April 30 Crim Digests

People v. Amaca Facts: An Information was filed by the Bais City Prosecutor against Amaca and one "Ogang," charging them with murder attended by evident premeditation and nighttime for attacking, assaulting and shooting with the use of a firearm one Wilson Vergara who, as a result thereof, suffered fatal gunshot wound .

Bernardo Mangubat, member of the PP of Canlaon City, testified that he in!uired from the ictim about the incident, and the latter answered he was shot by members of the Civilian Volunteer Volunteer Organization #C$O% Amaca and Ogang . &'on !uery why he was shot, the ictim said he did not know the reason why he was shot. (e was able to reduce into writing the declaration of victim $ergara, $ergara, and hae the latter affi) his thumbmark with the use of his own blood in the 'resence of *agner *agner Cardenas, the brother of the City Mayor. Mayor. +he trial court rendered its ecision finding Amaca guilt of murder. It deemed the victim!s statement to Police Officer "angubat , positivel identifing Amaca , a ding declaration sufficient to overcome the latter-s defense of alibi. +he a''ellant alleges, among others, that he ma be held liable O#$% FO& 'O"(C()* since treacher was not alleged in the (nformation , while evident premeditation and nighttime , although duly alleged, were not satisfactoril proven . (ssue: *hether or not the Amaca is guilty of murder or homicide 'eld: Onl homicide. +he ante mortem statement of the ictim is sufficient to identify the assailant in the case at hand. (oweer, the accused cannot be convicted of murder attended b treacher, because the (nformation charged him with murder +ualified onl b evident premeditation . +he Constitution re+uires that the accused must be informed of the the nature and cause of the the accusation against him ./ +his failure to allege treachery in the Information should benefit the a''ellant, because in a criminal case , the accused ma be held accountable onl for the crime charged and ever doubt must be resolved in his favor .

Moreoer, in this case, treacher and nighttime ma #O, be considered even as generic aggravating circumstances, because there is nothing in the testimon of the prosecution witnesses to convincingl show that the accused consciousl and purposel adopted #0% such means of attac- to render the victim defenseless and #1% the dar-ness of night to facilitate the commission of the crime , to prevent its discover or een evade capture. +his conclusion is further bolstered by the sim'le fact that not one of the 'rosecution witnesses saw the commencement of the assault or een the actual assault itself. (ence, they are not com'etent to testify on whether the aggraating circumstances of treachery and nighttime attended the commission thereof. ,hese circumstances cannot be appreciated on the basis of mere presumptions or su''ositions2 they "/, 0* P&OV*# A/ C$*A&$% A/ ,'* C&("* (,/*$F. People v. &emalante

Pre'ared by3 4arah 5ose +. 6anto

0

Facts: At about 7 PM, while "ercedes ,obias ,obias accom'anied by 8usebio 6erilla and 9ucia Pelo was on her wa home in the barrio of 6uinarona, 9eyte, 9e yte, coming from her farm in Maanghon, she met a group of more than ten men all armed with rifles , some of them with beard reaching the breast. &emalante , one of the men, a''roached, too- hold of and and dragged "ercedes. 4he entreated him not to take her because she had done him no wrong. 5emalante

continued to drag and struck her with the butt of his rifle on different 'arts of her body. +he companions of "ercedes were told to continue their wa . +hey saw Mercedes being dragged toward the sitio of /awahon . (ardly had they walked one kilometer when they heard gun re'orts. +he following da "ercedes ,obias was found dead in /awahon with two gunshot wounds. 5emalante was charged with the comple1 crime of -idnapping with murder . (is com'anions hae not been a''rehended. +he C:I found him guilty. (ssue: *hether or not 5emalante is guilty of the com'le) crime of kidna''ing with murder or

only murder 'eld: Onl murder. +here is no sufficient evidence of intention to -idnap because from the moment "ercedes +obias was held and dragged to the time when the gun reports were heard nothing was done or said by the a''ellant or his confederates to show that the captors intended to deprive her of her libert for some time and for some purpose and thereafter set her free or kill k ill her. +he (#,*&VA$ WA/ /O /'O&, A/ ,O #*2A,* ,'* ()*A ("P$(*) (# 3()#APP(#2. '*& /'O&, )*,*#,(O# A#) ($$4,&*A,"*#, A&* (#C$)*) O& FO&" PA&, OF ,'* P*&P*,&A,(O# P*&P*,&A,(O# OF ,'* C&("* OF "&)*& . It is murder because of the concurrence of at least one +ualifing circumstance , either of treacher, or of abuse of superior strength , or with the aid of armed men , the first shown by the entry of the shots at the

