(General legal information; not legal advice. For a specific incident, a lawyer can assess the best charge based on the facts and evidence.)

1) Start here: “Attempted assault” is not usually the exact legal charge

In Philippine criminal law, “assault” is either:

Ordinary violence against a person (commonly charged as homicide/murder if there is intent to kill, or physical injuries if there are injuries but no intent to kill), or
Direct Assault (a specific crime) if the victim is a person in authority or agent of a person in authority and the attack is because of their official functions.

So the “right” case depends on what was actually done, whether anyone was injured, what weapon was used, what was said, and (crucially) whether there was intent to kill.

A victim being a senior citizen does not create one single “attempted assault on a senior” offense under the Revised Penal Code (RPC). Instead, the victim’s age commonly affects the case through aggravating circumstances and, in some situations, through special laws.

2) The core framework: stages of a felony (Attempted vs Frustrated vs Consummated)

Under the RPC, many crimes can exist in stages:

Attempted felony: the offender begins the commission by overt acts, but does not perform all the acts of execution because of some cause other than desistance (e.g., the victim escapes, someone intervenes).
Frustrated felony: the offender performs all acts of execution, but the felony is not produced by reason of causes independent of the offender’s will (classic example: a mortal wound is inflicted, but the victim survives due to timely medical treatment).
Consummated felony: all elements occur (e.g., death in homicide).

Practical implication: if a senior citizen is attacked but survives, the case is usually attempted or frustrated homicide/murder (if intent to kill is shown), or physical injuries (if intent to kill is not shown and injuries exist), plus possible accompanying offenses.

3) The most common charging paths

A) Attempted Homicide (or Attempted Murder) — if there is intent to kill

This is often the main charge when someone attacks a senior with a deadly weapon or in a manner suggesting lethal intent (e.g., stabbing motions toward the torso/head, repeated hacking swings, firing a gun but missing).

Key issue: INTENT TO KILL. Intent to kill is rarely proven by a confession; it is usually inferred from circumstances such as:

Weapon used (knife, gun, bolo, blunt weapon used lethally)
Targeted body part (vital areas: head, neck, chest, abdomen)
Number and manner of blows
Statements before/during the attack (e.g., “Papatayin kita”)
Persistence of attack and lack of warning shots/strikes
Nature of wounds (if any)

Attempted Murder vs Attempted Homicide:

Murder requires homicide plus at least one qualifying circumstance (e.g., treachery, evident premeditation, abuse of superior strength, cruelty, etc.).
If no qualifying circumstance is provable, the charge is commonly attempted homicide.

Why this matters: qualifying circumstances can raise the gravity of the charge.

B) Physical Injuries — if there are injuries, but no intent to kill

If the evidence points to an intent to hurt rather than kill, prosecutors may charge:

Serious physical injuries, less serious physical injuries, or slight physical injuries, depending on the severity and effect of the injuries (e.g., incapacity to work/medical attendance period, disfigurement, loss of function, etc.).

Important nuance: Physical injuries offenses are typically result-based (they depend on actual injury). If the attacker tried to hit but no injury occurred, prosecutors often consider other charges (like threats, coercion, unjust vexation), unless the facts instead show intent to kill (which supports attempted homicide/murder).

C) Grave Threats / Light Threats — if the core act is threatening harm

If the suspect did not actually commence a physical attack (or the evidence of an overt attempt is weak), but made credible threats—especially with a weapon—possible charges include:

Grave threats (more serious threats, especially involving a weapon or a demand/condition)
Light threats (less serious)
Related offenses depending on context

This often appears alongside an attempted attack if the threat is distinct and provable.

D) Unjust Vexation / Coercion / Other disturbance-type offenses

If the behavior is harassing, frightening, or aggressive but doesn’t cleanly fit attempted homicide/murder or physical injuries (and injuries are absent or minimal), prosecutors sometimes evaluate:

Coercion (forcing someone to do something against their will or preventing them from doing something)
Unjust vexation (a catch-all for conduct that annoys/irritates/disturbs without other specific classification), depending on facts

E) Direct Assault (RPC) — only in special situations

“Assault” in the technical RPC sense often refers to Direct Assault: attacking a person in authority (or their agent) in relation to the performance of official duties.

A senior citizen is not automatically a “person in authority” by age alone. But if the senior is, for example, a barangay official or otherwise legally considered a person in authority/agent in the situation, the charge may be Direct Assault (sometimes with physical injuries/homicide implications depending on outcome).

4) How the victim being a senior citizen affects the case

A) Aggravating circumstance: disregard of respect due to age

The RPC recognizes as an aggravating circumstance the offender’s insult or disregard of the respect due the offended party by reason of age (among other factors). When proven, this can:

Push the penalty toward a higher period within the prescribed range, and
Support exemplary damages in the civil aspect.

Reality in litigation: it’s not always automatic; it is stronger when facts show the offender took advantage of the victim’s age/weakness or acted with particular disrespect tied to the victim’s seniority.

