If Ramon Tulfo were to be believed, these cases I copied in toto from his column at the Philippine Daily Inquirer's website are one of the weirdest legal cases in the world.***
The Court of Appeals’ dismissal of a rape case against a teenage boy on account of his being a minor sends chills down the spine of parents who have daughters.
The boy, who was 13 at the time, was charged with raping a 6-year-old girl.
But the appellate court said he should not be charged since the Juvenile Justice and Welfare System Law of 2006 says that persons 15 years old and below cannot be charged in court.
If my granddaughter was raped by a 15-year-old boy and I see the boy going scot-free for his crime, I would take the law into my own hands.
I’m sure many parents and grandparents feel the same way I do.
* * *
The Court of Appeals sides with a 13-year-old rapist, but it has affirmed the conviction of a complete paralytic who was charged with rape.
The paralytic I’m referring to is Ronald “Jeff” Quesada, who can’t even go to the toilet without being bodily carried by two persons.
What kind of logic do those honorable justices of the Court of Appeals have?
* * *
I’m trying to look for the ramp model who was allegedly raped by a Luzon congressman on the campaign trail during the 2004 elections.
The model was allegedly a member of a bevy of beauties hired by the congressman to campaign for him.
I was told that the model was given a huge amount and promised more in a second tranche so she would not file charges.
Perhaps I can convince the model to press rape charges against the congressman since I was told that the promised second tranche has not been given.
On second thought, why should I do the convincing since even her boyfriend could not persuade her to file the rape case?***
I would love to include a case I heard in the news long time ago about a security guard who filed a rape case against a fellow guard in Baguio City. But I can't find it anymore.
Photo from thegrumpyowl.wordpress.com
No comments:
Post a Comment