CRIMINAL LAW MOCK BAR QUESTIONNAIRE WITH ANSWERS

SYLLABUS ITEM #11

1. The Anti-Rape Law of 1997 reclassified rape from a crime against honor, a private offense, to that of a crime
against persons. Will the subsequent marriage of the offender and the offended party extinguish the criminal
action or the penalty imposed? Explain.
Suggested Answer: Yes. By express provision of Article 266-C of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, the
subsequent valid marriage between the offender and offended party shall extinguish the criminal action or the penalty
imposed, although rape has been reclassified from a crime against chastity, to that of a crime against persons.

2. Eduardo Quintos, a widower for the past 10 years, felt that his retirement at the age of 70 gave him the
opportunity to engage in his favorite pastime voyeurism. If not using his high-powered binoculars to peep at
his neighbor's homes and domestic activities, his second choice was to follow sweet young girls. One day, he
trailed a teenage girl up to the LRT station at EDSA-Buendia. While ascending the stairs, he stayed one step
behind her and in a moment of bravado, placed his hand on her left hip and gently massaged it. She screamed
and shouted for help. Eduardo was arrested and charged with acts of lasciviousness. Is the designation of the
crime correct?
Suggested Answer: The crime should be Other Acts of Child Abuse under Section 10 of RA. 7610, par. b of Section 3 that
refers to child abuse committed by any act, deeds or words which debases, degrades or demeans the intrinsic worth and
dignity of a child as a human being. In relation thereto, Section 10 provides criminal liability for other acts of child
abuse, cruelty or exploitation, or for other conditions prejudicial to the child's development. The reaction of the victim,
screaming for help upon the occurrence of the touching indicates that she perceived her dignity was being debased or
violated.

3. Aling Maria received an urgent telephone call from Junior, her eldest son, asking for P2,000.00 to complete his
semestral tuition fees preparatory to his final exams in Commerce. Distressed and disturbed, she borrowed
money from her compadre Mang Juan with the assurance to pay him within 2 months. Two months lapsed but
Aling Maria failed to settle her obligation. Mang Juan told Aling Maria that she does not have to pay the loan if
she will allow her youngest 10-year old daughter Annie to work as a housemaid in his house for 2 months at
Pl,000.00 a month. Despite Aling Maria's objection, Mang Juan insisted and brought Annie to his house to
work as a maid.

Was a crime committed by Mang Juan when he brought Annie to his house as maid for the purpose of
repaying her mother's loan?

Suggested Answer: Yes. Mang Juan committed the crime of exploitation of child labor which is committed by any
persons who under the pretext of reimbursing himself of a debt incurred by an ascendant, guardian or person entrusted
with the custody of a minor, shall, against the latter's will, retainh im in his service (Art. 273, Revised Penal Code). He
can also be liable as an employer for the employment of a minor below 15 yrs. old, under Sec. 12, Art. 8 of RA. 7610.

4. When is embracing, kissing and touching a girl's breast considered only unjust vexation instead of acts of
lasciviousness?
Suggested Answer: The acts of embracing, kissing of a woman arising either out of passion or other motive and
the touching of her breast as a mere incident of the embrace without lewd design constitutes merely unjust vexation
(People us, Ignacio. CA GRNo. 5119-R, September 30, 1950). However, where the kissing, embracing and the touching of the
breast of a woman are done with lewd design, the same constitute acts of lasciviousness (People vs. Percival Gilo, 10 SCRA
753).

5. Mrs. MNA was charged of child abuse. It appears from the evidence that she failed to give immediately the
required medical attention to her adopted child, BPO, when he was accidentally bumped by her car, resulting in
his head injuries and impaired vision that could lead to night blindness. The accused, according to the social
worker on the case, used to whip him when he failed to come home on time from school. Also, to punish him
for carelessness in washing dishes, she sometimes sent him to bed without supper.

She moved to quash the charge on the ground that there is no evidence she maltreated her adopted child habitually. She
added that the accident was caused by her driver's negligence. She did punish her ward for naughtiness or carelessness,
but only mildly. Is her motion meritorious? Reason briefly.

Suggested Answer: No, the motion to quash is not meritorious. It is not necessary that movant's maltreatment of a child
be "habitual" to constitute child abuse. The wrongful acts penalized as "Child Abuse" under Rep. Act No. 7610 refers to
the maltreatment of the child, "whether habitual or not": this is expressly stated in Sec. 2(b) of the said Law. Mrs. MNA
should be liable for child abuse.


MCQ