VRO LAW

Statutory r**e

Statutory Basis:

The offense of statutory r**e is provided for under Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code ( formerly Art 335) as amended by Republic Act No. 8353 or the Anti-R**e Law of 1997:

Article 266-A. R**e: When And How Committed. - R**e 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 otherwise unconscious;



c) By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority; and



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.

Elements:

The two elements of statutory r**e are: (1) that the accused had carnal knowledge of a woman; and (2) that the woman is below twelve years of age. [People vs Dalisay, G.R. No. 133926, August 6, 2003]

Consent immaterial for woman below 12 years old.

If the woman is under 12 years of age, proof of force and consent becomes immaterial. [F]orce is not an element of statutory r**e [since] the absence of a free consent is presumed when the woman is below such age. Conviction will therefore lie, provided s*xual in*******se must be proven. [see People vs. Mahinay, G.R. No. 122485, February 1, 1999]

In statutory r**e, mere s*xual congress with a woman below twelve years of age consummates the crime of statutory r**e regardless of her consent to the act or lack of it. The law presumes that a woman of tender age does not possess discernment and is incapable of giving intelligent consent to the s*xual act. Thus, it was held that carnal knowledge of a child below twelve years old even if she is engaged in prostitution is still considered statutory r**e. The application of force and intimidation or the deprivation of reason of the victim becomes irrelevant. The absence of struggle or outcry of the victim or even her passive submission to the s*xual act will not mitigate nor absolve the accused from liability. [People vs Jalosjos, G.R. Nos. 132875-76, November 16, 2001]

But if the woman is 12 years of age or over at the time she was violated, as in this case, not only the first element of s*xual in*******se must be proven but also the other element that the perpetrator's evil acts with the offended party was done through force, violence, intimidation or threat needs to be established. Both elements are present in this case. [see People vs. Mahinay, G.R. No. 122485, February 1, 1999]

Guidelines in Evaluating Evidence of Age of the Victim

The Court has specified the guidelines in determining the sufficiency of evidence of the victim's age as an element of the crime or as a qualifying circumstance, thus:

1. The best evidence to prove the age of the offended party is an original or certified true copy of the certificate of live birth of such party.

2. In the absence of a certificate of live birth, similar authentic documents such as baptismal certificate and school records which show the date of birth of the victim would suffice to prove age.

3. If the certificate of live birth or authentic document is shown to have been lost or destroyed or otherwise unavailable, the testimony, if clear and credible, of the victim's mother or a member of the family either by affinity or consanguinity who is qualified to testify on matters respecting pedigree such as the exact age or date of birth of the offended party pursuant to Section 40, Rule 130 of the Rules on Evidence shall be sufficient under the following circumstances:

a. If the victim is alleged to be below 3 years of age and what is sought to be proved is that she is less than 7 years old;

b. If the victim is alleged to be below 7 years of age and what is sought to be proved is that she is less than 12 years old;

c. If the victim is alleged to be below 12 years of age and what is sought to be proved is that she is less than 18 years old.

4. In the absence of a certificate of live birth, authentic document, or the testimony of the victim's mother or relatives concerning the victim's age, the complainant's testimony will suffice provided that it is expressly and clearly admitted by the accused.

5. It is the prosecution that has the burden of proving the age of the offended party. The failure of the accused to object to the testimonial evidence regarding age shall not be taken against him.

6. The trial court should always make a categorical finding as to age of the victim.

[see People vs. Pruna, c, October 10, 2002; and People vs Jalosjos, G.R. Nos. 132875-76, November 16, 2001]

Source:mylegalwhiz.com

Perspective of Law Office