People v.

Silvano
G.R.No. 127356 ll Jun. 29, 1999 ll Per Curiam

Victim is under 18 years of age at the timeof the rapev.

307 332
Tiangco
Persons and Family Relations

KEYWORDS:
Sex as punishment
DOCTRINE:
It is the duty of the father to give her loveand affection,
advice and counsel,companionship and understanding.
The Coderecognizes the authority of parents to
disciplinetheir children but not to the extent that thefather
would force her daughter to have sexwith him under the
mask of punishment.
FACTS:
The father, David Silvano y Hayag had beensexually
abusing her daughter, Sheryl, since shewas 13 years old.
Three days after she hadturned 16, and on the pretense of
punishmentfor coming home late, the father raped
hisdaughter. She went to school the next day anddid not
come home for two weeks until shereported the incident
to the authorities.

The offender is the parent

proven by thecertificate of live birth of Sheryl.The father is

guilty beyond reasonable doubtand is given death penalty
with P50,000 asmoral damages andP75,000 for civil
indemnity.Arguments of the defendant and the answers of
the court: (most to least relevant in thediscussion)1.

He denied allegation because he providesher financial,

material and educationalsupport.

non
-sequitur, the fact that

ISSUE:

hesupports her does not give him the licenseto rape her. It
is the obligation of parents tosupport their children (Arts
195 and 220FC). The ratiocination of the father is aproduct
of a sick mind of a sick parent. Thestatus of being a
parents entails the naturalright and duty not only of the
caring for andrearing of unemancipated children butabove
all the development of their moral,mental and physical
character and well-

WON the appellant is guilty of qualifiedrape punishable by

death penalty? YES.

--being. The Family Code recognizes theparents rights and

duties to impose

HELD:

discipline but it does not authorize them toforce their

children to copulate with them,or invade their honor and
violate theirdignity nor does it give them the license
toravish the product of their marital union.The appellant
provided her with perversedand distorted moral and
spiritual guidanceto the extent that brainwashing her that
sexwith the father is part of sex education. It isthe duty of
the father to give her love andaffection, advice and
counsel,companionship and understanding, but shegot
humiliation and destruction of her life,good future and the
very essence of herexistence.2.

The fundamental presumption of innocenceenjoyed by

appellant was overcome with therequisite quantum of
proof; his guilt was provenbeyond reasonable doubt. Sec
11 of RA 7659imposes death penalty to qualified rape
committed by the victims parent. The follow
ingelements of rape were proven:i.

Sexual congress

the testimony of thevictim and the medical report stating

thatshe is no longer a virginii.

The victim offered only a token of resistance: this cannot

be construed as
voluntary submission to appellants desires.
The law does not impose upon a victim theb

With a woman

urden of proving resistance. The latters

- his own daughter

moral ascendancy over the formersubstitutes for violence

or intimidation. Awoman at her age can only cower in
fearand into submission.3.

iii.

By force and without consent

- substituted
by the moral ascendancy of the offenderover the victimiv.

That the mother is using the rape case tofurther her

separation with her husband.

Untenable for no mother in her right mindwould subject

her daughter to humiliation,disgrace and trauma,
attendant to theprosecution of rape, if she were
notmotivated solely to incarcerate the person

The testimony of the girl could not convicthim (credibility)

the presumption that ayoung and decent Filipina would

nothumiliate herself unless that is the truth forit is her
natural instinct to protect herhonor.6.

People v. Silvano
G.R.No. 127356 ll Jun. 29, 1999 ll Per Curiam
308 332
Tiangco
Persons and Family Relations
responsible for the defilement of herdaughter.4.

That he could not have raped her in a smallroom where

her other brothers aresleeping. That it is highly improbable
that aseries of acts constituting the rape lastedfor 40
minutes. (And really lame excuse thatit is only 10:30
where people are not yetsoundly asleep)

lacks merit for lust is norespecter of time and place. This is

a trivialmatter as lust may be consummated in amatter of
seconds or it could last hoursdepending on the parties
andcircumstances.7.

The behavior of her daughter after thealleged incident is

not consistent with thebehavior of a raped victim.

Without meritfor different people react differently.

Thefailure of the victim to immediately revealthe
incestuous acts is not indicative of fabricated charges. Her
shame and genuinefear of what the appellant might do to
herbrothers and mother prevented her fromreporting the
incident.5.

The irregularity regarding his arrest because

of the invitation from the police station
he waived any objection when hesubmitted himself under
the jurisdiction of the court. Furthermore, he was
convictednot on the basis of what was illegallyobtained by
the police, but on the credibletestimony of the witness.