People v. Chavez

 

People v. Chavez

G.R. No. 235783

September 25, 2019

FACTS:

                The RTC and CA convicted the accused for the crime of violating Sec 5 (b) of RA 7610. On 28 April 2010, BSF Edelito A. Aranda (BSF Aranda), a member of the Barangay Security Force of Pasig·City, took the witness stand. According to BSF Aranda, on 18 May 2009, he was on duty at the time BBB's mother called them to report that Estong raped BBB. Upon receiving the complaint, BSF Aranda proceeded to the house of BBB' s mother. However, during that time, through the help of Bautista, Estong had already escaped. BSF Aranda then chased Estong to Maybunga where BSF Aranda arrested Estong. On 20 October 2010, BBB, the second victim, took the witness stand. BBB, who was then fourteen (14) years old during the alleged rape, testified that on 17 May 2009 at around 8:30 in the evening, while BBB was at her neighbor's house, AAA called her. After going down to her neighbor's house, Bautista called BBB to buy ice and softdrinks. BBB then bought the items and brought the same to the house ofEstong and Bautista. Bautista then closed the door and told BBB that they would just play cards. Estong, who was in the same room, then undressed BBB and caressed BBB's  vagina. Estong then mashed and licked BBB's breast. According to BBB, Bautista was just watching while she was being sexually abused by Estong. The daughter of t BBB's neighbor saw them and kicked the door, forcing Estong to open it.  The said neighbor then requested the barangay officials to arrest Estong. According to BBB, she and AAA were friends and neighbors. BBB alleged that the sexual abuse committed to her had affected her schooling.

ISSUE:

                Whether or not Estong is guilty of rape under Art. 266-A par. 1(a) of the RPC

HELD:

                Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 8353, defines the crime of rape, to wit: ART. 266-A. Rape, When and How Committed. -Rape is committed -1) By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances: (a) Through force, threat or intimidation; (b) When the offended party is deprived of reason or is otherwise unconscious; ( c) By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority; (d) When the offended party is under twelve (12) years of age or is demented, even though none of the circumstances mentioned above be present. ' 2) By any person who, under any of the circumstances mentioned in paragraph 1 hereof, shall commit an act of sexual assault by inserting his penis into another person's mouth or anal orifice, or any instrument or object, into the genital or anal orifice of another person.

                The action ofEstong in placing an x-rated film which both Estong and AAA watched, if any, amounts to inducement or enticement  under sexual abuse cases under RA 7610 but not to force or intimidation as an element of rape under the Revised Penal Code. In this case, what is clear is that AAA was aware of previous sexual advances by Estong and yet AAA still heeded the invitation of Estong. Moreover, AAA admitted that she repeatedly went to Estong's house whenever he would call her. Such is  not the usual conduct of a rape victim. In fact, if there were indeed previous sexual encounters against her will, under ordinary circumstances, AAA would have avoided Estong and would have stayed away from Estong' s house. The existence bf willingness on the part of the victim, AAA, shows reasonable doubt that the carnal knowledge between AAA and Estong was not un-consensual'. Accordingly, Estong must be acquitted of the charge of rape. Estong is guilty of the crime of sexual abuse under Section S(b) of RA 7610 against BBB. Bautista participated in the sexual abuse as an accomplice.