Republic of the Philippines

1ST MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURT

11th Judicial Region
City of Panabo

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff,
CRIM. CASE NO. 12345

-Versus- For: ACTS OF

LASCIVIOUSNESS

MANG KANOR,
Accused,

/************************************************************/
INFORMATION

The undersigned City Prosecutor, upon sworn complaint originally

filed by the offended party, accuses MANG KANOR of the crime of an
ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS, committed as follows:

That on or about December 23, 2015 in the City of Panabo,

Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of the Honorable Court, accused
Mang Kanor [hereinafter “Accused”] with lewd designs, did then and there,
willfully, unlawfully and feloniously smashed the breast and touched the
vagina of Aling Moana, 35 years of age, to the damage and prejudice of said
Aling Moana who suffered psychological and emotional disturbance,
anxiety, sleeplessness and humiliation.

Contrary to Article 336 of the Revised Penal Code.

City of Panabo, January 30, 2017

Cristiano C. Ronaldo
City Prosecutor

BAILBOND REOCMMENDED: PHP 100,000.00

WITNESSES:
1. Lebron James
CERTIFICATION

This is to certify that as shown by the records the undersigned, an

authorized officer, that there is a reasonable ground to believe that a crime
has been committed and that the accused is probably guilty thereof; that the
accused was informed of the complaint and of the evidence submitted
against her and was given an opportunity to submit controverting evidence.

Sergio M. Ramos
Associate Prosecution Attorney II

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this January 30, 2016, in

the City of Panabo, Philippines.
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES )
CITY OF DIGOS ) S.S
x-----------------------------------------------------x

COMPLAINT-AFFIDAVIT

I, Ayaw Kho, 24 years old, born on December 28,1992, Filipino,

single and a resident of Estrada 4th St., Digos City, after having been duly
sworn to in accordance with law, do hereby depose and state that:

1. On December April 15, 2017, at around 09:10 in the evening, I rode a

tricycle from Digos Doctor’s Hospital to go home since I work in the
hospital as a nurse and it is also the end of my shift. When we are
traversing Digos-Makar road, I was seated beside the driver and I’m
the lone passenger of that tricycle. I was having a nap because I’m
tired from work when suddenly I notice that the driver was smashing
my breast and thereafter touched my vagina (private part);

2. I immediately took of his hand when I woke up and shouted on him

while inside the tricycle. I ordered him to drop me off so I can ride
another tricycle which he acceded to. I was furious and ashamed that I
was molested inside the tricycle during that dark night;

3. When I rode another tricycle, I asked the driver to go to the City

Police Station to blotter the said incident and told him that I was
molested by a tricycle named Luod Kha, as shown in his ID inside the
tricycle. The driver assisted me in the police station;

4. I sought help from SPO1 Bea Alonzo of the Women and Children’s
Protection Desk of the Digos City Police Station who took my
statement regarding the incident (herein attached as Annex “A”);

5. I am therefore executing this affidavit freely and voluntarily in

support of my intent to file a case for ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS
against Luod Kha.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 24th of

April, 2017 in Digos City, Philippines.
 Ayaw Kho
Complainant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO ME before this 24th of January,

2016 in Panabo City, Philippines. I further certify that I have personally
examined the herein complainant and I am satisfied that he voluntarily
executed and understood his affidavit.

Allen Mark Lupera

NOTARY PUBLIC
 REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
ST
1 MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURT
11th JUDICIAL REGION
PANABO CITY, DAVAO DEL NORTE

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff,

CRIM CASE NO . 12345

- Versus - FOR: ACTS OF
LASCIVIOUSNESS
MANG KANOR,
Accused,
x-------------------------------------------x

FORMAL OFFER OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE

PLAINTIFF by the undersigned counsel and unto this

Honorable Court, most respectfully offers in evidence the following
documentary exhibits for the above titled case, to wit:

EXHIBITS DESCRIPTION PURPOSE/S

“A” Judicial Affidavit of Plaintiff To prove the fact that

Aling Moana the crime is being
Committed by the
Accused by proving all
the allegations.
“B” Judicial Affidavit of Lebron To prove the fact that the
 James conductor and witness
In the above entitled case
“C” Police blotter issued by SPO1
Maja Salvador
crime charge against the
accused is true and
actually committed as
seen by him.
To prove the fact that the
crime is being recorded
by the local police
authority.

Aforesaid exhibit are being offered to prove that the crime and
accusation against the accused was true and committed at the address
indicated to her complaint.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully prayed to

this Honorable Court that the foregoing documentary exhibits be admitted
for all purposes for which each and all said exhibits were being offered in
proving the claims of the complainant/s, and with the formal submission of
the aforesaid exhibits coupled with the testimonies of the witnesses who
testified thereon.

