368 Phil. 676
"Sheryl Silvano is a beautiful mestiza (as may be shown in the pictures, Exhs. "T" to "T-5"), and already 5'6 tall at her age of sixteen (16) years, having been born on January 20, 1980. (Exhs. F and F-1) Her height have been inherited from her parents as her father is 6'2 tall and her mother is a mestiza. She is the legitimate daughter of David Silvano y Hayag, the accused in this case, and Shirley Ann G. Pedrosa, as evidenced by a marriage contract (Exhs. "E" & "E-1"). Sheryl is the eldest and the only girl with two brothers, namely: John David, who was born on July 29, 1984 and Noel William, who was born on April 16, 1986. (pp. 1-5, tsn, August 14, 1996)On February 12, Sheryl who could no longer bear the punishment in the form of sexual abuse she had been getting from her father as in fact she was first raped when she was thirteen (13) years of age, left their house at Scout Rallos, Quezon City, and stayed at her maternal grandmother's house at Scout Lozano, Quezon City. When she was asked to go back to her parents' house at and settle her differences with the accused, Sheryl confided to her mother and grandmother the real reason why she did not like to go back to their house. Thereupon, her mother and grandmother immediately sought the assistance of General Hercules Cataluña, Chief of the Central Police District Command, who happens to be married to a cousin of the mother of Sheryl."
"On January 23, 1996 at 10:30 in the evening, while Sheryl was sleeping in her room at the second floor of their house located at 134-C Scout Rallos Street, Barangay Sacred Heart, Quezon City,** she was awakened by her father, the accused in this case. The accused then started scolding Sheryl for her coming late. (pp. 6-7, tsn, ibid.) The accused who appeared tipsy, started undressing Sheryl by lifting her T-shirt, as a form of punishment for her coming home late, which punishment she has been experiencing from the accused since she was 13 years old. After lifting Sheryl's T-shirt, as she was not then wearing any bra, the accused started holding Sheryl's breast at the same time kissing it. As Sheryl was practically leaning on the bed, the accused dragged Sheryl at the edge of the bed so that she would be facing the accused a little bit. The accused then knelt down on the floor and continued holding the breast of Sheryl with one hand while the other hand was holding the private organ of Sheryl. Sheryl tried to prevent the accused from doing what he was doing but the accused told Sheryl "you did something wrong and I told you I would do that as a punishment to you" (p. 7, tsn. ibid.). Despite the pleas of Sheryl, the accused continued kissing her breasts. Afterwards, the accused pulled Sheryl at the side of the bed and the accused removed her pair of short pants and panty. After removing the pair of short pants and panty of Sheryl, the accused grasped the hips and waist of Sheryl and pulled her towards him. Thereafter, when the accused was already in between the thighs of Sheryl, the accused started kissing the private organ of Sheryl, the accused was at the same time inserting his finger into Sheryl's vagina (p. 8, tsn, ibid.). Thereafter, the accused stood up a bit, pulled down his short pants and knelt down at the side of the bed. The accused then got a hold of Sheryl's two feet and placed them on top of his shoulders. The accused once again grasped the hips of Sheryl and pulled her nearer to him. When Sheryl was pulled nearer to the accused, the accused inserted his private organ into Sheryl's private organ. Although 'Sheryl tried to free herself by pushing the shoulders of the accused with her two feet and telling the accused to stop what he was doing to her, the accused, in order to have a full grip, got hold of the legs of Sheryl and placed them in between the arms of the accused (pp. 8-9, tsn, ibid.). After inserting the accused's private organ into the private organ of Sheryl, the accused performed a pumping motion. Subsequently, the accused's private organ was removed from the private organ of Sheryl and the accused rubbed his organ with the private organ of Sheryl. Thereafter, Sheryl felt something cold which was a sticky liquid emitted from the private organ of the accused and which the accused scattered in between Sheryl's private organ and on her stomach. Later on, the accused got a tissue paper and wiped the liquid-like substance. The accused then put on his pair of pants and left the room (pp. 9-11, tsn, ibid.). The following morning, Sheryl went to school at Jose Abad santos Memorial School (JASMS) in Quezon City.