back and the second and the third by the number of the armed ca'tors. +he fact that the a''ellant grew beard reaching his breast as some of his com'anions co m'anions did is a 'ositie and clear 'roof that he was a member of the grou' of marauders, dissidents, bandits who were harassing the 'eaceful inhabitants of the town of agami and its enirons. It is true that no one witnessed the killing of Mercedes +obias, but the acts of the malefactors show and constitute cons'iracy which renders the a''ellant liable for the crime committed by his com'anions. People v. /espene Facts: In the afternoon, $eonardo *nerio left his home in barrio +agbaya, Ca'i;, and went to the field to tend his carabao . $eft in the house were his wife 6loria, three minor children the oldest of whom being < years of age, and a housebo. Before de'arting, $eonardo 8nerio left behind his bolo and instructed the housebo to split some firewood .


1

Between = and =3>? o-clock that eening, Priscila 8nerio, a sister of 9eonardo, arried at the house to fetch the latter because their mother was seriously ill. ot finding her brother at home, Priscila waited, and while she was conersing with 6loria and one 8liang from Buracay, /a5era and /a5ona arrived . /a5ona sat himself on a chair inside the sala , while /a5era hid behind the shutters in the balcon . 4a@ona in!uired about 9eonardos whereabouts when the sound of chopping of banana stal-s in the bac-ard and the dropping of stones atop the roof , were heard. As they looked outside 6loria and Priscila saw three individuals hiding behind 2loria!s store . $eonardo arried, and 5ust as he was about about to step on the the first rung rung of the ladder ladder , "angilog suddenly a''eared and rushing towards him, attac-ed the latter from the rear with a bolo . +aken com'letely by sur'rise, the victim was struc- on both shoulders . /espe6e , $eonardo and Calizo , each armed with a firearm , arried and fired four shots at $eonardo . 6loria and

Priscila shouted for hel'. pon seeing the victim stand up and ma-e an effort to escape , /a5ona fired his revolver at his victim. /a5era, who was behind, -nifed the deceased on the nape . 4till with life, 9eonardo

made an attem't to flee from his assailants, but the latter surrounded him and so he was forced to lean against the fence fronting the house. +he fence bro-e due to weak condition and $eonardo fell with it , his head touching the canal while his feet rested at the base of the fence. *hile in this 'osition, /espe6e shouted 7-ill him7 and one of them fired a shot at 9eonardo. +he assailants fled from the scene. A few minutes after 9eonardo was brought into the house, he died. An information for murder was filed against all of them e)ce't Mangilog who remained at large. All the defendants were found guilt of murder8 of murder8 +ualified b ,&*AC'*&% . +he /olicitor 2eneral maintains that the crime was attended b the aggraating circumstances of superior strength , aid of armed men and dwelling , and in iew of the 'enalty attached by the Code to the crimereclusion tem'oral in its ma)imum 'eriod to death he recommends that the decision of the lower Court should be modified by raising the penalt to death . (ssue: *hether or not the aggraating circumstances of superior strength , aid of armed men and dwelling should be appreciated separatel from treacher 'eld: #o. +he aggravating circumstances of superior strength , aid of armed men , and night time which concurred in the commission of the offense, are (#C$)*) (# ,'* 9A$(F%(#2 C(&C"/,A C(&C" /,A#C* #C* OF ,&*AC'*&% and cannot be appreciated separatel from the latter circumstance .

As to the aggraating circumstance of dwelling , the Court entertains doubts as to its applicabilit to the case at bar because the deceased was onl about to step on the first rung of the ladder of the house when he was assaulted by a''ellants.


