Anda di halaman 1dari 2

People vs Mangalino

Victim, 6 years old was playing at the 2-story apartment of the accused
and his wife. At the time of the incident, there were 2 people playing chess at
the sala, and another witness who testified in favor of accused. Mangalino
gave 2Php to the girl and told her not to tell anybody. He fingered her and
inserted her organ, but in vain
Despite failure to insert and the fact of many person denying the
incident as well as the non-reaction of the child, may Mangalino be convicted
of rape?

Yes, Mangalino is guilty of statutory rape.

Rape could have been perpetrated when there are indications of
a recent genital trauma. Under normal condition, the color of the vestibular
mucosa is pinkish. The doctor found the mucosa dark red. The forcible
attempt of an erected penis to have complete penetration caused the 3.5 cm
contusion prior to the hymen.
In addition, the victim being of tender age, the penetration could go
only as deep as the labia. In any case, the court has consistently held that for
rape to be committed, full penetration is not required. It is enough that there
is proof of entrance of the male organ with the labia or pudendum of the
female organ. Indeed, even the slightest penetration is sufficient to
consummate the crime of rape.
As to the childs reaction, the heart of the matter is the violation of the
childs incapacity to discern evil from good.

People vs Lim
Siblings Aida and Evelyn went to the theatre after their mother
failed to arrive at the port. There, they were called by appellant and fed them
at her house in front of the theatre. After eating, Aida was told by the
accused to take a bath and was given clothes to wear. Aida then served her
from July 1 to 15, 1986 doing chores for Lim. On the same day they arrived,
Evelyn was brought to Cebu. On July 15, when Aidas father went to the
house of the accused, Aida refused to leave. Aida was only taken with the
help of a PC.
Whether the court erred in convicting Lim despite the fact that
Aida was not detained by appellant?

Yes, Carmen Lim is acquitted.

There is no kidnapping in this case. The 2 minors voluntarily
entered the appellants residence through the front entrance. The fact of
detention which is essential in the crime charged was not clearly established.
There was no showing that there was actual confinement or restrictions of the
person of the offended party. The appellants residence has a store fronting
the street where many customers come and go. The place is busy with a
movie house in front. There is no indication that Aida was locked up,
physically restrained of her liberty or unable to communicate with anyone.
The actuation of Aida trying to escape is not proved.