"That on or about the 23rd day of January, 1996 in Quezon City, Philippines, the said accused who is the father of the Complainant by means of force and intimidation, to wit: then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously, undressing the undersigned complainant who is under eighteen (18) years of age and putting her legs on top of his shoulders, and thereafter have carnal knowledge with the undersigned complainant against her will and without her consent."After the prosecution presented its case, appellant filed a motion for leave to file demurrer to evidence on the ground that his guilt was not proven beyond reasonable doubt, which motion, however, was denied by the lower court. Appellant thus presented evidence for his defense. Thereafter, the lower court rendered judgment convicting appellant of the crime charged, sentenced him to suffer the penalty of death, and ordered him to indemnify the victim. The dispositive portion of the decision a quo states:
"WHEREFORE, this court finds the accused David Silvano y Hayag guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape defined in and penalized by Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, and sentences him to suffer the penalty of death and to pay the costs. The accused is hereby ordered to indemnify the victim, Sheryl P. Silvano, the amount of P50,000.00, as moral damages, and P30,000.00 as exemplary damages.Upon automatic appeal to this Court, appellant assails his conviction by insisting on his innocence. He denied the accusation arguing that the charge leveled against him was a mere ploy of his wife and the latter's relatives for the purpose of severing their marital relationship.
a.) An accusation for rape can be made with facility; it is difficult to prove but more difficult for the person accused, though innocent, to disprove;The fundamental presumption of innocence enjoyed by appellant was overcome with the requisite quantum of proof in criminal cases and his guilt sufficiently established by proof beyond reasonable doubt.
b.) In view of the intrinsic nature of the crime of rape, where only two persons are usually involved, the testimony of the complainant is scrutinized with extreme caution; and
c.) The evidence of the prosecution stands or falls on its own merits and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the defense.
"When and how rape is committed - Rape is committed by having carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances.In proving such felony, the prosecution must allege and prove the ordinary elements of 1.) sexual congress 2.) with a woman 3.) by force and without consent, and in order to warrant the imposition of death penalty, the additional elements that 4.) the victim is under 18 years of age at the time of the rape and 5.) the offender is a parent (whether legitimate, illegitimate or adopted) of the victim should also be alleged and proven. All such elements are undisputedly present in this case. The victim herein at the age of sixteen (16) years was subjected to forced sexual intercourse by appellant, as duly shown in her testimony:
1.) By using force or intimidation;
2.) When the woman is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; and
3.) When the woman is under twelve years of age or is demented.
The crime of rape shall be punished by reclusion perpetua.
Whenever the crime of rape is committed with the use of a deadly weapon or by two or more persons, the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua to death.
When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the victim has become insane, the penalty shall be death.
When the rape is attempted or frustrated and a homicide is committed by reason or on the occasion thereof, the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua to death.
When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, a homicide is committed, the penalty shall be death.
The death penalty shall also be imposed if the crime of rape is committed with any the following attendant circumstances:
1.) When the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age and the offender is a parent, ascendant, step-parent, guardian, relative by consanguinity or affinity within the third civil degree, or the common-law spouse of the parent of the victim;
2.) When the victim is under the custody of the police or military authorities;
3.) When the rape is committed in full view of the husband, parent, any of the children or other relatives within the third degree of consanguinity;
4.) When the victim is a religious or a child below seven (7) years old;
5.) When the offender knows that he is afflicted with Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) disease;
6.) When committed by any member of the Armed Forces of the Philippines or Philippine National Police or any law enforcement agency;
7.) When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the victim has suffered permanent physical mutilation. (emphasis supplied)
