RA 9775 – ANTI-CHILD PORNOGRAPHY ACT OF 2009

ROLANDO CAHILOG v. ATTY. ANDREI A. ANDRESAN and ATTY. YUL BERNIE L.

CURADA
G.R. No. 10649, 05 March 2018

FACTS:

Rolando Cahilog’s sex video with AAA, a minor, were uploaded on the internet and
began proliferating around the entire province.

AAA executed a Judicial Affidavit (JA) alleging that: (1) she met Cahilog at a Christmas
disco; (2) they exchanged phone numbers and sent text messages; (3) they would
always see each other as she was always given money and, sometimes, fice up to four
(4) kilos; (4) Cahilog threatened to stop giving her gifts unless they engage in sexual
intercourse; (5) they had sexual intercourse; and (6) she was shocked, terrified and
humiliated upon learning the news that videos of her sexual intercourse with
complainant was circulating in the internet. However, AAA later issued a Sworn
Statement recanting herein JA.

ISSUE:

Can Cahilog still be convicted despite of AAA’s Sworn Statement?

RULING:

Yes, he can.

HELD:

As a rule, a recantation or an affidavit of desistance is viewed with suspicion and

reservation. Jurisprudence has invariably regarded such affidavit as exceedingly
unreliable because it can easily be secured from a poor and ignorant witness, usually
through intimidation or for monetary consideration. At most, the retraction is an
afterthought which should not be given probative value.

Here, Cahilog admitted that AAA was receiving money, food and gifts from him, as well
as enjoying financial academic assistance. The admission alone is sufficient to form a
conclusion that AAA may have incurred a debt of gratitude towards complainant. This
debt of gratitude may very well be used bu complainant to inject feelings of guilt and
coerce a hapless and financially distressed victim such as AAA to grant him sexual
favors. The Court is not unaware of the scheme of peddling sexual favors from the
destitute in consideration or exchange of monetary or other necessary benefits. Thus, it
is of great likelihood that AAA may have recanted her complaint because she stands to
lose the benefits which she may still receive from Cahilog. A witness is said to be
biased when his or her relation to the cause or to the parties is such that he or she has
an incentive to exaggerate or give false color to his or her statements, or to suppress or
to pervert the truth, or to state what is false.

- AIMEE N. CALO -
 RA 9775 – ANTI-CHILD PORNOGRAPHY ACT OF 2009

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. XXX and YYY

G.R. No. 235652, 09 July 2018

FACTS:

Biological parents XXX and YYY maintain for the purpose of prostitution and/
pornography their minor biological children, AAA, BBB and CCC, by providing food,
shelter and clothing to induce and persuade them, by using a computer, webcam and
internet connections, to engage in private chat wherein persons, usually foreigners
would pay a fee, for the minors to show their genitals, buttocks, breasts, pubic area, and
to perform simulated sexual explicit activities as by touching and fondling her genitals,
buttocks, breasts, pubic area, and uttering words as “FUCK ME!” or “LICK ME!”,
instilling in the mind of the minors that the same is necessary for their support and daily
sustenance as the earnings they derive from such activities will pay for the family’s food,
rental and utilities.

ISSUE:

Can XXX and YYY be held guilty beyond reasonable doubt?

RULING:

Yes, they can.

HELD:

Section 4 (a) and (e) of Republic Act (RA) No. 2908 states: “Section 4. Acts of
Trafficking in Persons. – it shall be unlawful for any person, natural or juridical, to
commit any of the following acts: (a) to recruit, transport, transfer, harbour, provide, or
receive a person by any means, including those done under the pretext of domestic or
overseas employment or training or apprenticeship, for the purpose of prostitution,
pornography, sexual exploitation, forced labor, slavery, involuntary servitude or debt
bondage; x x x (e) to maintain or hire a person to engage in prostitution or pornography;
x x x.”

The prosecution had established beyond reasonable doubt that: (a) they admittedly are
the biological parents of AAA, BBB and CCC, who were all minors when the crimes
against them were committed; (b) they made their children perform acts of cybersex for
different foreigner customers, and thus, engaged them in prostitution and pornography;
(c) they received various amounts of money in exchange for the sexual exploitation of
their children; and (d) they achieved their criminal design by taking advantage of their
children’s vulnerability as minors and deceiving them that the money they make from
their lewd shows are needed for the family’s daily sustenance.

Aside from violation of RA No. 9208, they were also charged for violations of RA No.
7610 (An Act Providing for Stronger Deterrence and Special Protection against Child
Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination, and for Other Purposes) and RA No. 9775 (An
Act Defining the Crime of Child Pornography, Prescribing Penalties Therefor and for
Other Purposes).

- AIMEE N. CALO -
 RA 9775 – ANTI-CHILD PORNOGRAPHY ACT OF 2009

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. SCOTT DOUGLAS LACY

No. 95-30370, 119 F.3d 742 (1997)

FACTS:

The United States Customs Services was informed that child pornography from a
Danish computer bulletin board system called BAMSE was being brought into the
United States by computer, BAMSE’s records indicated several people, including a
caller from Seattle who identified himself as “Jim Bakker,” had received material from
BAMSE by telephone. “Bakker” had called BAMSE sixteen (16) times and had
downloaded six (6) picture files containing computerized visual depictions known as
GIFs. Customs agents traced the caller’s phone number to an apartment occupied by a
computer analyst named Scott Lacy. Telephone records reflected calls made from
Lacy’s telephone to BAMSE on the dates shown in BAMSE’s records.

Thereafter, Lacy was indicted for possessing child pornography. Lacy then argued that
the evidence is insufficient to establish probable cause to believe that he possesses
such pornography.

ISSUE:

Can the evidence establish probable cause?

RULING:

Yes, it can.

HELD:

The statute indicates that at a minimum, a “matter” must be capable of containing a

visual depiction. Although both the disks and the GIF files could be viewed as
“containing” the visual depiction, we conclude the “matter” is the physical medium that
contains the visual depiction – in this case, the hard drive of Lacy’s computer and the
disks found in his apartment. This interpretation is supported by two (2) principles of
statutory interpretation, noscitur a sociis and ejusdem generis. “The first means that a
word is understood by the associated words, the second, that a general term following
more specific terms means that the things embraced in the general term of the same
kind as those denoted by the specific terms.” Although canons of construction do not
mandate how a phrase is to be read, they describe what we usually mean by a
particular manner of expression. Here, the “matter” appears at the end of the list “books,
magazines, periodicals, firms, and video tapes,” all of which are physical media capable
of containing images.

The trial court did not explicitly instruct the jury to find whether Lacy knew depictions of
minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct were on his hard drive and disks. It might
be argued that instructing the jury to find whether Lacy knew images on his disks and
hard drive depicted minors engaging in sexually explicit conduct necessarily required it
to find that Lacy knew these depictions were, in fact, on his disks or hard drive.
However, Lacy claimed he had seen the depictions from his disks and drive. If his claim
were true, he knew the depictions he downloaded onto his disks and drive were of
minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct, but he did not know the depictions were
still on his disks and drive. To address this defense, the trial court had to instruct the
jury that to convict Lacy it must find that he knew the depictions were on his disks and

- AIMEE N. CALO -
 RA 9775 – ANTI-CHILD PORNOGRAPHY ACT OF 2009

drive. Because the instructions allowed the jury to convict Lacy without finding that he
knew the hard drive and disks contained the unlawful visual depictions, they were
erroneous.

- AIMEE N. CALO -