Case Law: Rape

The absence of fresh laceration or of any sign of trauma in the victim's body does not necessarily negate
rape." (People vs. Pajaro, 265 SCRA 668; People vs. Galimba, 253 SCRA 722; People vs. Erardo,
277 SCRA 643)

Besides, a medical examination of the victim, as well as the
medical certificate, is only corroborative in character and is not an
indispensable element in rape. The unequivocal piece of evidence
that appellant had carnal knowledge of the victim is her credible and
consistent testimony." (People vs. Tamsi, 388 SCRA 604)

Also, rape does not necessarily mean
defloration. A freshly broken hymen is not an essential element of
rape. (People vs. Madridano, 227 SCRA 363; People vs. Llamo, 323 SCRA 791)

Indeed, it is not necessary, in order to have rape, that the
accused succeeds in having full penetration. The slightest touching or
introduction of the lips of the female organ or the labia of the
pudendum constitutes rape. When the accused tried to insert his
penis into his victim's vagina, that was all that was necessary to
commit consummated rape." (People vs. Clopino, 290 SCRA 432; People vs. Libeta, 381 SCRA 21; People vs. Velasquez,
377 SCRA 214.)

Full penetration of the genital organ is
not indispensable to sustain a conviction for rape." People vs. Manuel, 298 SeRA 184.