People of the Philippines v.

Rustico Bartolini Facts: The Regional Trial Court of Bislig City, Surigao del Sur charged appellant Rustico Bartolini with three counts of rape for raping his two daughters. .Criminal Case No.99-1-2083-H On or about 7:00 in the morning sometime in the month of March 1995, appellant Bartolini with lewd and unchaste designs, willfuly, unlawfully and feloniously rape his daughter,[AAA], by means of force and intimidation, against his daughters will, to the damage and prejudice of the said [AAA], who was then 14 years old. Criminal Case No.99-1-2084-H On or about March 2,1998 at 8:00 in the morning, Bartolini with lewd and unchaste designs and by means of force and intimidation, wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously have carnal knowledge or rape his own daughter,[BBB], against the latters will, to the damage and prejudice of [BBB]. Criminal Case No.99-1-2085-H On or about 3:00 in the afternoon sometime in the month of March 1994, Bartolini with lewd and unchaste designs and by means of force and intimidation, wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously rape his daughter [BBB],16 years old against the latters will, to the damage and prejudice of the said [BBB]. Upon arraignment, appellant Bartolini pleaded not guilty to the three charges filed against him. According to him, he could not have raped BBB because that day he had been out to deliver shrimps, prawns and crabs to a certain Benjamin Castanas. He claimed that he arrived there at 4:20 am and stayed there for breakfast and left for home at 10:00 am. Issue: Whether or not the crime committed was incestuous rape Ruling: The court held that the qualifying circumstance of relationship of BBB to appellant was specifically alleged and proven during the trial but the specific averment of the victims age at the time the offense against her was committed is absent in the information. Such an omission committed by the prosecutor is fatal in the imposition of death penalty against the offender. The requirement for complete allegations on the particulars of the indictment is based on the right of the accused to be fully informed of the nature of the charges against him so that he may adequately prepare for his defense especially so if the case involves the imposition of death penalty in case accused iss convicted. Thus, even if the victim is below 18 years old and the accused is her parent, but these facts are not alleged in the information, or if only one is so alleged as in the instant case, their proof as such by evidence offered during trial cannot imposed death penalty. Settled is the rule that when the issue is one of credibility of witnesses, appellate courts will not disturb the findings of the trial courts considering that the latter are in a better position to decide the question as they have heard their deportment and manner of testifying during trial. These findings will not ordinarily be disturbed by an appellate court absent any clear showing that the trial court has overlooked, misunderstood,or misapplied facts or circumstances of weight or substance which could very well affect the outcome of the case.

In Criminal Case Nos. 99-1-2083-H and 99-1-2084-H, appellant Rustico Bartolini is found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of two counts of Qualified rape and is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua in lieu of death while in Criminal Case No. 99-1-2084-H, appellant is found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape and is sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua.

People of the Philippines v. Melchor Cabalquinto FACTS: The Regional Trial Court of Quezon City convicted Melchor Cabalquinto on two counts for the rape of his eight-year old daughter, AAA. Melchor Cabalquinto by means of force and intimidation, wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously undress AAA,his own daughter, 8 years old, a minor,on two occasions by putting himself on top of her , inside the room of their residence and have carnal knowledge with her against her will and without her consent. Issue: Whether or not the posting of the full text of decisions in cases involving child abuse on the Supreme Court Web Page violates right to privacy of the aggrieved parties

