G.R. No. 256452 , February 25, 2025
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, vs. WILLEM JOHANNES PEEK, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Willem Johannes Peek was charged with Sexual Abuse under Section 5(b) of Republic Act (RA) No. 7610 and Qualified Trafficking in Persons under RA 9208, as amended. The prosecution alleged that in October 2016, the minor victim, AAA256452 (15 years old), met Peek via Facebook Messenger. Their relationship developed, and Peek began requesting nude photos from AAA256452, giving her money (PHP 1,000, PHP 5,000, and PHP 10,000) in exchange. Despite her initial compliance, AAA256452 asked Peek to stop, but he threatened to upload the photos to her Facebook page. Peek then arranged to meet AAA256452 in person, discussing sexual intercourse, and gave her PHP 10,000 as consideration for the meeting. On January 31, 2017, AAA256452 and her sister went to Peek’s apartment. After eating and drinking, and when her sister stepped out, Peek forcibly removed AAA256452’s clothes, licked her vagina, inserted his penis into her vagina and anus, forced her to perform oral sex, and sucked her breasts despite her pleas to stop. AAA256452 escaped and reported the incident to the police. Peek denied the allegations, claiming the photos and meeting were consensual and that AAA256452 and her sister also solicited money. He also presented an affidavit of recantation executed by AAA256452. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) convicted Peek of both charges. The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the RTC’s decision with modifications to the penalties and damages.

ISSUE

Whether the CA correctly affirmed Peek’s conviction for Sexual Abuse under RA 7610 and Qualified Trafficking in Persons under RA 9208, as amended.

RULING

The Supreme Court DENIED the appeal and AFFIRMED the CA Decision with MODIFICATIONS. The Court upheld Peek’s conviction for both crimes.
1. On Sexual Abuse under RA 7610: All elements were proven: (a) AAA256452 was a 15-year-old child; (b) Peek committed lascivious acts (sexual intercourse, oral sex, touching) upon her; and (c) the acts were done with coercion and intimidation, as AAA256452’s resistance was overcome by Peek’s force. Consent is immaterial under Section 5(b) of RA 7610 when the child is exploited in prostitution or subjected to sexual abuse. The act of giving money for nude photos and to secure a meeting for sex constituted such exploitation. The affidavit of recantation was unreliable and did not outweigh AAA256452’s credible trial testimony.
2. On Qualified Trafficking in Persons under RA 9208, as amended: All elements were present: (a) Peek’s act of “harboring” AAA256452 by providing his apartment as a venue for sexual exploitation; (b) the means employed was “abuse of vulnerability” due to her poverty and minor age, by giving monetary benefits to secure her consent; (c) the purpose was sexual exploitation; and (d) the trafficked person was a child, constituting a qualifying circumstance. The act of “harboring” includes providing a place where the intended exploitation occurs. The exchange of money for sexual acts confirmed the intent to exploit.
Damages and Penalties were modified as follows:
For Sexual Abuse (RA 7610): Indeterminate penalty of 8 years and 1 day of prision mayor minimum to 17 years, 4 months, and 1 day of reclusion temporal* maximum. Peek is ordered to pay AAA256452 PHP 75,000 as civil indemnity, PHP 75,000 as moral damages, and PHP 75,000 as exemplary damages.
* For Qualified Trafficking (RA 9208): Life imprisonment and a fine of PHP 2,000,000. Peek is ordered to pay AAA256452 PHP 500,000 as moral damages and PHP 100,000 as exemplary damages.
* Interest at 6% per annum on all damages from finality until fully paid.