B) Other aggravating/qualifying circumstances that commonly pair with attacks on seniors

Depending on facts, prosecutors may also allege:

Abuse of superior strength (especially if the senior is frail or outnumbered)
Treachery (attack so sudden that the victim had no chance to defend)
Dwelling (attack in the victim’s home)
Nighttime, evident premeditation, etc.

These can change the nature of the charge (e.g., homicide → murder) or raise the penalty.

5) Special laws that might also apply (depending on relationships and context)

A) Violence Against Women and Their Children (VAWC)

If the senior victim is a woman and the offender is her husband, ex-husband, boyfriend, ex-boyfriend, or someone with whom she has (or had) a dating/sexual relationship or common child, VAWC may apply. VAWC can cover physical violence, threats, harassment, and controlling behavior, and it uniquely provides protection orders.

B) Expanded Senior Citizens Act (and related protections)

Philippine law strongly protects senior citizens’ welfare and penalizes certain acts against them in specific contexts. However, most violent attacks are still primarily prosecuted under the Revised Penal Code (attempted homicide/murder, physical injuries, threats, etc.), with senior status affecting aggravation and remedies.

(Because the best-fit special-law application is highly fact-specific, it’s common for prosecutors to anchor the criminal case on the RPC and add special-law counts only when clearly supported by the scenario.)

6) Penalty basics (conceptual, not a case-specific computation)

Philippine sentencing is technical. Still, these are reliable guideposts:

If a felony is attempted, the penalty is generally lower than for the consummated offense.
Aggravating circumstances (including disregard of age) usually affect the period of the penalty and related civil damages.

Bottom line: an attack on a senior can become very serious very quickly—especially if intent to kill is provable (attempted/frustrated homicide or murder).

7) Evidence that usually determines the charge

To support stronger charges (like attempted homicide/murder), these commonly matter:

Medical certificate/medico-legal report (even if injuries are minor, it documents harm and timing)
Photos of injuries, torn clothing, bloodstains, damaged property
CCTV / mobile videos
Witness affidavits (including barangay tanods/responding officers)
Threats/messages (texts, chat logs, recordings—preserve metadata)
Weapon recovery (knife/bolo, gun, blunt object)
Scene details showing intent (distance, angle, number of swings/stabs, where aimed)

Intent to kill is the dividing line; evidence that the attacker aimed at vital areas or used deadly force is often decisive.

8) Procedure: where the case goes and what to expect

A) Reporting and filing

Common routes:

Report to PNP (police blotter, statements, referral for medico-legal)
File a complaint-affidavit with the Office of the City/Provincial Prosecutor for preliminary investigation (unless inquest applies)

B) Barangay conciliation (Katarungang Pambarangay)

Some minor disputes require barangay-level conciliation first, but many serious offenses (and many situations involving immediate danger or specific exclusions) proceed directly through the criminal justice system. When violence is involved, complainants often go straight to police/prosecutor, especially if safety is a concern.

C) Possible immediate remedies

If there is ongoing threat, prioritize safety: seek police assistance and document incidents.
If VAWC applies, protection orders (Barangay/Temporary/Permanent) are a major tool.

9) Common defenses you’ll see (and how they affect charging)

Denial/alibi (often countered by eyewitness/CCTV)
Self-defense (requires specific legal elements; evidence of unlawful aggression is central)
Accident (rare in “attempted assault” narratives unless the act was truly inadvertent)
Lack of intent to kill (this frequently downgrades attempted homicide to physical injuries or lesser offenses)

10) Civil liability and damages (often overlooked)

A criminal case commonly includes a civil aspect. Depending on the offense and proof, courts may award:

Actual damages (medical bills, therapy, property damage)
Moral damages (mental anguish, fear—especially relevant for elderly victims)
Exemplary damages (more likely when aggravating circumstances are proven)

Even if the criminal case fails, a separate civil action may still be possible depending on circumstances.

11) Practical charging examples (how facts map to cases)

Suspect swings a bolo at an 70-year-old’s neck; victim ducks; no injury. Likely evaluated as attempted homicide or attempted murder (depending on qualifying circumstances), plus possible threats.
Suspect punches an elderly man repeatedly, causing bruises and short incapacity; no lethal weapon, no “kill” statements. Often charged as physical injuries (severity depends on medical findings), with disregard of age possibly aggravating.
Suspect corners an elderly woman and says “Papahirin kita,” raising a knife but never actually swings; she escapes. Could be grave threats and/or other applicable offenses; whether it becomes “attempted” homicide depends on whether overt acts of execution are provable beyond mere intimidation.

12) Key takeaways

The legal system will not usually label the crime “attempted assault.” It will classify it under the Revised Penal Code (attempted homicide/murder, physical injuries, threats, etc.) and sometimes special laws.
Intent to kill is the pivot point between attempted homicide/murder and physical injuries/other offenses.
A senior citizen victim status commonly strengthens the case through aggravating circumstances (notably disregard of age) and can influence penalties and damages.
The most important practical step is evidence preservation (medical report, videos, witnesses, weapon, messages).

If you share a hypothetical fact pattern (weapon used, what was said, whether there was injury, where the blow was aimed, relationship between parties, and location), I can map it to the most likely charges and what prosecutors typically need to prove each one.