people v perez digest

Upload: kat-jolejole

Post on 03-Apr-2018

487 views

Category:

Documents


2 download

TRANSCRIPT

  • 7/29/2019 People v Perez Digest

    1/2

    83 PHIL 314People vs. Perez

    FACTS: Accused Perez was charged with treason and rape. The accused kidnapped several women in order topresent them to a Japanese Commander to satisfy the latters carnal pleasure against the will of the women. In someinstances, the accused himself raped several women.

    HELD/RATIO: The accused was acquitted in relation to the crime of treason; but, he was found guilty in relation to thecrime of rape. The acts of the accused in relation with the Japanese didnt directly and materially tend to improve thewar efforts or to weaken the power of the United States. Moreover, intent of disloyalty which is essential in thecrime of treason is lacking. Nevertheless, the accused can be held liable for the several counts of rape hecommitted.

    Facts: Seven counts of treason were filed against SusanoPerez aka Kid Perez, the accused, for recruiting,apprehending, and commandeering women (EribertaRamo, Eduarda Daohog, Eutiquia Lamay, and FlavianaBonalos) against their will to satisfy the immoral purposeand sexual desire of Colonel Mini, andotherJapanese of Officers.

    Only counts 1,2,4,5,6 were substantiated. In the 4th and5th counts, the accused personally assaulted and

    abused two of the offended girls.

    Susano Perez was convicted of treason and sentenced todeath by electrocution by the Peoples Court.

    Issue: Whether or not the acts of the accused constitute acrime of treasonHeld

    : NO. There is a dilemma in trying to draw a linebetween treasonable and untreasonable assistance, sincethe scope of adherence to the enemy is comprehensive,and its requirement indeterminate, but as a general ruleacts providing aid and comfort to the enemies areconsidered treasonable when the aid and comfort

    http://scradigests.blogspot.com/2009/12/83-phil-314.htmlhttp://scradigests.blogspot.com/2009/12/83-phil-314.htmlhttp://scradigests.blogspot.com/2009/12/83-phil-314.html
  • 7/29/2019 People v Perez Digest

    2/2

    rendered are directed to them as enemies not as mereindividuals. To lend or give money to an enemy as a friendso that he may buy personal necessities is not technically

    traitorous, but to lend or give money to an enemy toenable him to buy arms or ammunition to use againstthe government of the giver is treason.

    The act of the accused of providing the enemieswith women andentertainment, boosting their (theenemies) morale and making their lives more pleasant, isnot treason. Sexual and social relations

    withthe Japanese did not directly and materially tend toimprove their war efforts or weaken the power ofthe government. Any favourable effect towardthe Japanese that the accused might have made wastrivial, imperceptible and unintentional. Intent of disloyaltyis a vitalingredient in the crime of treason, which in theabsence of admissionmay be gathered from the nature

    and circumstances of each case. In this particular case, itwas not evident that the intent of the accused in providingthe enemies with women was to help them overthrowthegovernment.