>

#As to the motie of the crime, a week before the incident, 2loria went to collect from defendants their debts for the tuba and sardines which the bought on credit from the store of the offended 'arty, but the replied that the had no mone then . +he day before the killing, defendants returned to the store of the offended 'arty and wanted to ma-e purchases on credit, but the offended part refused to e1tend them credit until the had paid their old accounts . /a5ona remarked3 "(f ou will not be ta-en during the da8 b evening ou will be 0<> , the offended part had a dispute with ta-en." It a''ears further that sometime in March 0<>, /espe6e and $eonardo regarding the boundaries of a certain piece of land , and that the same was settled by the barrioDlieutenant and a councilor. *hateer the cause of the killing, it is not no t absolutely necessary to find a motie therefor. +he +uestion of motive is important in cases where there is doubt as to whether the defendant is or is not the person who committed the act , but when there is no doubt , as in the case at bar, it is not indispensable to conviction to -now the e1act reason for the deed .% People v. "anero Facts: +his was a gruesome murder in a main thoroughfare an hour before sundown. A foreign religious minister was riddled with bullets , his head shattered into bits and pieces amidst the reeling of his e)ecutioners as the danced and laughed around their !uarry, chanting the tune "Mutya Ea Baleleng", a 'o'ular regional folk song, -ic-ing and scoffing at his prostrate , miserable, s'iritless figure that was gas'ing its last. +heir leader pic-ed up pieces of the splattered brain and moc-ingl displaed them before horrified spectators . 4ome accounts swear that acts of cannibalism ensued, although they were not sufficiently demonstrated. :or their outrageous feat, the gang leader already earned the monicker "cannibal priest4-iller ." But, what is indubitable is that Fr. ,ulio Favali was senselessly -illed for no apparent reason than that he was one of the (talian Catholic missionaries laboring in their vineard in the

hinterlands of Mindanao. Informations for "urder, Attempted "urder and Arson were filed against defendants. +he trial court rendered @udgment finding them guilt of the "urder of Fr. Favali with the aggraating circumstances of superior strength and treacher , and the Attempted "urder of &ufino &obles. :urther, the Court finds accused #orberto "anero alias Commander Bucay guilty of Arson for the burning of the motorccle of Fr. Favali . Around 0? in the morning, defendants were inside the eatery of one 5eynaldo eocades at 3m. ;<8 $a *speranza8 ,ulunan8 Cotabato . +hey were conferring con ferring with defendant Arsenio $illamor, $illamor, Fr., Fr., 'riate secretary to the Munici'al Mayor of +ulunan, Cotabato, and his two unidentified bodyguards. Plans to li+uidate a number of suspected communist smpathizers were discussed . Arsenio $illamor scribbled on a cigarette wra''er the following "PA . PA, starring :r. Peter, omingo 6ome;, Bantil, :red 6a'ate, 5ene alias +abagac and $illaning." ":r. Peter" is Fr. Peter 2eremias , an (talian priest suspected of having lin-s with the communist movement2 "Bantil" is &ufino &obles , a Catholic lay leader who is the complaining witness in the Attempted "urder 2 omingo 6ome; is another lay leader, while the others are sim'ly


7

"messengers." +he cons'irators agreed to 8dilberto Maneros 'ro'osal that should the fail to -ill Fr. Peter 2eremias8 another (talian priest would be -illed in his stead . 8l'idio with two unidentified com'anions nailed a 'lacard 'laca rd on a streetD'ost beside the eatery of eocades. +he 'lacard bore the same inscri'tions as those found on the cigarette wra''er e)ce' t for the additional 'hrase "ersus Bucay, 8dil and Palo." 8l'idio also 'osted a wooden 'lacard bearing the same message on a street crossDsign close to the eatery. eatery. 9ater, defendants proceeded to the house of 70antil ," their first intended victim . "Bantil" confronted them wh his name was included in the placards . 8dilberto asked "Bantil" if he had any !ualms about it, and without any 'roocation, *dilberto drew his reoler and fired at the forehead of 70antil ." "Bantil" was able to 'arry the gun, albeit his right finger and the lower 'ortion of his right ear were hit. +hen they grappled for its possession until "0antil7 was e1tricated b his wife from the fra . But, as he was running awa8 he was again fired upon by 8dilberto. Onl his trousers were hit . "Bantil" howeer managed to see- refuge in the house of a certain )omingo 2omez . #orberto ordered his men to surround the house and not to allow anone to get out so that 70antil7 would die of hemorrhage . +hen 8dilberto went back to the restaurant of eocades and 'istolDwhi''ed him on the face and accused him of being a communist coddler. Moments later, while )eocades was feeding his swine , *dilberto strewed him with a burst of gunfire from his MD07 Armalite. eocades cowered in fear as he knelt with both hands clenched at the back of his head. +his again drew boisterous laughter and ridicule from the dreaded des'erados. At  o-clock, Fr. ,ulio Favali arrived at 3m. ;< on board his motorccle . (e entered the house of 2omez . #orberto o'ened the motorcycles gasoline tank, s'illed some fuel, lit a fire and burned the motorccle . As the ehicle was abla;e, the felons raed and re@oiced. &'on seeing his motorcycle on fire, Fr. Favali accosted #orberto . But the latter sim'ly ste''ed backwards and e)ecuted a thumbsDdown signal. 8dilberto asked the 'riest3 "Ano ang gusto mo8 padreG 2usto mo bu-on -o ang ulo mo #o you want me to break your head%G" +hereafter, *dilberto fired at the head of the priest . #orberto taunted *dilberto if that was the onl wa he -new to -ill a priest . 4lighted oer the remark, *dilberto 5umped over the prostrate bod three times8 -ic-ed it twice , and fired anew. +he burst of gunfire irtually /'A,,*&*) ,'* '*A) OF F&. FAVA$(8 CA/(#2 '(/ 0&A(# ,O /CA,,*& O# ,'* &OA). As orberto flaunted the brain to the terrified onlookers, his brothers danced and