The victim's claim that she was ravished is corroborated by the medical findings of the physician who examined her, to wit:
While you were sleeping at 10:30 in the evening of January 23, 1996, what happen?***
ATTY. UMINGA: Objection, your Honor, the question is misleading, "while you were sleeping" it does not mean established that she was sleeping. COURT: Witness may answer. A. I was awakened by my father. Q. When your father woke you up, what happened? A. He was scolding me. Q. What did he say? A. He was asking me why I came home late. That I knew that I had a punishment. Q. What else did your father do, if there was any aside from scolding you? A. He was trying to undress me, particularly my shirt. Q. Was he able to undress you? A. Yes, he was able to lift up my shirt. Q. And then what happen? A. He was holding my breast and he was kissing my breast. Q. What else did he do? A. I was leaning on the bed, he dragged me on the side ways, so that, I will be facing him a bit and then he knelt down on the floor. Q. After he knelt down on the floor, what else did he do? A. He continued kissing and holding my breast, while he was holding his other hand to my breast and he was kissing it, he was holding my private organ his other hand. Q. And what were you wearing at that time? A. I was wearing t-shirt without bra. Q. And when he was holding your private organ, what happened? A. I was trying to tell him, not to do this to me, but he insisted and said that "you did something wrong, and I told you that I would do that punishment to you" but I said that I did not agree. Q. And then what did he do if any, after he was holding your private part and he was holding and kissing your breast? A. He told me and he insisted that, he would do that to me, but I said "no, please don't." Q. When you answered him stop, what did he do? A. He still continued kissing my breast and kissing my private organ. Q. After than, what happened? A. He pulled me at the side of the bed. Q. When he pulled you at the side of the bed, what did your father do? A. He undressed my shorts and panty. Q. After your father removed your shorts and panty, what else did he do? A. He grasped me by my hips, he grasped me by my waist, and he pulled me towards him. Q. And where was his position when he pulled you towards him? A. He was at the side of the bed. Q. And in relation to you, where was he located? A. In between my thighs. Q. What did he do after that? A. He started kissing my private organ. Q. When he was kissing your private organ, what else did he do? A. He was putting his finger inside my vagina hole or opening and he continued kissing it. Q. After putting his finger inside your private organ, what else did he do? A. He stood up a bit, he removed or lowered down his pants and then he knelt down at the side of the bed. Q.
After removing his pants, after lowering down his pants, and kneeling down a bit, what did your father do?
A. He got my two feet and placed him on top of his shoulder. Q.
After putting your two feet on top of his shoulder, what did he do?
A. He grasped me by my hips, he pulled me nearer to him and he placed his organ inside my organ. Q.
After the accused, your father, placed his organ inside your organ, what else happen?
Put on record that the witness is crying.
ATTY. MENDOZA: (to the witness) Q. After your father put his organ inside your organ, what else did he do? A. He just put his organ inside my organ. He was almost on top of me. COURT: (to the witness) Q. What about you, what did you do, when your father, the accused in this case placed his organ inside your organ? A. I was trying to remove my two feet on top of his shoulder, I was pushing him by his shoulder with my two feet and I was telling him to "stop doing it to me." Q. And what was the response of your father? A. He kept on grasping my hips nearer to him. COURT: (to Atty. Mendoza) Go ahead.
ATTY. MENDOZA: (to the witness)
Q. So, while you were trying to free yourself, and your father continued grasping your hips closer to him, what else happen? A. I was able to remove my feet a bit but in order for me not to break free, he placed my legs in between his arms and both feet and then he gripped it. Q. When you were able to free your legs from the shoulder of your father, he grabbed your legs and grasped it with his arms, what happen? A. He placed his organ in my organ. Q. And was he able to put his organ inside your vagina? A. Yes, then I felt pain. Q. After that, what happen? A. I tried again resisting him, moving again my two feet from his grasp. I tried to get far from the edge of the bed, far from him. Q. And you were able to remove his arms from your legs? A. No, sir. Q. So, what happen? A. His organ removed from my organ, but he tried to put it but since he can't. Q. Since he can't, what did he do? A.
He placed his organ on top of my organ.
