This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2004-06-17 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| We note that the physical examination of the victims took place more than one month after the incidents subject of the complaints. Although the victims bore no evident sign of extragenital injury, and that the hymen of each victim was intact, Dr. Lee of the NBI did not rule out the commission of rape. As the law now stands, penetration of the victim's organ is not required for the commission of rape. A torn hymen is not an essential element of rape, not even when the victim is an innocent child. Medical research also shows negative findings after physical examination of the victims are of no significance, since the hymen may not be torn despite repeated coitus. In fact, many cases of pregnancy have been reported in women with unruptured hymens.[70] In a previous case we also ruled that rape occurred despite repeated intercourse over a period of four years, the complainant still retained an intact hymen without signs of injury.[71] | |||||