sang "Mutya Ea Baleleng" to the delight of their comradesDinDarms. In seeking e)cul'ation from criminal liability, a''ellants contend that the trial court erred in disregarding their res'ectie defenses of alibi which, if 'ro'erly a''reciated, would tend to establish that there was no prior agreement to -ill 2 that the intended victim was Fr. Peter 2eremias8 not Fr. ,ulio ,ulio Favali 2 that there was onl one gunman8 *dilberto 2 and, that there was absolutely no showing that appellants cooperated in the shooting of the victim des'ite their 'ro)imity at the time to 8dilberto.




On their defense of alibi, /everino and &ud $ines claim that they were harvesting pala the whole da some one -ilometer awa from the crime scene. &oger 0eda6o alleges that he was on an errand for the church to bu lumber and nipa in "!lang8 Cotabato that morning, taking along his wife and sick child c hild for medical treatment and arrived in $a *speranza8 ,ulunan8 ,u lunan8 PA/, PA/, #OO#,("*. =maaga pa> (ssue: . *hether or not the trial court erred in disregarding the defenses of alibi H #o. ;. *hether or not there is conspirac H %es. 'eld:

0. #o. It is a)iomatic that the accused interposing the defense of alibi must not onl be at some other place but that it must also be P'%/(CA$$% ("PO//(0$* FO& '(" ,O 0* A, ,'* /C*#* OF ,'* C&("* at the time of its commission . Considering the failure of appellants to prove the re!uired phsical impossibilit of being present at the crime scene , as can be readily deduced from the pro1imit between the places where the were allegedl situated at the time of the commission of the offenses and the locus criminis =the place of the crime> , the defense of alibi is definitely feeble . #o phsical impossibilit e1ists in instances where it would ta-e the accused onl <4;? minutes b 5eep or triccle8 or some .< hours b foot , to traerse the distance between the

'lace where he allegedly was at the time of commission of the offense and the scene of the crime. 5ecently, we ruled that there can be no 'hysical im'ossibility even if the the distance between two places is merel ; hours b bus . More im'ortant, it is wellDsettled that the )*F*#/* OF A$(0( CA##O, P&*VA($ OV*& ,'* PO/(,(V* ()*#,(F(CA,(O# OF ,'* A,'O&/ A,'O&/ OF ,'* C&("* 0% ,'* P&O/*C,(O# W(,#*//*/ . +he

'resence of a''ellants in the eatery at Em. 01 haing been 'ositiely established, all doubts that they were not 'riy to the 'lot to li!uidate alleged communist sym'athi;ers are therefore remoed. +here was direct 'roof to link them to the cons'iracy. +wo +wo eyewitnesses testified that they were both inside the eatery when the a''ellants first discussed their 'lan to kill some communist sym'athi;ers. +hey also saw a''ellants when 5ufino 5obles #Bantay/% was shot. :urther, at  that afternoon, a''ellants were er y much at the scene of the crime when :r. :aali was brutally murdered. 1. %es. +here is conspirac when two or more persons come to an agreement to commit a crime and decide to commit it . It is not essential that all the accused commit together each and eery act constitutie of the offense. It is enough that an accused 'artici'ates in an act ac t or deed where there is singularit of purpose , and unit in its e1ecution is 'resent. It is clear that appellants were not merel innocent bstanders but were in fact vital cogs in perpetrating the savage murder of :r. :aali and the attempted murder of 5ufino 5obles by


