This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2008-11-28 |
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J. |
||||
| It is well settled that proof of hymenal laceration is not an element of rape, neither is a medico-legal report indispensable in the prosecution of a rape case, it being merely corroborative in nature.[55] More importantly, a freshly broken hymen is not an essential element of rape, and healed lacerations do not negate rape,[56] neither does the absence of spermatozoa negate rape.[57] In addition, absence of external signs of physical injuries does not cancel out the commission of rape, since proof of injuries is not an essential element of the crime.[58] It must be borne in mind that AAA has a mental capacity of a 4-5-year old. Most likely, she did not put up a resistance that could bring about physical injuries. Moreover, prosecution witness Dr. Eligio testified that AAA could have been "used" once or twice before in view of the presence of healed lacerations; and that if the penis is of normal size, subsequent intercourse would no longer cause lacerations. | |||||