This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2003-02-12 |
BELLOSILLO, J. |
||||
| We do not agree. The presentation of a medical certificate and the testimony of the examining physician, although not essential in the prosecution of rape, substantiated the allegations and reinforced the testimony of the complainant. The tightness of the vaginal canal does not negate rape. The complainant's vagina was found to be elastic, given her age. Thus even with the insertion of an object like the penis in the vaginal canal, the examining physician concluded that the same would still return to its normal size.[21] The presence of spermatozoa is not a prerequisite for conviction of rape, the important consideration being the penetration of the pudenda by the male organ, no matter how slight, and not the emission of seminal fluid.[22] | |||||