Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 2

Chuaquico Jett I. day.

She only learned that her daughter was raped

after the medical examination.
Title 11: Crimes against Chastity
Defenses version: Appellant testified on his behalf.
People vs. Amaro: Forcible Abduction with Rape He denied abducting and raping AAA but admitted
that he brought the latter to his house when AAA
FACTS: Amaro was charged with forcible abduction
approached him asking for bread first, before begging
with rape
him to take her with him because she was always
Prosecutions version: AAA, who was then only 7 being scolded by her parents. Upon reaching his
years old, testified that she was walking on her way house, appellant entrusted AAA to the care of
home from school when she passed by Boots & Maya Florante Magays sister. Appellant then went back to
store. She met a man, whom she later identified in town to attend to his work as a mason. He only
court as the appellant, who asked her to buy decided to go back home when he heard his name on
cigarettes. After buying the cigarettes and handing it the radio in connection with the disappearance of a
to appellant, the latter gave her bread and banana cue. girl. He picked up the child in Barangay Tagburos
After eating them, she suddenly became dizzy and and brought her to her house in Buncag. AAA walked
passed out. AAA was brought to the house of alone towards her house.
appellant. When she regained consciousness, she saw
RTC and CAs decision: Convicting him of the crime
appellant naked. Appellant then undressed her, kissed
her on the lips and neck, and inserted his penis into
her vagina, causing her to feel pain. AAA cried but ISSUE: Whether or not the prosecution was able to
appellant covered her mouth with his hand. AAA was establish from the testimony of the complainant the
detained for six (6) days and was raped five (5) times guilt of the accused for the crime offorcible abduction
by appellant. AAA clarified that appellants penis with rape beyond reasonable doubt.
touched the outer portion of her vagina.
RULING: Yes, his guilt was sufficiently established
On the last day of her detention, AAA and appellant beyond reasonable doubt
went out of the house. On their way to San Jose, a
certain Aunt Ruthie saw AAA walking and The elements of the crime of forcible abduction, as
immediately picked her up and brought her to the defined in Article 342 of the Revised Penal Code,
police station. Appellant noticed AAA being taken are: (1) that the person abducted is any woman,
away but he did nothing. regardless of her age, civil status, or reputation; (2)
that she is taken against her will; and (3) that the
The prosecution also presented AAAs mother, BBB, abduction is with lewd designs. On the other hand,
to corroborate her daughters testimony. BBB rape under Article 266-A is committed by having
narrated that on 26 March 1998, she was in the house carnal knowledge of a woman by: (1) force or
when AAA came home at around noon time to eat. intimidation, or(2) when the woman is deprived of
Thereafter, AAA told BBB that she had to go backto reason or is unconscious, or (3) when she is under
school. At around 5:00 p.m. when AAA had not come twelve years of age.
home, BBB went to the school to look for her. When
the teacher told BBB that that school children had The prosecution was able to prove all these elements
already been sent home, she proceeded to the police in this case. The victim, AAA was a seven (7) year-
station to report her missing daughter. After six (6) old girl who was taken against her will by appellant
days, AAA was found by BBBs former employer who told her that he knew her mother and that he
who brought her to the police. Upon receiving a call would bring her home. At her tender age, AAA could
from the police, BBB immediately went to the police have easily been deceived by appellant. The
station and saw her daughter. BBB observed that employment of deception suffices to constitute the
AAA was still in shock and could not walk properly forcible taking, especially since the victim is an
so she was brought to the doctor on the following unsuspecting young girl. It is the taking advantage of
their innocence that makes them easy culprits of change of clothes as she was in her school uniform
deceiving minds. The presence of lewd designs in and later to a Jollibee outlet. He then brought her to
forcible abduction is established by the actual rape of his sisters house in x x x where he raped her inside a
the victim. bedroom. Afterwards, a certain couple Putay and
Tessie talked to Cayanan and she was brought to the
The fact of sexual intercourse is corroborated by the barangay office where she was asked to execute a
medical findings that the victim suffered from document stating that she voluntarily went with
laceration on the upper and lower part of the Cayanan. It was the latters mother and sister-in-law
introitus. who brought her home later that evening. She told
her mother and brother of the incidents only after her
The presence of lewd intentions is established by the
classmate Adriano informed her family of what
conduct of the accused during the abduction. When
happened in school and of the rape incidents. AAA
the girl is defiled, the forcible abduction becomes the
testified that she did not immediately tell her family
means to commit the rape, and since rape is the more
because she was still in a state of shock.
serious offense, under Article 48 of the Revised Penal
Code, the complex crime of forcible abduction with Defenses version: Cayanan interposed the sweetheart
rape is committed and penalized by reclusion defense.
perpetua, the penalty proper to rape.
RTC and CAs decision: Convicting him of the crimes
People vs. Cayanan: Rape absorbed Forcible charged
abduction if the real objective of the offender is to
rape the victim CAs ruling: Record shows that Cayanan forced AAA
to have sex with him on February 1, 2001 and
FACTS: Cayanan is charged with two crimes: threatened her and her family with physical harm.
Qualified rape and Forcible abduction with rape The testimony of Adriano, meanwhile, corroborated
AAAs testimony that Cayanan forcibly took her by
Prosecutions version: Cayanan took advantage of
the school campus gate on February 26, 2001 and
15-year old AAA on February 1, 2001 while the
thereafter raped her. The defense failed to show any
victim was alone inside her house in x x x, Bulacan.
reason why the prosecutions evidence should not be
Cayanan is the victims brother-in-law, being married
given weight or credit.
to her older sister, and the couple lived in a nearby
house. AAA was asleep when she felt someone ISSUE: Whether or not he should be guilty for the
caressing her. It turned out to be Cayanan. He then crimes charged
started kissing her and told her to remove her shorts.
When she refused, Cayanan forcibly took it off and RULING: Yes, however for the crime of forcible
after the latter took off his own under garment, he abduction with rape should be dropped
inserted his organ into her genitalia. Cayanan, who
had a knife with him, threatened to kill AAA if she The Court, however, finds that Cayanan should be
resisted and informed anybody of the incident. convicted only of Qualified Rape in Criminal Case
No. 1498-M-2001. Forcible abduction is absorbed in
On February 26, 2001, AAA was about to enter the the crime of rape if the real objective of the accused
school campus with her friend Armina Adriano is to rape the victim. In this case, circumstances show
(Adriano) when Cayanan arrived on a tricycle driven that the victims abduction was with the purpose of
by his uncle, Boy Manalastas. Cayanan then pulled raping her. Thus, after Cayanan dragged her into the
AAA towards the tricycle. She tried shouting but he tricycle, he took her to several places until they
covered her mouth. They alighted somewhere and reached his sisters house where he raped her inside
boarded a jeep. He brought her to a dress shop in x x the bedroom. Under these circumstances, the rape
x, Bulacan where he asked someone to give her a absorbed the forcible abduction.