Ruling: Yes, the OSG said that posting of full text of decisions in cases involving child abuse on the SC webpage violates right to privacy. To determine whether or not the subject matter falls within the constitutionally-protected zone privacy, it must be shown that the persons expectation of privacy is reasonable. The reasonableness of such expectancy depends on a two-part test: (1) whether by his conduct, the individual has exhibited an expectation of privacy (2) whether this expectation is one that society recognizes as reasonable. The fact that the aggrieved child may have consented, through a parent or guardian, to a public hearing of the case does not negated the expectation of privacy which the child may later invoke because child victims cannot be presumed to have intended their initial agreement to extend beyond the termination of their case to the posting of the decision reached by the Court on the Web Page. Moreover, such an expectation of privacy is reasonable considering the various statutes and rules which reveal the intention of the State to maintain the confidentiality of information pertaining to child abuse cases. The OSG invites the Courts attention to a New Jersey statute which provides that all court documents which state the name, address and identity of a child victim in certain sexual assault, endangering the welfare and abuse and neglect cases should remain confidential. The name of the victim shall not appear in any public record; rather, initials or a fictitious name shall appear. The offenses covered by the law include aggravated sexual assault, sexual assault, aggravated criminal sexual contact, endangering the welfare of children and any action alleging an abused or neglected child. The court shall withhold the real name of the victim-survivor and shall use fictitious initials in representing her in cases involving violence against women and children. Moreover, the personal circumstances of the victim-survivors or any other information tending to establish or compromise their identities as well as those of their immediate family or household members shall not be disclosed.

People of the Philippines v. Joselito Pascua FACTS: The Regional Trial Court charged appellant Joselito Pascua with the crime of rape Sometime on August 2000 in the City of San Pablo, Joselito Pascua with lewd design and by means of force and intimidation did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously have carnal knowledge of one Alma Agapay against her will and consent. The mental disability of the victim shall be appreciated as aggravating circumstance. In his defense, appellant denied the charge against him. He testified that he does not know Alma or her mother, Trinidad. However, he admitted seeing her sometimes in the public market but did not pay much attention to her as he was always busy working at the Philippine National Railways train station. Issue: What are the Guidelines in reviewing rape cases Ruling: The court held that in reviewing rape cases, they are guided by three well-entrenched principles: a. That an accusation of rape can be made with facility; it is difficult to prove but more difficult for the person accused, though innocent to disprove ; b. That in view of the intrinsic nature of the crime which usually involves two persons, the complainants testimony must be scrutinized with extreme caution and c. That the evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of evidence of the defense. Accordingly, the primordial consideration in a determination concerning the crime of rape is the credibility of the complainants testimony. In rape cases, the accused may be convicted solely on the testimony of the victim, provided it is credible, natural convincing and consistent with human nature and the normal course of things. On the other hand, the mental condition of the victim cannot be appreciated to aggravate the crime and to warrant the death penalty. Under Article 266(10) of the Revised Penal Code, the rape shall be qualified when the offender knew of the mental disability, emotional disorder and/or physical handicap of the offended party at the time of the commission of the crime. In this case, the allegation of mental disability is insufficient. Thus, appellant can only be convicted of simple rape.

People of the Philippines v. Jerry Nazareno Facts: The Regional Trial Court convicted Jerry Nazareno for raping her two minor daughters. That sometime and between January 1992 up to December 6,1998, in Barangay Codon, Municipality of San Andres, Province of Catanduanes, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused by means of force, violence and intimidation did then and there wilfully, unlawfully, feloniously and repeatedly made sexual intercourse with his daughter BBB at the age of 7 through 14 years old against her will. That from sometime in January 1990 up to December 1998 in barangay Codon, Municipality San Andres, Catanduanes, and within the jurisdiction of the Honorable Court, the said accused, being the father of the complainant, did then and there, wilfully, feloniously and criminally had repeatedly sexual intercourse with her daughter AAA, then five years old up to the time when she was 15-years old against her will. In his defense, the accused denied that he raped his two daughters. He asserted that he sometimes beat his children but he could not molest them for the fact that they are his daughters. He said that the reason that his daughters filed a complaint against him is that his father-in-law wants him to be incarcerated for the reason that from the very start, he was opposed to his marriage to her daughter. Issue: Whether or not the crime committed was rape by sexual assault Ruling: Yes, the court held that the crime committed by appellant was rape by sexual assault, punishable under Article 266-A, paragraph 2 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 8353. The said law provides: Article 266-A Rape; when and how committed.-Rape is committed 1. By a man who should have carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances: a. Through force, threat, 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 years of age or is demented, eventhough 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 anothers mouth or anal orifice, or any instrument or object, into the genital or anal orifice of another person.