That advantage be taken of superior strength, or means be employed to weaken the defense. (Art. 14, par. 15, RPC)
When is there abuse of superior strength?
Abuse of superior strength is present whenever there is a notorious inequality of forces between the victim and the aggressor/s that is plainly and obviously advantageous to the aggressor/s and purposely selected or taken advantage of to facilitate the commission of the crime. Evidence must show that the assailants consciously sought the advantage, or that they had the deliberate intent to use this advantage. To take advantage of superior strength means to purposely use force excessively out of proportion to the means of defense available to the person attacked. The appreciation of this aggravating circumstance depends on the age, size and strength of the parties. (Valenzuela vs. People, G.R. No. 149988, August 14, 2009)
Examples:
1. When a man with a deadly weapon attacked an unarmed and defenseless woman (sex and weapon)
2. Strong man ill-treated a child or old person, or sick person (age, size, strength)
3. When the offender uses a powerful weapon which is out of proportion to the defense available to the offended party (weapon)
4. Simultaneous attack by two persons with revolvers against a defenseless person. (weapon, strength)
5. The aggressors were fully armed police officers and the deceased was defenseless and in the influence of liquor. (weapon, strength)
Does superiority in number mean that the offenders abused their superior strength?
● The mere fact that there were two persons who attacked the victim does not per se constitute abuse of superior strength. There must be evidence of (1) notorious inequality of forces between the offender and the offended party in their age, size and strength, and that (2) the offender took advantage of such superior strength in the commission of the crime. (People vs. Carpio, G.R. No. 82815-16, October 31, 1990)
● The fact that there were two persons who attacked the victim does not per se establish that the crime was committed with abuse of superior strength, there being no proof of the relative strength of the aggressors and the victim." The evidence must establish that the assailants purposely sought the advantage, or that they had the deliberate intent to use this advantage. (Fantastico and Villanueva vs. Malicse and People, G.R. No. 190912, January 12, 2015 )
● The prosecution failed to present evidence to show a relative disparity in age, size, strength, or force, except for the showing that two assailants, one of them armed with a knife, attacked the victim. The presence of two assailants, one of them armed with a knife, is not per se indicative of abuse of superior strength. Mere superiority in numbers does not indicate the presence of this circumstance. Nor can the circumstance be inferred solely from the victims possibly weaker physical constitution. In fact, what the evidence shows in this case is a victim who is taller than the assailants and who was even able to deliver retaliatory fist blows against the knife-wielder.
The events leading to the stabbing further belie any finding of deliberate intent on the part of the assailants to abuse their superior strength over that of the victim. The testimonies of the witnesses, on the whole, show that the encounter between the victim and his assailants was unplanned and unpremeditated. The victim and his companions were simply passing by after a night of conversation with drinks, while the assailants were simply singing and engaged in merrymaking, and no conscious effort on the part of the accused appeared to have been made to use or take advantage of any superior strength that they then enjoyed. (Valenzuela vs. People)
When is there no advantage of superior strength?
1. If the assault is characterized with passion and obfuscation
2. When a quarrel arose unexpectedly and the fatal blow was struck at a time when the aggressor and his victim were engaged in a fight.
3. When the attack was made on the victim alternately and not simultaneously. (People vs. Pablo, G. R. NOS. 120394-97. January 16, 2001)
When it is inherent?
1. Abuse of superior strength is inherent in parricide as generally, the husband is physically stronger than the wife.
2. It is inherent in rape or is absorbed in the element of force
3. It is absorbed and inherent in treachery.
● When the circumstance of abuse of superior strength concurs with treachery, the former is absorbed in the latter. People vs. Cabrillas, G.R. No. 175980, February 15, 2012)
Abuse of superior strength is present whenever there is a notorious inequality of forces between the victim and the aggressor/s that is plainly and obviously advantageous to the aggressor/s and purposely selected or taken advantage of to facilitate the commission of the crime. Evidence must show that the assailants consciously sought the advantage, or that they had the deliberate intent to use this advantage. To take advantage of superior strength means to purposely use force excessively out of proportion to the means of defense available to the person attacked. The appreciation of this aggravating circumstance depends on the age, size and strength of the parties. (Valenzuela vs. People, G.R. No. 149988, August 14, 2009)
1. When a man with a deadly weapon attacked an unarmed and defenseless woman (sex and weapon)
2. Strong man ill-treated a child or old person, or sick person (age, size, strength)
3. When the offender uses a powerful weapon which is out of proportion to the defense available to the offended party (weapon)
4. Simultaneous attack by two persons with revolvers against a defenseless person. (weapon, strength)
5. The aggressors were fully armed police officers and the deceased was defenseless and in the influence of liquor. (weapon, strength)
Does superiority in number mean that the offenders abused their superior strength?
● The mere fact that there were two persons who attacked the victim does not per se constitute abuse of superior strength. There must be evidence of (1) notorious inequality of forces between the offender and the offended party in their age, size and strength, and that (2) the offender took advantage of such superior strength in the commission of the crime. (People vs. Carpio, G.R. No. 82815-16, October 31, 1990)
● The fact that there were two persons who attacked the victim does not per se establish that the crime was committed with abuse of superior strength, there being no proof of the relative strength of the aggressors and the victim." The evidence must establish that the assailants purposely sought the advantage, or that they had the deliberate intent to use this advantage. (Fantastico and Villanueva vs. Malicse and People, G.R. No. 190912, January 12, 2015 )
● The prosecution failed to present evidence to show a relative disparity in age, size, strength, or force, except for the showing that two assailants, one of them armed with a knife, attacked the victim. The presence of two assailants, one of them armed with a knife, is not per se indicative of abuse of superior strength. Mere superiority in numbers does not indicate the presence of this circumstance. Nor can the circumstance be inferred solely from the victims possibly weaker physical constitution. In fact, what the evidence shows in this case is a victim who is taller than the assailants and who was even able to deliver retaliatory fist blows against the knife-wielder.
The events leading to the stabbing further belie any finding of deliberate intent on the part of the assailants to abuse their superior strength over that of the victim. The testimonies of the witnesses, on the whole, show that the encounter between the victim and his assailants was unplanned and unpremeditated. The victim and his companions were simply passing by after a night of conversation with drinks, while the assailants were simply singing and engaged in merrymaking, and no conscious effort on the part of the accused appeared to have been made to use or take advantage of any superior strength that they then enjoyed. (Valenzuela vs. People)
When is there no advantage of superior strength?
1. If the assault is characterized with passion and obfuscation
2. When a quarrel arose unexpectedly and the fatal blow was struck at a time when the aggressor and his victim were engaged in a fight.
3. When the attack was made on the victim alternately and not simultaneously. (People vs. Pablo, G. R. NOS. 120394-97. January 16, 2001)
When it is inherent?
1. Abuse of superior strength is inherent in parricide as generally, the husband is physically stronger than the wife.
2. It is inherent in rape or is absorbed in the element of force
3. It is absorbed and inherent in treachery.
● When the circumstance of abuse of superior strength concurs with treachery, the former is absorbed in the latter. People vs. Cabrillas, G.R. No. 175980, February 15, 2012)
0 Comments
Post a Comment