Q. And then, what did he do? Rubbing it on top of my organ. Q. and what were you saying in tagalog? A. " kinikiskis po." Q. And then, what did you do? A. And then, I still tried telling him "stop doing to me." Q. You cannot free yourself from your father? A. No, sir. Q. And after that, he was rubbing his organ with your organ, what happen? A. I felt cold, liquid-like substance on top of my organ and somewhere in between my stomach. Q. And then, after that, what happen? A. He got his shoe (should be tissue) and then he wiped it. COURT: (to the witness) Q. Where did that fluid came from? A. It came from his organ. Q. Did you see? A. Yes, your Honor. ATTY. MENDOZA: (to the witness) Q. Will you please tell to the Honorable Court whether the place while your father was doing this to you was lighted? A. Yes, sir. Q. What was the lighting? A. Flourescent light. Q. And who put the lights on? A. He opened it. Q. After that, what did your father do? A. He stood up and wore his underpants. Q. And where did he go? A. He went out of the room. Q. And what did you do? A. I wore my underpants too then I covered my face with the pillow. (italics supplied)
GENERAL AND EXTRAGENITALFor his defense, appellant claims among others, that the victim offered only a token resistance when the alleged sexual acts were being done. Be that as it may, the failure to shout or offer tenacious resistance cannot be construed as a voluntary submission to appellant's desires. It is enough if the prosecution had proven that force or intimidation concurred in the commission of the crime as in this case. The law does not impose upon a rape victim the burden of proving resistance. Moreover, physical resistance need not be established in rape when intimidation is exercised upon the victim and she submits herself against her will to the rapist's lust because of fear for her life or personal safety. The force, violence or intimidation in rape is a relative term, depending not only on the age, size, and strength of the parties but also on their relationship with each other. Herein victim is only 16 years old, about 5'6" and weighs 128 lbs. As compared to her father who is his early 40's, about 6'2" weighs 210 lbs. And a former driver/messenger in the Italian embassy. Considering also that the assailant is no less than the victim's own father who wields parental influence over her person, the crime undoubtedly was committed with facility. The latter's moral ascendancy over the former substitutes for violence or intimidation. A woman at such young age like the victim herein can only cower in fear and yield into submission. Rape is nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation by which a man keeps a woman in a state of fear and humiliation. Thus, it is not even impossible for a victim of rape not to make an outcry against an unarmed assailant.
Fairly developed, fairly nourished and coherent female subject. Breasts are hemispherical with pinkish brown areola and nipples from which no secretions could be pressed out. Abdomen is flat and soft.
There is abundant growth of pubic hair. Labia majora are full, convex and coaptated with the pinkish brown labia minora presenting in between. On separating the same, disclosed an elastic, fleshy-type hymen with deep healed lacerations at 3, 7 and 9 o'clock positions. External vaginal orifice offers moderate resistance to the introduction of the examining index finger and the virgin-sized vaginal speculum. Vaginal canal is narrow with prominent rugosities. Cervix is normal in size, color and consistency.
Subject is in non-virgin state physically.
There are no external signs of recent application of any form of trauma at the time of examination.
Vaginal and peri-urethral smears are negative for gram-negative diplococci and for spermatozoa. (emphasis supplied)
It is settled that carnal knowledge is consummated by the mere touching of the woman's labia of the pudendum by the male sex organ. The briefest contact of penile invasion is as serious as full penetration and thus, rapture of the hymen is not required. In addition, the absence of fresh lacerations does not disprove rape. Appellant could have been held liable for "instrument or object rape" under R.A. 8353 when he inserted his tongue and finger into her daughter's vaginal orifice. Luckily for him, at the time he committed such act, "instrument or object rape" was not yet punishable.
Article 195. "Subject to the provisions of the succeeding Articles, the following are obliged to support each other to the whole extent set forth in the preceding Article:The victim testified that appellant told her that she will be punished for coming home late at night and the punishment is to have sex with him. This ratiocination is the product of a sick mind of an equally sick parent who does not deserve to be such. It is clear from the provisions of Article 209 of the Family Code that from the mere status of being a parent flows one's "natural right and duty" not only of the "caring for" and the "rearing of" their unemancipated children but above all "the development of their moral, mental, and physical character and well-being." Although the Family Code recognizes the parents' rights and duties to "impose discipline" on their unemancipated children; "Supervise their activities, recreation and association with others x x x; and prevent them from acquiring habits detrimental to their x x x morals", it does not authorize them to force their offspring to copulate with them under the mask of discipline, or invade their honor and violate their dignity nor does it give them the license to ravish the product of their marital union. Appellant's way of punishment comes not in the form of correction but of an insane sexual gratification. Sex with one's own child is per se abhorrent and can never be justified as a form of parental punishment. The practice of sexual exploitation of the youth in the guise of disciplinary action is not a solution to juvenile curiosity which is part of growing up. His gratification instills an unnamed trauma in the child's innocent mind when she still cannot understand the meaning of sexual behavior. Moreover, instead of instructing and educating his own daughter with "the right precept and good example", appellant provided her with perversed and distorted "moral and spiritual guidance" to the extent of brainwashing her that sex with one's father is nothing but a disciplinary sanction and "part of sex education" which the latter teaches her. Worse, the daughter herein even entertained doubts as to the normality and abnormality of her father's deplorable acts. It is also appellant's duty under the Family Code to give her "love and affection, advice and counsel, companionship and understanding." Yet what she got was the humiliation and the destruction of her life, good future and the very essence of her existence.
