Scribd
Upload
2K views2 pages

LINA TALOCOD Petitioner vs. People of The Philippines, Respondent GR No 250671

The petitioner was accused of violating the Anti-Child Abuse Law for shouting invectives at AAA, an 11-year old child. However, the court acquitted the petitioner, finding that she had no intention of debasing the child's worth and dignity when she acted in anger after being upset by AAA's behavior. To be guilty of child abuse, there must be specific intent to demean the child. Shouting insults in the heat of anger without such intent is not sufficient to constitute child abuse under the law.

Uploaded by

Crystal Matibay
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
2K views2 pages

LINA TALOCOD Petitioner vs. People of The Philippines, Respondent GR No 250671

The petitioner was accused of violating the Anti-Child Abuse Law for shouting invectives at AAA, an 11-year old child. However, the court acquitted the petitioner, finding that she had no intention of debasing the child's worth and dignity when she acted in anger after being upset by AAA's behavior. To be guilty of child abuse, there must be specific intent to demean the child. Shouting insults in the heat of anger without such intent is not sufficient to constitute child abuse under the law.

Uploaded by

Crystal Matibay
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

LINA TALOCOD, PETITIONER vs.

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondent


G.R. No. 250671, October 7, 2020

FACTS

● In the morning of November 5, 2011, AAA, an 11-year old child was playing with other
children by throwing sand and gravel on the road thus bothering passing motorists. AAA
berated his playmates and told them to stop.

● EEE who was upset by the reprimand, reported the incident to her mother who
confronted AAA about his behavior, pointing finger at him and shouted: “Huwag mong
pansinin yan. At putang ina yan. Mga walang Kwenta yan. Mana-mana lang yan!”

● AAA went home and relayed the incident to his mother, BBB. AAA was allegedly
traumatized as a result of the petitioner’s utterance of harsh words and expletives.

ISSUE

● Whether or not, the petitioner is guilty of violating Section 10(a), Article VI of R.A. No.
7610 (Anti-Child Abuse Law).

RULING

● ACQUITTED. The act of petitioner in shouting invectives against private complainants


does not constitute child abuse under the foregoing provisions of R.A. No. 7610.
Petitioner had no intention of debasing the intrinsic worth and dignity of the child. It was
an act of carelessness done in the heat of anger.
● For one to be held criminally liable for the commission of acts of Child Abuse under
Section 10(a), Article VI of RA 7610, “the prosecution (must) prove a specific intent to
debase, degrade, or demean the intrinsic worth of the child: otherwise, the accused
cannot be convicted.
● Citing Bongalon v. People (Bongalon), where it was held that the laying of hands against
a child, when done in the spur of the moment and in anger, cannot be deemed as an act of
child abuse under Section 10(a) of RA7610, absent the essential element of intent to
debase, degrade, or demean the intrinsic worth and dignity of the child ,as a human
being on the part of the offender, viz:

Not every instance of the laying of hands on a child constitutes the crime of child abuse
under Section 10(a) of Republic Act No. 7610. Only when the laying of hands is shown
beyond reasonable doubt to be intended by the accused to debase, degrade or demean the
intrinsic worth and dignity of the child as a human being should it be punished as child
abuse.

You might also like