Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 86 views

    23 - People v. Lazaro - Co

    Uploaded by

    Selynn Co
    Bienvenido was charged with forcible abduction with rape of an 11-year old girl, AAA. On August 31, 1995, Bienvenido brought AAA to his house and raped her, threatening her not to tell anyone. AAA's uncle later found out about the ordeal after questioning her changing behavior. Bienvenido claimed AAA's testimony was inconsistent because she gave varying dates of the crime. However, the court held that the exact date of a rape is not material and discrepancies must refer to significant facts, not mere details like time. The mention of an earlier date was just an inadvertence by the prosecutor since the complaint stated the 31st.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    23 - People v. Lazaro - Co

    Uploaded by

    Selynn Co
    86 views1 page
    Bienvenido was charged with forcible abduction with rape of an 11-year old girl, AAA. On August 31, 1995, Bienvenido brought AAA to his house and raped her, threatening her not to tell anyone. AAA's uncle later found out about the ordeal after questioning her changing behavior. Bienvenido claimed AAA's testimony was inconsistent because she gave varying dates of the crime. However, the court held that the exact date of a rape is not material and discrepancies must refer to significant facts, not mere details like time. The mention of an earlier date was just an inadvertence by the prosecutor since the complaint stated the 31st.

    Original Title

    23_People v. Lazaro_Co

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Bienvenido was charged with forcible abduction with rape of an 11-year old girl, AAA. On August 31, 1995, Bienvenido brought AAA to his house and raped her, threatening her not to tell anyone. AAA's uncle later found out about the ordeal after questioning her changing behavior. Bienvenido claimed AAA's testimony was inconsistent because she gave varying dates of the crime. However, the court held that the exact date of a rape is not material and discrepancies must refer to significant facts, not mere details like time. The mention of an earlier date was just an inadvertence by the prosecutor since the complaint stated the 31st.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    86 views1 page

    23 - People v. Lazaro - Co

    Uploaded by

    Selynn Co
    Bienvenido was charged with forcible abduction with rape of an 11-year old girl, AAA. On August 31, 1995, Bienvenido brought AAA to his house and raped her, threatening her not to tell anyone. AAA's uncle later found out about the ordeal after questioning her changing behavior. Bienvenido claimed AAA's testimony was inconsistent because she gave varying dates of the crime. However, the court held that the exact date of a rape is not material and discrepancies must refer to significant facts, not mere details like time. The mention of an earlier date was just an inadvertence by the prosecutor since the complaint stated the 31st.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    You are on page 1of 1

    CO, SELYNN

    Article III. Section 14. Right to be Informed. Date of the Commission of Crime.

    People v. Lazaro – 596 SCRA 587

    Bienvenido was charged before the RTC with the complex crime of Forcible Abduction with Rape of AAA, an 11
    year old girl. On the morning of 31 August 1995, while AAA was walking on her way to school, Bienvenido, whom
    AAA called Lolo, stopped her and brought her to his house. There, he raped her, and threatened her so that she
    would not tell anyone. On 29 September 1995, worried about AAAs changing demeanor, AAAs uncle, BBB,
    insistently questioned her. It was then that AAA revealed her ordeal.

    ISSUE: W/N Bienvenido’s claim that AAAs testimony was riddled with material inconsistencies, since she gave
    varying dates of the commission of the crime can be taken in his favor? No.

    HELD:

    Firstly, the exact date of the commission of rape is not material. In rape cases, the time of commission of the crime
    is not a material ingredient of the offense. In this connection, this Court also ruled that in rape cases, victims of rape
    hardly retain in their memories the dates, number of times, and manner in which they were violated. In the same
    vein, to be material, discrepancies in the testimony of the victim should refer to significant facts that are
    determinative of the guilt or innocence of the accused, not to mere details that are irrelevant to the elements of the
    crime, such as the exact time of its commission in a case of rape.

    Secondly, the mention of 12 August 1995 as the date of commission of the crime was a mere inadvertence on the
    part of the public prosecutor. The complaint-affidavit mentions 31 August 1995 as the date when AAA was raped.
    There was only one instance in her whole testimony when 12 August 1995 was mentioned.

    You might also like