Title
People vs. Pusing y Tamor
Case
G.R. No. 208009
Decision Date
Jul 11, 2016
Accused-appellant convicted of qualified rape and child abuse against his 12-year-old foster daughter with intellectual disability; Supreme Court affirmed guilt, increased penalties, and awarded damages.

Case Summary (A.M. No. RTJ-04-1863)

Incident Description

The events in question occurred on or about April 5, 2004. Pusing allegedly committed multiple acts of sexual abuse against AAA, who was twelve years old at the time and had the mental capacity of a nine-year-old. Prosecution claims include allegations of rape, sexual assault, and child abuse, detailing Pusing’s actions of forcefully engaging in sexual acts with AAA.

Legal Charges

Pusing was charged with four counts related to the abuse of AAA, comprising two counts of qualified rape under Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code and two counts of committing acts of lasciviousness under the Special Protection of Children Against Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act (Republic Act No. 7610). The charges were framed to highlight the aggravating factors of AAA's minority and Pusing’s role as her guardian at the time of the offense.

Prosecution Evidence

The prosecution presented five witnesses, including AAA, her cousin BBB, and two doctors. Testimonies established that AAA disclosed the abuse to BBB after being removed from Pusing's custody. Medical examinations corroborated AAA's allegations of sexual abuse, revealing physical injuries consistent with rape.

Defense Presentation

Pusing and CCC, his spouse, provided the defense testimonies. Pusing claimed he treated AAA as his daughter and was unaware of her intellectual disability, suggesting that the charges stemmed from a scheme by BBB to take possession of Pusing's property. CCC supported Pusing's assertion by indicating their absence during the alleged incidents due to family obligations.

Court Decisions

The Regional Trial Court found Pusing guilty beyond a reasonable doubt on two counts of qualified rape and one count of child abuse, ultimately sentencing him to reclusion perpetua without parole in one instance, and other penalties in the additional cases. The acquittal on one criminal charge was based on insufficient evidence.

Appellate Review

Upon appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed the Regional Trial Court's decision, upholding the conviction and penalties imposed on Pusing. The courts concluded that the evidence presented established a credible case of aggravated sexual offenses against AAA.

Examination of Credibility

Both the Regional Trial Court and the Court of Appeals found AAA's testimony credible, emphasizing that a victim, especially a minor, making such allegations must be treated with utmost seriousness. The courts referenced jurisprudence affirming that the credibility of the victim's testimony is pivotal in sexual abuse cases.

Findings on Legal Standards

The appeal reviewed the legal basis supporting the convictions, focusing on the definitions of rape under the Revised Penal Code, particularly the provisions addressing minors. The elements necessary for proving rape and lascivious conduct have been established beyond reasonable doubt against Pusing based on AAA’s psychological assessment and BBB's corroborating te

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.