=

the Manero brothers and their militiamen. :or sure, appellants all assumed a fighting stance to discourage if not 'reent an attempt to provide assistance to the fallen priest . +hey surrounded the house of )omingo 2omez to sto' 5obles and the other occu'ants from leaing so that the wounded &obles ma die of hemorrhage . &ndoubtedly, these were overt acts to ensure success of the commission of the crimes and in furtherance of the aims of the conspirac . W'($* APP*$$A#,/ "A% #O, 'AV* )*$(V*&*) ,'* FA,A$ /'O,/ ,'*"/*$V*/8 ,'*"/*$V*/8 ,'*(& CO$$*C,(V* AC,(O# /'OW*) A CO""O# (#,*#, ,O CO""(, ,'* C&("(#A$ C&("( #A$ AC,/ AC,/ .

#*(858:O58, the @udgment a''ealed from being in accord with law and the eidence is A::I5M8 with the modification that the ciil indemnity which is increased from P0 1,???.?? to P?,???.?? is awarded to the lawful heirs of the deceased 'lus e)em'lary damages of P0??,???.??2 howeer, the award of moral damages is deleted.% dele ted.% People v. ,eehan-ee

'u blicity in the #ote: +he (ultmanHCha'man murder case was a murder case that gained wide 'ublicity Phili''ines during the early 0<
After a while, "aureen re+uested $eino to ta-e her home at Cam'anilla 4treet, asmarias $illage, $illage, Makati. Chapman tagged along . *hen they entered the illage, "aureen as-ed $eino to stop along Mahogany 4treet, about a bloc- awa from her house . 4he wanted to wal- the rest of the wa because she did not want her parents to -now she was going home that late . $eino offered to wal- with her while Chapman staed in the car and listened to the radio. 9eino and Maureen started walking on the sidewalk. *hen they reached the corner of Caballero and Mahogany 4treets, a lightDcolored Mitsubishi bo)Dty'e $ancer car8 driven b accused came up from behind them and stopped in the middle of the road . Accused alighted from his car, approached them, and asked3 "Who are ou =/how me our> (.) ." 9eino thought accused only wanted to ch check eck their identities. (e reached into his 'ocket, 'ocke t, took out his 'lastic wallet, and handed to accused his Asian eelo'ment Bank I.. Accused did not bother to look grabbed $eino!s $eino!s wallet and and poc-eted poc-eted it . at his I.. as he 5ust grabbed


J

Chapman saw the incident. (e asked accused3 "Wh are ou bothering us " Accused pushed Chapman8 dug into his shirt8 pulled out a gun and fired at him . Cha'man felt his u''er body,

staggered for a moment, and asked3 "*hy did you shoot meG" Cha'man crum'led on the sidewalk. $eino -nelt beside Chapman to assist him but accused ordered him to get up and leave Chapman alone . Accused then turned his ire on 9eino. (e 'ointed gun at him and asked3 "o you want a troubleG" 9eino said "no" and took a ste' backward. +he shooting initiall shoc-ed "aureen . *hen she came to her senses, she became hsterical and started screaming for help . 4he re'eatedly shouted3 "Oh8 m 2od8 he!s got a gun. 'e!s gonna -ill us. Will somebod help usG" Accused was 'ointing his gun to and from 9eino to Maureen, warning the latter to shut u'. Accused ordered 9eino to sit down on the sidewalk. 9eino obeyed and made no attem't to moe away. Maureen continued to be hysterical. 4he could not stay still. 4he strayed to the side of accused-s car. Accused tried but failed to grab her. Maureen circled around accused-s car, trying to 'ut some distance between them. +he short chase lasted for a minute or two. 8entually, accused caught Maureen and re'eatedly en@oined her to shut u' and sit down beside 9eino. :or a moment, accused turned his back from the two. (e faced them again and shot $eino . 9eino was hit on the u''er @aw, fell backwards on the sidewalk, but did not lose consciousness. $eino heard another shot and saw "aureen fall beside him . (e lifted his head to see what was ha''ening and saw accused return to his car and drive awa . 9eino struggled to his knees and shouted for hel'. (e noticed at least three 'eo'le looking on and standing outside their houses along Caballero 4treet. +he security guards of asmarias $illage came after a few minutes. +hey rushed 9eino and Maureen to the Makati Medical Center for treatment. After

K

(ssue: *hether or not treacher was present 'eld: %es8 in the wounding of $eino and the -illing of 'ultman. 0ut not in the -illing of Chapman.