Panabo City, Davao del Norte

January 20, 2017

PROS. CRISTIANO RONALDO

Government Prosecutor
Panabo, Davao del Norte

ATTY. DANIEL CARVAJAL

Private Prosecutor
Dr. 2, 3rd Flr. Carvajal Bldg.
Pioneer St, Davao City
PTR 12345
IBP 12345
Commission Serial No. 123
MCLE Compliance No. 123
Roll No. 123

Copy Furnished:

Atty. Lionel A. Messi

Counsel for the Accused
PAO Panabo, Dvo Norte
 Republic of the Philippines
11th Judicial Region
1st Municipal Circuit Trial Court
Panabo City

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff,

- versus - Crim. Case No.: 12345

For: ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS

MANG KANOR,
Accused.
x-----------------------------------------x

COMMENT TO DEMURRER

The Plaintiff, PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, through the

undersigned counsel, opposes the DEMURRER OF EVIDENCE submitted
by the defendant MANG KANOR.

I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Plaintiff ALING MOANA is the former girlfriend of MANG

KANOR. On the night of December 23, 2015, Aling Moana rode a UV
express van with a terminal located in the Gmall Terminal, Davao City
bound to Tagum City. After a half day of window shopping, she decided to
take the van as a means to reacg Tagum City. Later on, in Panacan, Mang
Kanor rode the same van where Aling Moana was a passenger, at first he
didn’t notice that it was his ex-girlfriend Moana who was seated on the back
of the driver. When the passenger beside Moana alighted from the van as
Bunawan is her destination. Mang Kanor decided to transfer from 3rd row to
seat to 2nd row seat where Moana is sitting. When the van reached Lasang,
he noticed that the woman beside him sleeping was his former girlfriend
Aling Moana. When the van is entering Panabo City, particularly near the
new city hall, Mang Kanor lean on Aling Moana who was sleeping,
smashing her breast and touching her vagina. Aling Moana woke up when
she noticed that someone was touching her. Then she saw Mang Kanor
smashing her breast and touching her vagina. She pushed Mang Kanor and
shouted while inside the van. She told the driver to stop the van as she
wanted to alight from the van. But the conductor asked nicely Mang Kanor
to get out of the van. Mang Kanor reasoned that she was his former
girlfriend and told the conductor and some passenger that Aling Moana
consented to the sexual advances. Then thereafter, Aling Moana went to the
Panabo Police Station accompanied by the driver and the conductor and
reported the incident/ SPO1 Maja Salvador was assigned at the Women and
Children Protection Desk and recorded such incident.

II. ARGUMENTS/DISCUSSION

The Demurrer is completely without merit. A demurrer to evidence is

an allegation that, admitting the facts of the preceding pleading to be true, as
stated by the party making it, he has yet shown no cause why the party
demurring should be compelled by the court to proceed further. A demurrer
admits the truth of all material facts plead, giving the complaint a reasonable
interpretation, reading it as a whole and its parts in their context. The
demurrant improperly argue the facts and include facts that are not part of
the complaint and testimonial evidence presented during the trial. All
allegations must be taken as true on a demurrer. Sufficient facts were alleged
for the commission of acts of lasciviousness and the demurrant should take
these allegations as true.

The considerations in acts of lasciviousness are: (1) An accusation for

acts of lasciviousness can be made with facility; it is difficult to prove but
more difficult for the person though innocent, to disprove the same; (2) In
view of the intrinsic nature of the crime acts of lasciviousness where only
two persons are usually involved, the testimony of the complainant must be
scrutinized with extreme caution; and (3) The evidence for the prosecution
must stand or fall on its own merits and cannot be allowed to draw strength
from the weakness of the evidence for the defense.

What is decisive in acts of lasciviousness charge is the complainant’s

positive identification of the accused as the malefactor and the positive act
that the crime alleged really occurred. The plaintiff has positively identified
the accused Mang Kanor in open court. The plaintiff has pointed her finger
at the accused to positively identify him in open court. There is no better
way for a victim to get a good look at her molestor than to see him face to
face. The plaintiff has also testified that she was able to identify the accused
beside her as the van’s cabin light is on.

The prosecution has shown through clear and positive evidence that
the plaintiff was molested as it was affirmed by some passengers of the van.
And that the accused was drunk and went near the victim with a lewd desire
without having hesitation to commit such immoral act. One of the witnesses
for the prosecution is the conductor of the van. He has testified that he saw
the accused leaning on the victim touching her vagina with his right hand
while the other hand smashing her breast. When asked why he is sure that it
is the accused who committed such crime, he answered that he vividly
remember his face as he was near to the accused and the victim with a
person gap in which they are seated. It is a natural human reaction to be
shocked by the incident and he remembered it as it was his first experience
in his life that someone was molested in a public transportation.
Furthermore, the conductor, Lebron James recalled that there were only 8
passengers riding the UV Express van. It would not be unusual for a
conductor to recall every single detail of his customers, especially if there
were only few passengers inside the van and the cabin light is on.

