This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2003-10-17 |
PER CURIAM |
||||
| Without the penetration, the crime committed is either attempted rape or acts of lasciviousness.[14] Attempted rape, however, requires that the offender commence the commission of rape directly by overt acts but does not perform all the acts of execution by reason of some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance.[15] In the present case, nothing prevented appellant from consummating the act and it would seem that he was already contended with rubbing his penis against the complainant without actually inserting it into her private part. Thus, appellant cannot be convicted of attempted rape but only of acts of lasciviousness for the June 1999 incident. | |||||
|
2003-06-26 |
CARPIO, J. |
||||
| This Court has repeatedly noted in rape cases that it is common for a girl of tender age to be intimidated by the mildest threat against her life.[18] Rape is committed when the accused intimidates the victim who submits to sexual intercourse out of fear for her life or personal safety.[19] Intimidation is addressed to the mind of the victim, and being subjective, its presence cannot be tested by any hard and fast rule. Instead, intimidation should be viewed in the light of the victim's perception and judgment at the time of the commission of the rape.[20] Danly described appellant's acts of intimidation on her as follows: Q Could you tell the court how you were able to go to Pasig? | |||||