child Abuse punishable by Republic Act (RA) 7610. The main issue resolved here
is the credibility of the complaining witness who is only 14 years old.

This is the case of Amy who had a misunderstanding with her mother and ran away
from home. She stayed with her friends in different barangays until she met Berto
through a common friend. Berto asked Amy if she would be willing to engage in
sexual intercourse for money to which Amy agreed because she needed money and
had no one else to depend on but herself.

The next day Berto already found her a customer. She met the customer and went
with him on board a red car. The man then asked Amy, her age so she told him she
was 18 years old, as instructed by Berto. About 7 P.M., they arrived at the house
where the man had sex with her as he fondled and touched her breast and other
parts of her body. After an hour, the man brought her back to Berto’s house and
paid her P2,000. Amy in turn paid Berto P600 and then bought some food and
went home.

Later Amy told her mother everything she had gone through. So, her mother
immediately went to the Police Station and reported the incident where Amy and
her mother executed their sworn statements. The next day Amy was examined by a
doctor in a hospital who found lesions in different parts of her hymen.

So Berto was charged in the Regional Trial Court with the crimes of Child
Trafficking and Child Abuse penalized RA 9208 and RA 7610. At the trial, Amy
testified and narrated what happened to her as above set forth. On the other hand,
Berto denied the accusations and told the court that on the day when the alleged
crimes happened, he was at a small-town lottery with his wife until evening’ His
denial and alibi was corroborated by three other women witnesses.

After trial however, the RTC convicted Berto of the crimes charged based on the
sole testimony of Amy which it found to be candid, straightforward and
unequivocal. Her claim that a sexual intercourse between her and a client had
transpired was corroborated by the medical findings of the doctor who examined
her and found lesions in her sexual organ and labia minora. So the RTC sentenced
Berto to suffer the penalty of twenty years and a fine of P1 million for Child
Trafficking and imprisonment of Ten years two months and twenty one days
minimum to seventeen years, four months and one day maximum for the crime of
Child Abuse. This ruling was affirmed by the Court of Appeals which also
imposed 6% interest on the award of damages. The CA ruled that the lone
uncorroborated testimony of the offended victim may prove the crimes as charged
because it was clear positive and categorical.
Were the RTC and CA correct? Yes said, the Supreme Court. The offense is
qualified Trafficking in Person because Amy at that time was a minor only 14
years of age at the time of the commission of the offense as evidenced by her birth
certificate who is a person below 18 years old and therefore considered as a child.

The SC also ruled that Berto is guilty Child Abuse because he is engaged in or
promoted and facilitated or induced child prostitution. A child is exploited in
prostitution when the child indulges in sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct for
money profit or any other consideration or under the coercion of influence of any
adult syndicate or group. Even if the child may seem to consent to what is being
done to her and may appear not to complain, said child is still incapable of rational
consent because flesh trade with a client requires a level of familiarity with its
ways and inner working that an untrained minor would not have stumbled into on
her own.

For qualified Trafficking in Person under RA 9208, Berto is sentence to life

imprisonment and a fine P2,000,000, plus moral damages of P500,000 and
exemplary damages of P100,000.

For Child Abuse under RA 7610, he is sentenced to 14 years 8 months, minimum

to 20 years as maximum and civil indemnity of P50,000.

All the monetary awards shall earn 6% per annum interest from finality of
judgment until full payment (Brozoto vs. People G.R. 233420, April 28, 2021).