Supreme Court: Online ‘Sweetheart’ Guilty of Rape and Qualified Trafficking for Sexual Exploitation of Minor

The following post does not create a lawyer-client relationship between Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices (or any of its lawyers) and the reader. It is still best for you to engage the services of a lawyer or you may directly contact and consult Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices to address your specific legal concerns, if there is any.

Also, the matters contained in the following were written in accordance with the law, rules, and jurisprudence prevailing at the time of writing and posting, and do not include any future developments on the subject matter under discussion.

AT A GLANCE:

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction of a 68-year-old foreigner for rape and qualified trafficking after inviting and meeting with a minor for sex. In the case of People of the Philippines v. Willem Johannes Peek (G.R. No. 256452, February 25, 2025), the SC held that Peek forced the victim to engage in sexual acts in exchange for money and and under threat of uploading her nude photos online if she refused.

The Facts

In October 2016, 68-year-old Willem Johannes Peek (“Peek”) began an online romantic relationship with 15-year-old AAA256452 (“AAA”) via Facebook, soliciting nude pictures from her in exchange for money.
When AAA attempted to stop sending images, Peek threatened to publicize the pictures on her Facebook account. Following this, Peek offered AAA PHP 10,000.00 for an in-person meeting for sexual intercourse, among others, to which AAA agreed, leading to their meeting on January 31, 2017.
On the agreed date, AAA and her sister met Peek and proceeded to his apartment. After they ate and drank, and while AAA’s sister was momentarily away from the room, Peek removed AAA’s clothing and engaged in various sexual acts with her despite her explicit requests to stop. He continued these acts and also forced AAA to perform oral sex. When AAA attempted to call for help by shouting, Peek silenced her.
While Peek was asleep, AAA managed to leave the apartment and immediately reported the incident to her sister, after which they sought assistance from the police.
For his defense, Peek denied the allegations, asserting that AAA voluntarily sent him nude pictures in exchange for money and expressed excitement for their meeting, offering sexual favors for additional payment. He further alleged that AAA’s sister also sent him nude pictures seeking payment. Peek claimed that upon AAA and her sister’s arrival at his apartment, he rested after supper. He was later awakened by his landlord, who asked about his well-being after observing AAA and her sister leave. Peek’s subsequent attempts to contact AAA’s sister were unsuccessful, and he was later arrested after a police officer arrived at his apartment.
AAA subsequently executed an affidavit of recantation regarding the case.
The RTC found that the prosecution successfully established all the elements of the crimes charged, namely Sexual Abuse and Qualified Trafficking. It dismissed Peek’s defense of denial and alibi. The RTC also ruled that AAA’s affidavit of recantation would not absolve Peek, as recantations are easily obtained through intimidation or monetary consideration. Thus, Peek’s motion for reconsideration was denied.
The CA affirmed the RTC’s ruling with modifications.

The Issue

W/N the CA erred in finding Peek guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crimes charged.

The Supreme Court decides:

The Supreme Court DENIED the appeal, AFFIRMING with MODIFICATIONS the CA’s Decision and Resolution.
The Court held that Peek’s conviction for Sexual Abuse under RA 7610 should be modified to Rape under the Revied Penal Code (RPC). The Court reasoned that the factual allegations and evidence, particularly Peek’s use of “force and intimidation” to achieve carnal knowledge of AAA without her consent, squarely met the elements of Rape. It emphasized that even with a victim between 12 and 18 years old, if sexual intercourse is non-consensual due to force or intimidation, the offense is Rape under the RPC. The RPC, as amended, is considered the more recent and applicable penal legislation that aligns with and strengthens the policies of RA 7610, by imposing a more severe penalty of reclusion perpetua for Rape.
The Court affirmed Peek’s conviction for Qualified Trafficking in Persons. It found that the prosecution successfully established the elements of the crime, specifically Peek’s acts of harboring and receipt of AAA, a child, for the purpose of sexual exploitation. The Court reiterated that when the trafficked victim is a child, it constitutes trafficking in persons even without the explicit means of force or coercion, and that the victim’s consent is not an allowable defense under the law.
The Supreme Court concurred with the lower courts in disregarding AAA’s affidavit of recantation. The Court reiterated the jurisprudential rule that retractions are generally unreliable and viewed with considerable disfavor, especially in sensitive cases like rape, as they can easily be secured from vulnerable witnesses, often for monetary consideration or through intimidation. The recantation was deemed doubtful and an afterthought, having been made after AAA’s positive identification of Peek during trial.
For Rape, Peek was sentenced to reclusion perpetua and ordered to pay AAA PHP 75,000.00 each for civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary damages. For Qualified Trafficking, Peek was sentenced to life imprisonment and fined PHP 2,000,000.00, along with PHP 500,000.00 for moral damages and PHP 100,000.00 for exemplary damages. All monetary awards accrue 6% legal interest per annum until full payment.

Source:

Click here to subscribe to our newsletter

Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices specializes in business law and labor law consulting. For inquiries regarding legal services, you may reach us at info@alburolaw.com, or dial us at (02)7745-4391/ 09175772207/ 09778050020.

0 Shares

Leave a Reply Cancel reply