BAR 2020-21 - CRIMINAL LAW - Suggested ANSWERS - Dean JOE-SANTOS Balagtas BISQUERA

PRINCIPLES of Criminal Law - PROPOSAL to Commit Murder - Persons Criminal Liable: Principal by Direct Participation, Co-Conspirator versus ACCESSORY After the Facts - Dismissal of a Criminal Action on APPEAL on the Death of the Accused - MALUM PROHIBITUM vs Non-Existent Exempting Circumstance - PRAETER INTENTIONEM, Offense committed more Serious than that Intended, effect on Conviction.
MALUM in SE under the REVISED PENAL CODE - Crime vs CHASTITY, SEDUCTION vs Rape vs Child Abuse, SWEETHEART Theory, Act(s) to debase, demean a Child - THEFT in serving a Search Warrant with aggravating circumstance of TAKING ADVANTAGE of a PUBLIC POSITION - THEFT consummated despite return of the Thing Stolen - ROBBERY through Intimidation with taking Advantage of a Public Position - COMPLEX CRIME of GRAVE COERCION through SERIOUS ILLEGAL DETENTION of a FEMALE.
MALUM PROHIBITUM in SPECIAL CRIMINAL LAWS - Special Protection of CHILDREN against ABUSE, Exploitation and Discriminate Act (RA 7610) - ECONOMIC ABUSE, Anti-VIOLENCE against WOMEN and their CHILDREN, BATTERED WIFE Syndrome (RA 9262) - DATA PRIVACY ACT, SENSITIVE PERSONAL INFORMATION, CONFIDENTIALITY, CONSENT Imperative (RA 10173) - SAFE SPACE "WALANG BASTUSAN" ACT, includes LGBT (RA 11313) - INDETERMINATE SENTENCE LAW, Sentence more than ONE (1) Year, Arresto Menor, Sentence is One(1) Day to Thirty (30) days so excluded from the Indeterminate Sence (RA 4103).

[@marialilibethdellonardo8887]

Thank you, Dean Bisquera🥰❤..God bless you always in good health!🙏❤🙏

[@maloudela5307]

Salamat po

[@jonacarmelicalibuso4644]

Thank you, Dean Joe!

[@jargon8852]

Thank you sir for what you do.. love listening to you 🙏🏻❤️

[@necototus3333]

Thank you Dean🙂

[@jalilmague9767]

Thank you, Dean♥️ Love to heard your suggested answers.

[@joesantosbbisquera]

Jalil, since you will be a UM BAR Warrior, you may wish to make sure your Grammar is in place. With utmost apology, perhaps you short note could have read "Love to HEAR your suggested answers."

[@loillabendulo2529]

Thanks Dean but the volume is a challenge, it can barely be heard.

[@jmdiamante4308]

♥️♥️♥️

[@TORTLESSS]

I think it should be rape at 49:41, "she repeteadly said no" clearly qualifies that there was no consent, which is the material aspect of rape. Sweetheart defense will not hold up. People vs. Gecomo - “It should be borne in mind that love is not a license for carnal intercourse through force or intimidation. Even granting that appellant and complainant were really sweethearts, that fact alone would not negate the commission of rape. A sweetheart cannot be forced to have sex against her will. From a mere fiancee, definitely a man cannot demand sexual submission and, worse, employ violence upon her on a mere justification of love. A man can even be convicted for the rape of his common-law wife.”

[@reycfd7753]

Medyo mahina po ang sound volume nito, unlike your other videos po, Dean. Hope this can be remedied. Thanks!

[@attyjurhy1]

thank you so much sir for the video lecture you shared, it will help me a lot in my review. i just would want to be cleared in your suggested answer under good faith applicability. is it applicable if the land is registered? Godbless po.

[@joesantosbbisquera]

Which Number Teodorico?

[@felicisimomalinao698]

With due respect, another lawyer considered child abuse in the beaty queen question, as Caloagan vs. PEOPLE is not applicable.

[@joesantosbbisquera]

I stand that Child Abuse does not apply because there was no intent to downgrade d status of d child. in fact, they even became lovers. Thanx for ur "due respect".