Scribd
Upload
249 views1 page

People V. Jocelyn Acbangin G.R. NO. 117216

The accused was convicted of kidnapping and illegally detaining a child. The court held that kidnapping occurred because the child was deprived of liberty for two days when the accused hesitated to disclose the child's location to the parents, showing intent to deprive custody. The accused feeling remorse and later revealing the child's location did not absolve her of guilt since the crime was already committed. The child's testimony was also found credible.

Uploaded by

Norman Caronan
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
249 views1 page

People V. Jocelyn Acbangin G.R. NO. 117216

The accused was convicted of kidnapping and illegally detaining a child. The court held that kidnapping occurred because the child was deprived of liberty for two days when the accused hesitated to disclose the child's location to the parents, showing intent to deprive custody. The accused feeling remorse and later revealing the child's location did not absolve her of guilt since the crime was already committed. The child's testimony was also found credible.

Uploaded by

Norman Caronan
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/ 1

PEOPLE V.

JOCELYN ACBANGIN
G.R. NO. 117216

Accused was convicted of kidnapping and serious illegal detention. Two days after the taking of the child, she
informed the child’s parents of the whereabouts of the child.

HELD:

In cases of kidnapping, if the person detained is a child, the question is whether there was actual deprivation of
the child’s liberty and whether it was the intention of the accused to deprive the parents of the custody of the
child. The child in this case was deprived of liberty. True, she was treated well, however, there is still
kidnapping. For there to be kidnapping, it is not necessary that the victim be placed in an enclosure. It is enough
that the victim is restrained from going home. The intention to deprive the child’s parents of her custody is
indicated by the accused’s hesitation for 2 days to disclose the whereabouts of the child and more so by her actual
taking of the child. Accused’s motive at this point is not relevant. It is not an element of the crime. The fact
that she later on felt remorse and showed the child’s parents where the former was, cannot absolve her. At that
point, the crime was consummated.

The testimony of the child is also credible. A witness’ young age will not deter him or her from being a competent
and credible witness. To be a competent child witness, the following must be met: (a) capacity of observation;
(b) capacity of recollection; (c) capacity of communication.

You might also like