xxx xxx xxx
(2). Legitimate ascendants and descendants;
(3). Parents and their legitimate children
Article 220. The parents x x x shall have with respect to their unemancipated children or wards the following rights and duties:
(1). To x x x support" (emphasis supplied).
"Many victims of rape never complain or file criminal charges against their rapists. They prefer to bear the ignominy and pain rather than reveal their shame to the world or risk rapists making good their threats to kill or hurt their victims."The victim herein is in no case different. Her shame and genuine fear of what appellant might do to her or her brothers had temporarily sealed her lips. This is why she left their home, the scene of her defilement where her appellant father resides and went to her maternal grandmother's place. Only when confronted why she would not come back to their house did she reveal the avalanche of shame and degradation that had befallen her at that tender age of 16 years from her very own father. It is not uncommon for a young girl at such age to be intimidated into silence and conceal for sometime the violation of her honor, even by the mildest threat against her life. Silence is not an odd behavior of rape victims who do not always immediately go to the rooftop and denounce their assailants. This "natural reticence or aversion of the victims to reveal the humiliation attaching to the crime" is a "stigma they will have to bear indefinitely thereafter." The fear of these young victims of reprisals upon them or their families easily cows them into submission and silence. Worse, in incestuous rape, that fear which compels non-revelation is further reinforced by the moral ascendancy of the rapist over his ravished relative. As the father of the victim, appellant whom she called "Daddy" had assumed parental authority over her during her formative years. Undisputedly, he exerts strong moral influence over complainant.
"Apparent from the Court's decisions in rape cases with the offended parties being young and immature girls from the ages of twelve to sixteen, x x x is (the) considerable receptivity on the part of this Tribunal to lend credence to their version of what transpired, considering not only their relative vulnerability but also the shame and embarrassment to which such a grueling experience as a court trial, where they are called upon to lay bare what perhaps should be shrouded in secrecy, did expose them to. This is not to say that an uncritical acceptance should be the rule. It is only to emphasize that skepticism should be kept under control."Ultimately, all the foregoing boils down to the issue of credibility of witnesses. Jurisprudential annals is replete with the rule that the findings of facts and assessment of credibility of witnesses is a matter best left to the trial court because of its unique position of having observed that elusive and incommunicable evidence of the witnesses' deportment on the stand while testifying, which opportunity is denied to the appellate courts subject to certain exceptions, none of which, however, is attendant in this case. Trial courts deal with live witnesses while appellate tribunals rely on the cold pages of the written records. In this case, the lower court's findings, conclusions and evaluation of the testimony of witnesses is received on appeal with the highest respect, the same being supported by substantial evidence on record. No cogent reason was shown that the court a quo had overlooked or disregarded material facts and circumstances which when considered would have affected the result of this case or justify a departure from its assessments and findings.
"The death penalty shall be imposed in all cases in which it must be imposed under existing laws, except when the guilty person is below eighteen (18) years of age at the time of the commission of the crime or is more than seventy years of age or when upon appeal or automatic review of the case by the Supreme Court, the required majority vote is not obtained for the imposition of the death penalty, in which cases the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua."In an apparent, but futile attempt to mislead this Court, appellant quoted the amended complaint in its Brief underscoring the words "eighteen (18) years of age" but omitted the word "under" to show that the victim was already at least 18 years old at the time of the rape. And, it is neither controverted nor contested that the victim was below 18 years of age when her father raped her on January 23, 1996. It can be easily verified from the records that his daughter was born at about 5:30 a.m. on January 20, 1980 as shown in the latter's authenticated Certificate of Live Birth. Simple arithmetic would show that on the day she was raped, only three days has just lapsed since the victim celebrated her sixteenth (16) birthday. Besides, appellant did not object to the victim's testimony that she was 16 years old. The testimony of a person as to her age is admissible although another hearsay, though she can have no personal knowledge of the date of her birth, as all knowledge as to one's age is acquired from whatever is told by the parents or relative- and such testimony constitute an assertion of family tradition. It is not also unreasonable to conclude that such was her age considering that her parents were married sometime in July, 1979 and that their first offspring, the victim herein, would probably be born within the next year.
