Case Summary (G.R. No. 116682)
Facts of the Case
On the evening of March 4, 1979, Maxiline Bautista left her home to attend a Bible study approximately 100 meters away. En route, she encountered her uncle, Edwin Loredo, who persuaded her to accompany him to a nearby house under the pretense of sharing an important message. Once inside the house, which was dark and vacant, Loredo allegedly attacked her, embraced her, and forced her to have sexual intercourse despite her objections. Maxiline claimed she could not resist due to Loredo's physical strength and threats.
Defense of the Accused
Edwin Loredo admitted to having sexual intercourse with Maxiline but denied the allegations of rape, asserting that they were in a romantic relationship since December 1978. He narrated that their intimacy included prior consensual encounters. Loredo emphasized that the sexual activity on March 4 was consensual, supported by claims that Maxiline was even proactive during the encounter.
Evidence and Judicial Findings
The trial court relied primarily on the testimony of Maxiline, which was critically examined. The evidence showed inconsistencies in her account, including the absence of any outcry for help during the act, despite nearby locations from which she could have sought assistance. Moreover, the prosecution failed to present corroborative evidence, and the court questioned the credibility of Maxiline's statements, noting contradictions regarding her claims of coercion and emotional distress.
Analysis of the Testimony
Maxiline's testimony was scrutinized against legal standards for establishing non-consent. The court found it improbable for her to have willingly entered and remained in a location with Edwin if she genuinely felt threatened. Additionally, her delayed report to authorities, framed by fear of her father’s reaction, raised questions about the legitimacy of her claims.
Role of the Solicitor General
The Solicitor General recommended reversing the trial court's decision, arguing that the circumstances and evidence pointed to a lack of non-consen
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 116682)
Case Overview
- Court: Second Division of the Supreme Court of the Philippines
- Citation: 216 Phil. 167
- Date: July 31, 1984
- G.R. No.: L-64167
- Parties:
- Plaintiff-Appellee: The People of the Philippines
- Defendant-Appellant: Edwin Loredo
- Context: This case involves an appeal from the Regional Trial Court of Iloilo City regarding a conviction for the crime of rape.
Facts of the Case
- Incident Date: March 4, 1979
- Victim: Maxiline Bautista
- Left home to attend a bible study approximately 100 meters away.
- Encountered Edwin Loredo, who, claiming to have something to tell her, persuaded her to accompany him to a nearby house.
- Location of Incident: A dark, fenced lower portion of a bamboo house owned by Mildred Casquete.
- Sequence of Events:
- Inside the house, Edwin embraced Maxiline and insisted on having sexual intercourse.
- When she attempted to escape, he threatened her with a knife and restrained her.
- Despite her initial resistance, he successfully overpowered her and committed the act.
- Victim's Response:
- Maxiline did not report the incident immediately due to fear of repercussions from her father.
- She later sought medical attention for uterine bleeding, which was unrelated to the incident.
Defense's Position
- Defendant's Testimony:
- Edwin Loredo admitted to having sexual intercourse with Maxiline but claimed it was consensual and that they were sweethearts.
- He described their relationship, including prior sexual encounters and plans for marriage.
- Key Points from Defense:
- The alleged rape occurred in a well-lit area with potential witnesses nearby.
- The initial invitation to the house was consensual wit