This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2000-01-28 |
KAPUNAN, J. |
||||
| The trial court appreciated the circumstance of ignominy against appellant, apparently in view of its finding that appellant had sodomized complainant. Ignominy is defined as a circumstance pertaining to the moral order which adds disgrace and obloquy to the material injury caused by the crime.[19] This Court in previous rape cases, has held the following circumstances ignominious: where the accused ordered the complainant to exhibit to them her complete nakedness for about ten minutes before raping her;[20] where the rape was committed in front of the husband of the victim[21] or by two or more persons in view of one another;[22] where the sexual intercourse was performed in the "dog style" position;[23] and where the accused plastered mud on the victim's private part.[24] Ignominy was also present in People vs. Lozano,[25] where the victim was pregnant and whose pleas on that ground were ignored by the accused who went on to force his lust on her. The accused then tied a banana fiber around his penis and inserted it again into her vagina. Thereafter, he pulled out his organ and forced the victim to suck it. | |||||