TV host Ferdinand “Vhong” Navarro has been charged for the alleged rape of model Deniece Cornejo by the Taguig City Prosecutor’s Office.
The prosecutor’s office filed the information with the Taguig Regional Trial Court, accusing Navarro of raping Cornejo on Jan. 17, 2014, which became a widely-publicized case at the time.
Navarro was charged after the Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Cornejo in her petition for certiorari for issuance of a writ of mandamus.
In a decision dated July 21 this year, the Court of Appeals ordered the Taguig City Prosecutor’s Office “to file Information against Ferdinand ‘Vhong’ H. Navarro for: (1) Rape by Sexual Intercourse under Article 266-A (1) of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 8353; and (2) Acts of Lasciviousness under Article 336 of the Revised Penal Code.”
“It was erroneous for the DOJ to deny Cornejo’s petition for review on the ground that her statements in the complaint-affidavits are inconsistent and incredible. In this regard, it bears to stress that the determination of probable cause does not depend on the validity or merits of a party’s accusation or defense or on the admissibility or veracity of testimonies presented,” the appeals court said.
It said that “issues of credibility should be adjudged during the trial proper. It goes without saying that it is the trial court that has the unique power and position to observe the witnesses’ deportment, manner of testifying, emphasis, gesture, and inflection of the voice, all of which are potent aids in ascertaining the witness’ credibility.”
The Court of Appeals added that “ultimately, it falls upon the trial court to determine who between Navarro and Cornejo speaks the truth. Cornejo decries attempted rape on the night of January 22, 2014 while Navarro denies any wrongdoing on his part.”
“We reiterate once more that the preliminary investigation is not the proper venue to rule on the respondent’s guilt or innocence. Likewise, whether the other pieces of documentary or electronic evidence presented at the preliminary investigation level is enough to impeach the credibility of the alleged rape victim so as to exculpate the respondent of the crime imputed against him is a matter best left to the scrutiny of the trial court,” it said.
It added, “Finally, it must be borne in mind that the admissibility or inadmissibility of the parties’ evidence should be ventilated before the trial court during the trial proper and not in the preliminary investigation. There need not be an inquiry into whether there is sufficient evidence to procure a conviction. What is merely required is probability of guilt, the determination of which does not call for the application of rules or standards of proof that a judgment of conviction requires after trial on the merits. It is enough that it is believed that the act or omission complained of constitutes the offense charged. Precisely, there is a trial for the reception of evidence of the prosecution in support of the charge. Wherefore, the petition is granted.”