Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 3

People V Jaurige

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee,


vs.
NICOLAS JAURIGUE and AVELINA JAURIGUE, defendants.
AVELINA JAURIGUE, appellant
C.A. No. 384
February 21, 1946
Doctrine:
In the defense of their honor, when brutally attacked, women are permitted
to make use of all reasonable means available within their reach, under the
circumstances.
FACTS:
Nicolas and Avelina Jaurige and the deceased Amado Capina
Prior to the stabbing of the deceased Amado Capina by the two defendant, Amado
had been courting Avelina in vain and on one occasion even snatcjed a handkerchief
belonging to her as it was being washed.
September 13, 1942: Amado confessed of his love to Avelina which the latter flatly
refused , but he suddenly kissed and touched her breast. She slapped her and gave
him fist blowas, and because of this occasion, she armed herself with a long fan
knife whenever she went out for self-protection.
September 15, 1942: about midnight, Armado climbed the house of defendant and
entered the room where she was sleeping. He felt her forehead with the intention of
abusing her. She immediately screamed and asked for help to which the parents
came.
Amado asked for forgiveness, and the following morning his parents came to her
house and apologized for Armados misconduct.
Nicolas Jaurige, Avelinas father, was so angry and told them to end the
conversation as he might not be able to control himself.
September 20: Avelina heard that Amado was boasting in the neighborhood that
she asked him to elope with her
At about 8 PM of the same day, the Jaurige and Avelina went to a church to
attend a religious service. Upon seeing her, Amado sat beside her and place his
hand on her lap. She pulled out the fan knife she was carrying with her right hand
with the intention of injuring his hand that was placed on her lap.

But Amado seized her right hand holding the knife. She she quickly grabbed
the knife with her left hand and stabbed Amado once at the base of the left side of
the neck, inflicting upon him a wound about 4 and inches deep.
After the incident, barrio lieutenant Lozada advised them to go home
immediately which they followed. They locked themselves and waited for the arrival
of the policemen.
ISSUE: Is she exempt from criminal liability since she committed the act in
defense of her honor? NO.
In the defense of their honor, when brutally attacked, women are permitted to make
use of all reasonable means available within their reach, under the circumstances.

This is because a beautiful woman is said to be a jewel; a good woman, a


treasure; and that a virtuous woman represents the only true nobility. And
they are the future wives and mothers of the land.

The attempt to rape a woman constitutes an unlawful aggression sufficient to


put her in a state of legitimate defense, inasmuch as a woman's honor
cannot but be esteemed as a right as precious, if not more, than her
very existence;
And it is evident that a woman who, thus imperiled, wounds, nay
kills the offender, should be afforded exemption from criminal
liability, since such killing cannot be considered a crime from the
moment it became the only means left for her to protect her honor
from so great an outrage
As long as there is actual danger of being raped, a woman is justified in killing
her aggressor, in the defense of her honor

In the instant case, if Avelina had killed Amado Capina, when the latter
climbed up her house late at night on September 15, 1942, and
surreptitiously entered her bedroom, undoubtedly for the purpose of raping her, as
indicated by his previous acts and conduct, instead of merely shouting for help, she
could have been perfectly justified in killing him
HOWEVER, when the deceased sat by her side on the same bench, and placed
his hand on the upper portion of her right thigh, without her consent, the said
chapel was lighted with electric lights, and there were already several people, there
was and there could be no possibility of her being raped.
And when she gave Amado Capina a thrust at the base of the left side of his
neck, inflicting upon him a mortal wound 4 1/2 inches deep, causing his death a few
moments later, the means employed by her in the defense of her honor was

evidently excessive; and under the facts and circumstances of the case, she
cannot be legally declared completely exempt from criminal liability.

RULING: The defendant and appellant committed the crime of homicide, with no
aggravating circumstance whatsoever, but with at least three mitigating
circumstances of a qualified character to be considered in her favor;