GR No 199522

Ricky Dinamling vs People of the Philippines

GR No 199522         June 22, 2015

Facts:

            Dinamling was charged with offenses in violation of RA No 9262. The incidents that happened were as follows: First, Dinamling would hit AAA’s head, pull her hair and kick her. Second, one night after having a drinking session with a friend, Dinamling went home to AAA, a woman whom he had an on-going five year relationship and out of which two children were borne. Upon arrival, Dinamling started to evict AAA from the house as he alleged that AAA was using the same as a whore house. Even when AAA was hesitant at first, she left when Dinamling finally threw a baby’s feeding bottle causing it to break. Third, when AAA was at the house of CCC, Dinamling came and shouted for AAA to come out and thereby insulting AAA and inflicting physical abuse while outside the house.

            The RTC rendered its decision finding Dinamling guilty of the charges against him. On appeal to CA, the latter affirmed the ruling of RTC. Dinamling then filed a petition for review on certiorari with the SC.

Issue:

            WON Dinamling should be held guilty of the offenses against RA No 9262 in finding fault on the testimony of the prosecution’s witness.

Held:

            The Court resolves to deny the petition for lack of merit. On its face, there is no reason to doubt the veracity and truthfulness of the victim AAA’s evidence. In particular, AAA’s testimony narrating the specific incidents which gave rise to the charges was clear, categorical and straightforward and, therefore, worthy of credence.

            Under Section 5 of RA No 9262, the acts of violence against women and their children is committed through causing mental or emotional anguish, public ridicule or humiliation to the woman or her child, but not limited to, repeated verbal and emotional abuse, and denial of financial support or custody of minor children or access to the woman’s child or children.

            As found out, Dinamling has committed acts of physical abuse, emotional abuse, and psychological abuse when he was in an on-going relationship with AAA. The testimony of the AAA as a lone witness to the actual perpetration of the act, as long as it is credible, suffices to establish the guilt of the accused because evidence is weighed and not counted.

            The Court emphasized also that Section 5 (i) of RA No 9262 penalizes forms of psychological violence, as well as physical, sexual, and economic violence against the woman. Psychological violence is a means employed by the perpetrator, while mental or emotional anguish is the effect sustained by the offended party.

            In order to establish psychological violence as an element of the crime, it is necessary to show proof of the commission of any of the acts enumerated in Section 5 (i) or similar such acts. And to establish mental or emotional anguish, it is necessary to present the testimony of the victim as such experiences are personal to this party. Apparently, all of these were complied in the case at bar.