When the testimony of a victim is consistent with the other witness,

sufficient basis exists to warrant a conclusion that the essential requisite of
acts of lasciviousness has thereby been established. The prosecution has
offered as witness, Stephen Curry, driver of the UV express van that a
commotion occurred inside the van as he was driving when the victim
shouted in front of the accused. The driver is confident that an act of
lasciviousness was committed.

To prove the acts of lasciviousness, the victim, should describe

circumstances constituting an unbroken chain of events that would indicate
that the offense was actually perpetrated by the accused. The prosecution
was able to show an unbroken chain of events through positive testimony.
The testimony of the conductor showing what time the accused and the
victim rode the van. Where the victim, at the time of her invasion, was
unconscious, it could be safely concluded that she had not given free and
voluntary consent to her defilement, whether before or during the sexual act.
The prosecution successfully discharged its purpose to show that the
testimonies of the witnesses deserve full faith and credit.

Conviction for acts of lasciviousness may be based on circumstantial

evidence when the victim cannot testify on the actual commission of the
molestation because she was unconscious or asleep when the act was
committed. There have already been cases in which conviction for acts of
lasciviousness was upheld on purely circumstantial evidence. (People vs.
Tabarangao, 303 SCRA 623). The prosecution maintains that it has shown
proof beyond reasonable doubt that the accused should be held guilty for the
crime of Acts of Lasciviousness. Albeit that fact, the quantum of evidence
for these types cases may only be through circumstantial evidence.

III. CONCLUSION

In denying a demurrer to evidence, the court need not state that the
prosecution has established “proof beyond reasonable doubt” – it is
sufficient that words of similar import, such as those stated in the instant
case (“the essential elements of the crime charged”) be present to indicate
that there was a finding of guilt beyond reasonable doubt of the accused.
(Antonio vs. CA, 273 SCRA 328). The prosecution was able to show that all
the elements for the crime charged were present. And that positive
identification of the accused was established. The prosecution has
successfully discharged its onus to show that the general considerations for
an accusation for acts of lasciviousness were in favor of the plaintiff and
against the accused.

Based upon the foregoing, the prosecution has shown that the
evidence is sufficient to prove beyond reasonable doubt, or through
circumstantial evidence, that the accused committed the crime of acts of
lasciviousness while asleep against the complainant. It is respectfully prayed
that the Honorable Court overrule the Demurrer to Evidence presented by
the accused.

Other reliefs, just and equitable, are likewise prayed for.

Panabo City, Philippines, May 5, 2016.

Atty. Sergio Ramos

Assistant City Prosecutor

Atty. Daniel Carvajal

Private Prosecutor

Copy Furnished:

Atty. Lionel A. Messi

Counsel for the Accused
 REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
1ST MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURT
11TH JUDICIAL REGION
PANABO CITY

People of the Philippines

Plaintiff, Criminal Case No. 12345

-versus- FOR:
ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS

MANG KANOR,
Accused

x-------------------------------------------------x

MEMORANDUM

Comes now complainant Aling Moana, assisted by the Prosecutor’s Office

(Panabo City), through the undersigned counsel, unto the Honorable Court,
most respectfully states:

PRELIMINARY STATEMENTS:

Accused stands charged of the crime of Acts of Lasciviousness

committed as follows:

That on or about December 23, 2015, in the City of Panabo, Davao

del Norte, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court,
the above-named accuse, did and there, deliberately, maliciously and
feloniously touch the breast and vagina of Aling Moana, which acts of
accused caused annoyance, irritation, vexation, torment, distress and
disturbance to the herein offended party, to her damage and prejudice.

Contrary to Law.

In her sworn statement the complainant stated the gist that on

December 23, 2015 at around 9 of the evening, she was on board a UV
Express passenger van. She came from Davao City and was on her way to
Tagum City, Davao del Norte.

Upon reaching Panacan, Mang Kanor boarded the van. When the van
continued its journey, accordingly, while being drunk transferred seat beside
the victim and strategically placed his left arm where he could touched
complainant’s right breast. Mang Kanor while checking his phone and
assimilating as if reading a text at the same time moving his hand in a way
that it poked and stroked her vagina. Complainant awakened by the act of
Mang Kanor. When awakened, the latter continued poking and touching
Aling Moana’s private part. Complainant covered her body with her bag but
Mang Kanor moved his hand upward and smashing her breast.

