Cases (Cohabitation ) Flashcards
Accused Jesus Edualino was charged with consummated rape of a pregnant woman. Prosecution presented the following witnesses: (1) Rowena Nantiza – victim/complainant; Aileen Yayen – eyewitness; and Dr. Rogelio Divinagracia – medico-legal. On the other hand, accused-appellant relies on alternative defenses of alibi and consent on the part of complainant. While accused- appellant’s defense before the trial court alleges that he had left the scene of the incident together with defense witness Calixto Flora, he alternatively raises before this Court the contention that the elements of the crime of rape have not been established. Accused-appellant raises the issue of the character of complainant Rowena Nantiza. It is argued that a responsible and decent married woman, who was then three (3) months pregnant, would not be out at two (2) o’clock in the morning getting drunk much less would a decent Filipina ask a man to accompany her to drink beer. It is contended that complainant merely concocted the charge of rape to save her marriage since her husband had found out that she was using drugs and drinking alcohol and even made a spectacle of herself when she tried to seduce accused-appellant on 11 May 1994 while she was under the influence of drug and alcohol.
ISSUE: Whether or not the accused may question his conviction by assailing the character of the victim.
It should be pointed out that the moral character of a rape victim is immaterial in the prosecution and conviction of the accused. The Court has ruled that prostitutes can be the victims of rape. In the present case, even if accused-appellant’s allegations that the victim was drunk and under the influence of drugs and that she (the victim) cannot be considered a decent and responsible married woman, were true, said circumstances will not per se preclude a finding that she was raped. The Court has repeatedly held that a medical examination of the victim is not a prerequisite in prosecutions for rape. A person accused of rape can be convicted solely on the testimony of the victim provided the testimony is credible, natural, convincing and otherwise consistent with human nature and the course of things