1.) By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances: People v. Mahinay, (per curiam), G.R. No. 122485, February 1, 1999.
1.) Through force, threat, or intimidation;
2.) When the offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious;
3.) By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority; and
4.) When the offended party is under twelve years of age or is demented, even though none of the circumstances mentioned above be present.
2.) By any person who, under any of the circumstances mentioned in paragraph 1 hereof, shall commit an act of sexual assault by inserting his penis into another person's mouth or anal orifice, or any instrument or object, into the genital or anal orifice of another person.
Art. 266-B. Penalties. - Rape under paragraph 1 of the next preceding article shall be punished by reclusion perpetua.
"Whenever the rape is committed with use of a deadly weapon or by two or more persons, the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua to death.
"When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the victim has become insane, the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua to death.
"When the rape is attempted and a homicide is committed by reason or on the occasion thereof, the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua to death.
"When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, homicide is committed, the penalty shall be death.
"The death penalty shall also be imposed if the crime of rape is committed with any of the following aggravating/qualifying circumstances:
1.) When the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age and the offender is a parent, ascendant, step-parent, guardian, relative by consanguinity or affinity within the third civil degree, or the common-law spouse of the parent of the victim;
2.) When the victim is under the custody of the police or military authorities or any law enforcement or penal institution;
3.) When the rape is committed in full view of the spouse, parent, any of the children or other relatives within the third degree of consanguinity.
4.) When the victim is a religious engaged in legitimate religious vocation or calling and is personally known to be such by the offender before or at the time of the commission of the crime;
5.) When the victim is a child below seven (7) years old;
6.) When the offender knows that he is afflicted with Human Immuno-Deficiency Virus (HIV)/Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) or any other sexually transmissible disease and the virus or disease is transmitted to the victim;
7.) When committed by any member of the Armed Forces of the Philippines or Philippine National Police or any law enforcement agency;
8.) When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the victim has suffered permanent physical mutilation;
9.) When the offender knew of the pregnancy of the offended party at the time of the commission of the crime; and
10.) When the offender knew of the mental disability, emotional disorder and/or physical handicap of he offended party at the time of the commission of the crime.
"Rape under paragraph 2 of the next preceding Article shall be punished by prision mayor.
"Whenever the rape is committed with the use of a deadly weapon or by two or more persons, the penalty shall be prision mayor to reclusion temporal.
"When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the victim has become insane, the penalty shall be reclusion temporal.
"When the rape is attempted and the homicide is committed by reason or on occasion thereof, the penalty shall be reclusion temporal or reclusion perpetua.
"When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, homicide is committed, the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua.
"Reclusion temporal shall also be imposed if the rape is committed with any of the ten aggravating/qualifying circumstances mentioned in this article."
 People v. Sangil, Sr., 276 SCRA 532.
- To keep them in their company, to support, educate and instruct them by right precept and good example, and to provide for their upbringing in keeping with their means;
- To give them love and affection, advice and counsel, companionship and understanding;
- To provide them with moral and spiritual guidance, inculcate in them honesty, integrity, self-discipline, self-reliance, industry and thrift, stimulate their interest in civic affairs, and inspire in them compliance with the duties of citizenship;
- To enhance, protect, preserve and maintain their physical and mental health at all times;
- To furnish them with good and wholesome educational materials, supervise their activities, recreation and association with other, protect them from bad company, and prevent them from acquiring habits detrimental to their health, studies and morals;
- To represent them in all matters affecting their interests;
- To demand from them respect and obedience;
- To impose discipline on them as may be required under the circumstances; and
- To perform such other duties as are imposed by law upon parents and guardians."
(3)seduction, abduction, rape or other lascivious acts;