Complainant was very angry and she shouted while inside the van and
requested the conductor that she wanted to alight from the van. The
conductor asked the complainant what happened, and when he hear the act
done by accused, he became mad and ordered the accused to get out of the
van. The accused reasoned that the complainant was his former girlfriend
and she consented to the act.

Complainant then reported the incident to the Women and Children

Protection Desk of Panabo Police Station. She was accompanied by the
conductor and the driver of the passenger van. While at the police station,
she told the police that he knew the accused as he was his former boyfriend.

ISSUE:

WHETHER OR NOT THE GUILT OF ACCUSED MANG KANOR

WAS PROVEN BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT?

DISCUSSION:

Prosecution is of the humble submission that the guilt of the accused

was proven beyond reasonable doubt.

In the criminal information of the instant case, accused is charged of

deliberately, maliciously and feloniously touching the breast and vagina of
the private complainant which accordingly, caused the latter annoyance,
irritation, vexation, torment, distress and disturbance.
 In question and answer no. 5 in her sworn statement dated January 24,
2016, complainant stated that the following acts were doneon her by the
accused:

1. Accused strategically placed his left arm and maliciously touched

her right breast;
2. Accused sat beside her while checking/reading his cellphone and
maliciously moved his hand in a way that it poked and stroked her
vagina;
3. Complainant moved her bag to her lap to keep accused’s hand
away from her but he kept pushing and stroking his hand and
touching her vagina;
4. Complainant kept on covering her body with her bag but accused
moved his hand upward smashing her right breast.

In question and answer no. 6 of the same sworn statement,

complainant stated that she was very angry and shouted to the accused but
the latter smiled and ran his hands through her breast.

From the above enumerated alleged acts of the accused as stated by

the private complainant in her sworn statement, the allegation in the criminal
information that her breast was smashed and her vagina was touched by the
accused was all mentioned by her.

The allegation therefore that private complainant’s vagina was

touched by the accused, is to the mind of the prosecution, clearly proved at
all. Prosecution is of further opinion that the defense failed to prove that the
acts of the accused was consented to by the private complainant and such act
does not caused annoyance, irritation, vexation, torment, distress,
psychological and emotional disturbance, anxiety, sleeplessness and
humiliation.

Granting without admitting that the alleged acts were done by the
accuse, the act or reaction of the private complainant during the time when
her breast and vagina was touched would show that she was annoyed,
irritated, vexed, tormented, distressed, humiliated and disturbed.

Private complainant testified that there were 7 to 8 passengers in that

van when the malicious acts were committed by the accused. When she
asked if she shouted at those inside the bus to call their attention as to what
the accused was doing, she answered in the positive.

She testified that the conductor and some passenger were aware that a
malicious act occurred for the fact that she shouted at the accused and
requested to alight from the van. Private complainant won’t alight from the
van if there is no something fishy happened.

The private complainant and the witness also affirmed that the
accused was intoxicated with alcohol as he smell alcohol during that time
and while he talk, he was mumbling.

The witness said yes when he was asked whether he saw the malicious
act done by the accused but he did not react until the private complainant
shouted because he assumed that they are lovers.

Finally, private complainant accompanied by the conductor and driver

reported the alleged incident to the Panabo Police Station as evidence by the
copy of the police blotter with entry no. 12345 dated Dec. 23, 2015. The
police blotter was adopted by the prosecution as its exhibit.

In said police blotter, private complainant did mention that her breast
and vagina were touched and identified clearly the accused as her ex-
boyfriend. Considering that it was she herself who caused the for the
reporting of the alleged incident accompanied by the driver and conductor, it
is evident that the act done by the accused really occurred because if not or
consented the doing of the malicious act, she will not waste her time going
to the police station and be humiliated in public that her ex-boyfriend
touched her breast and vagina. This shows the truthfulness of the private
complainant’s allegation.

Prosecution reiterates it stand that accused touched the breast and

vagina of the private complainant.

Wherefore, in the view of the foregoing and in the interest of justice,

it is most respectfully prayed of the Honorable Court that for proving of the
prosecution that accused is guilty beyond reasonable doubt, an order of
conviction be issued.

Other relief and equitable likewise prayed for.

Respectfully submitted.

June 22, 2016. Panabo City, Davao Del Norte

Assisted by:

Prosecution’s Office
Panabo City
Davao Del Norte
 Cristiano Ronaldo
City Prosecutor

The Clerk of Court

1st Municipal Circuit Trial Court of Panabo City
Panabo City, Davao del Norte

Greetings!

Please submit the foregoing Memorandum for the kind consideration

and approval of the Honorable Court without further appearance and
argument of counsel.

Cristiano Ronaldo

Copy Furnished:

Public Attorney’s Office

Panabo City, Davao del Norte