View full case

PEOPLE v. MARCELINO “SENOY” ERARDO

FACTS:

The case involves the accused-appellant Marcelino "Senoy" Erardo who was charged with rape committed against Julie Ann Kiam, a mentally-retarded woman. According to the prosecution's witness, Jennylyn Cordero, she saw accused-appellant following Julie Ann into a thicket and witnessed him pulling his pants up while Julie Ann was naked from the waist down. Jennylyn confronted accused-appellant, and they later brought Julie Ann to her house where her mother, Delia Cordero-Kiam, was informed of the incident. Delia had Julie Ann examined by Dr. Hurley de los Reyes, who found hymenal lacerations on her vagina estimated to be one to two weeks old. The victim's mother testified that accused-appellant admitted to engaging in sexual intercourse with Julie Ann but claimed he did not hurt her. The victim, Julie Ann Kiam, testified that accused-appellant "iyot" (penetrated) her and that it was painful. Accused-appellant testified that he never saw Julie Ann on the afternoon of June 1, 1993, and claimed innocence. He presented an alibi defense, stating that he was working during the alleged incident.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether the trial court erred in not taking into consideration the testimony of Dr. Hurley de los Reyes regarding the old hymenal lacerations of the victim.

  2. Whether the trial court erred in convicting the accused of rape committed on the afternoon of June 1, 1993.

RULING:

  1. First Issue The Supreme Court held that the claim that another person is responsible for the old healed hymenal lacerations prior to the date of examination does not negate the commission of rape by the accused. The absence of fresh lacerations does not prove that the victim was not raped.

  2. Second Issue The Supreme Court found no error in the trial court's decision to convict the accused of rape. It held that the defense of alibi was weak and could not prevail over the victim’s positive identification of the accused as the perpetrator. The witness's credibility was upheld, and the accused's flight from the town after the incident was considered indicative of guilt.

PRINCIPLES:

  1. Credibility of Witnesses Testimonial evidence in court is afforded more weight than affidavits, and the demeanor of the witness is crucial in determining credibility.

  2. Defense of Alibi Alibi is an inherently weak defense and cannot prevail over positive identification made by the victim and prosecution witnesses.

  3. Mental Retardation in Rape Carnal knowledge of a mentally retarded woman, even if done with her consent, constitutes rape because a mental retardate cannot validly give consent.

  4. Hymenal Lacerations in Rape Cases The presence or absence of fresh hymenal lacerations is not determinative of whether rape has occurred.

  5. Flight Indicative of Guilt Flight of the accused after the commission of an offense, if unexplained, tends to show that they are the perpetrator of the crime.

  6. Judicial Discretion and Credibility The trial court’s assessment of the credibility of witnesses is generally upheld on appeal, given its unique position to observe witness demeanor during trial.

  7. Indemnity Indemnity to the victim in rape cases involving young girls or mental retardates is typically standardized in prevailing jurisprudence.