Robbery With Rape and Forcible Abduction: Lessons From People v. Napud
A 2001 Supreme Court ruling explains why the absence of physical injuries does not defeat a rape charge, and how robbery with rape is punished.
Rape is a crime that is seldom committed in front of witnesses. In many cases, a conviction rests on the survivor's own account. In People of the Philippines v. Alfredo Napud, Jr., G.R. No. 123058 (September 26, 2001), the Supreme Court upheld convictions arising from a night of violence in Janiuay, Iloilo, and used the case to restate settled rules on medical evidence, alibi, and the proper penalties for rape committed in the course of a robbery.
What happened that night
Shortly after 1:00 a.m. on September 21, 1994, Alfredo Napud, Jr. went with Tomas Amburgo and Romel Brillo to Barangay Jibolo, Janiuay, Iloilo. The three first called out to the house of the spouses Esmaylita and Ernesto Benedicto, then moved to the nearby home of Esmaylita's parents, the spouses Evelyn and Manuel Cantiller.
Amburgo forced the Cantillers' door open and pinned down Manuel. Napud broke into the chicken coop, took ten chickens, and handed them to Brillo. Napud then entered the house, demanded to know if Manuel had a daughter, and ordered the 59-year-old Evelyn outside. Threatening her with a knife, he raped her.
Amburgo later took Esmaylita about a kilometer and a half away to a banana plantation and raped her. Napud then dragged her farther off and raped her as well. The two men released her at around four o'clock in the morning.
The absence of physical injuries does not negate rape
On appeal, Napud argued that he could not have raped anyone because the examining doctor found no lacerations, hematoma, or other external injuries on the victims.
The Court rejected this. Under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, the gravamen of rape is carnal knowledge of a woman by force or intimidation and against her will or without her consent. What consummates the crime is penile contact, however slight, with the labia, without the woman's consent. Lacerations on the hymen are not required, and neither are redness of the genitalia or bruising elsewhere on the body. It is settled, the Court said, that the
Have a question about this topic?
This article is general information, not legal advice. Ask ASG Legal AI for a cited, plain-language answer on your own situation — free, no sign-up.