Title
Supreme Court
People vs. Erardo
Case
G.R. No. 119368
Decision Date
Aug 18, 1997
Accused convicted of raping a 12-year-old mentally retarded girl; alibi rejected, old hymenal lacerations noted; reclusion perpetua upheld, indemnity increased.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 119368)

Charges and Initial Proceedings

Marcelino Asenoya Erardo was charged with the crime of rape as per an information filed on June 21, 1993. The charge claimed that Erardo had carnal knowledge of Julie Ann Kiam, who was deprived of reason, in violation of the law. During his arraignment on May 3, 1994, Erardo entered a plea of not guilty, and after a trial, the Regional Trial Court of San Jose found him guilty of the crime, sentencing him to reclusion perpetua and ordering him to pay P40,000. The case was subsequently appealed.

Testimonies and Evidence

The prosecution's primary witness, Jennylyn Cordero, who is the victim's aunt, testified that she witnessed Erardo following Julie Ann to a thicket where she discovered him exposing his sexual organ while Julie Ann was sitting naked from the waist down. Cordero questioned Erardo about his actions, but he ignored her and fled the scene. Following this confrontation, Cordero took Julie Ann home, and a doctor’s examination took place on June 3, revealing hymenal lacerations consistent with previous sexual trauma.

Further corroborating testimony came from Julie Ann’s mother, Delia Cordero-Kiam, who recounted Erardo's admission to committing sexual acts against her daughter when he visited her to seek forgiveness. Medical examinations reported by Dr. Hurley de los Reyes indicated that Julie Ann's injuries could have been caused by a male organ. The prosecution also presented testimony indicating Julie Ann's mental retardation.

Defense Assertions

In his defense, Erardo claimed an alibi, asserting that he was working at a salt farm during the time of the alleged crime. He denied having seen Julie Ann that afternoon and contended that there was no animosity between him and the victim's family prior to the incident. Furthermore, his brother testified that an attempt to settle the case for P100,000 was made, but Erardo refused to pay.

Trial Court Findings

The trial court found the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses credible, particularly that of Julie Ann, noting her clarity in the examination. The court noted that rape can be established even if physical injuries were not evident, and that former hymenal lacerations do not negate the possibility of rape having occurred.

Legal Standards and Rulings

Rape is defined under the Revised Penal Code as having carnal knowledge of a woman under various circumstances, including when the woman is deprived of reason. Given that Julie Ann was a minor and mentally incapacitated, her consent was not legally valid, rendering any sexual act committed against her as rape.

The court emphasized that the defense’s argument regarding the lack of fres

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.