1 week ago
6
MANILA, Philippines — The Supreme Court has determined that a victim's age and level of maturity are crucial factors in evaluating the reliability of their testimony, particularly in cases involving sexual misconduct.
In a 16-page decision promulgated on Oct. 21, 2024, the Supreme Court upheld the conviction of Resty Laconsay for lascivious conduct against a 14-year-old girl.
Laconsay was sentenced to imprisonment ranging from eight years and one day to 17 years, four months and one day.
He was also ordered to pay P165,000 in civil indemnity, damages and fines.
The case
The case centered on a 14-year-old girl, identified as AAA, who testified that she was awakened in her home by Laconsay, their neighbor.
AAA recounted that Laconsay, holding a cellphone, pulled down her blanket and touched her foot, then proceeded to caress her leg up to her groin. She then cried for help, prompting Laconsay to flee.
According to the high court, the light from the cellphone allowed AAA to identify her assailant, a claim later corroborated by her sister, identified in the case as "BBB."
Laconsay, however, denied the allegations, asserting that he was elsewhere at the time of the incident.
He further challenged AAA’s credibility, citing an initial statement to her father in which she denied Laconsay's involvement.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC) convicted Laconsay, saying that it found that all the elements of acts of lasciviousness were proven beyond reasonable doubt.
The Court of Appeals (CA) also affirmed the decision and modified the penalty and damages.
The CA agreed with the RTC that AAA clearly identified the petitioner as her attacker because his cellphone's light illuminated his face.
This identification was further supported by BBB's testimony, which also confirmed the petitioner as the perpetrator.
The CA also found both the testimonies of AAA and BBB credible, pointing out that a young girl's detailed account of sexual abuse, presented in a public trial, carries significant weight.
Moreover, the appellate court dismissed the petitioner's alibi and denial, as these defenses are easily fabricated and cannot outweigh the positive identification by reliable witnesses.
This prompted Laconsay to file a petition before the Supreme Court.
The ruling
The Supreme Court upheld the lower courts' rulings, emphasizing the clarity and credibility of AAA’s testimony, which was supported by her sister’s account.
The high court said that a child's youth and immaturity are "badges of truth and sincerity," given their vulnerability and the shame and embarrassment they would endure if their testimony were false.
“The Court has consistently held that when the offended party is a young and immature girl, her version of what happened is generally given credence because of her relative vulnerability and the shame and embarrassment that may arise if the matter about which she testified were not true,” the court said.
The Supreme Court also addressed the inconsistency in AAA’s initial statement, acknowledging that she had initially denied Laconsay's identity out of fear of upsetting her father, who had a heart condition.
She later retracted this statement and confirmed Laconsay's actions.
The offense of lascivious conduct, as defined under Republic Act. 7610, involves lascivious acts against a person aged 12 to below 18, including intentional touching of sensitive body parts with the intent to abuse, humiliate, harass, degrade, or arouse sexual desire.
The high court determined that Laconsay’s actions, specifically touching AAA’s legs and groin, constituted lascivious conduct.