+he > Informations charged the accused with haing committed the crimes with treacher and evident premeditation . *vident premeditation was CO&&*C,$% &$*) O, b the trial court for, admittedly, the shooting incident was merel a CA/A$ *#CO#,*& or a C'A#C* "**,(#2 on the street since the victims were un-nown to the accused and iceD ersa. It, howeer, a''reciated the 'resence of the !ualifying circumstance of treachery. On the other hand, the P&O/*C,(O# FA($*) ,O P&OV* ,&*AC'*&% (# ,'* 3($$(#2 OF C'AP"A# . +here is no evidence on record to prove that the accused consciousl and deliberatel adopted his mode of attac- to insure the accomplishment of his criminal design without ris- to himself . +he accused acted on the spur of the moment . +heir meeting was b chance . +hey were strangers to each other. +he time between the initial encounter and the shooting was short and unbroken. +he /'OO,(#2 OF C'AP"A# WA/ ,'/ ,'* &*/$, OF A &A/' A#) ("P*,O/ ("P$/* on the part of the accused &A,'*& ,'A# A )*$(0*&A,* AC, OF W($$ . "ere suddenness of the attac- would not8 b itself8 constitute treacher . (ence, absent an +ualifing circumstance , the accused should onl be held liable for 'O"(C()* for the shooting and -illing of Chapman.

As to the wounding of $eino and the -illing of 'ultman , treacher clearl attended the commission of the crimes. +he eidence shows that while seated8 unarmed and begging for merc8 the two were gunned down b the accused . Clearly, the accused purposel placed his two victims in a CO"P$*,*$% )*F*#/*$*// PO/(,(O# before shooting them . +here was an appreciable lapse of time between the killing of Cha'man and the shooting of 9eino and (ultman H a 'eriod which the accused used to 're'are for a mode of attack which ensured the e)ecution of the crime without risk to himself. #I $I8* *(858O:, we hereby A::I5M *I+( MOI:ICA+IO4 the ecision of the trial court, dated ecember 11, 0<<1, thus3 #0% In Criminal Case o. <0D7=?, finding accused Claudio F. +eehankee, Fr., guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of (omicide for the shooting of 5oland Fohn Cha'man, and sentencing said accused to suffer an indeterminate 'enalty of im'risonment of e ight #K% years and one #0% day of 'rision mayor as minimum to fourteen #07% years, eight #K% months and one #0% day of reclusion tem'oral as ma)imum, and to 'ay the heirs of the said deceased the following amounts3 :ifty +housand #P?,???.??% 'esos as indemnity for the ictim-s death2 and, One Million #P0,???,???.??% 'esos as moral damages. #1% In Criminal Case o. <0D7=?=, finding accused Claudio F. +eehankee, Fr., guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Murder, !ualified by treachery, for the shooting of Maureen aarro (ultman, and sentencing him to suffer im'risonment of reclusion 'er'etua, and to 'ay


<

the heirs of the said deceased the following amounts3 :ifty +housand #P?,???.??% 'esos as indemnity for her death2 +wo Million +hree (undred :ifty +housand :our (undred 4i)tyDOne Pesos and 8ightyD+hree Centaos #P1,>?,7=0.K>% as actual damages2 :ie (undred 4i)tyD:our +housand :ourtyD+wo Pesos and :iftyD4een Centaos #P=7,?71.J% for loss of earning ca'acity of said deceased2 One Million Pesos #P0,???,???.??% as moral damages2 and +wo Million #P1,???,???.??% 'esos as e)em'lary damages. #>% In Criminal Case o. <0D7K?J, finding accused Claudio F. +eehankee, Fr., guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of :rustrated Murder, !ualified by treachery, for the shooting of Fussi Olai 9eino, and sentencing him to suffer the indeterminate 'enalty of eight #K% years of 'rision mayor as minimum, to fourteen #07% years and eight #K% months of reclusion tem'oral as ma)imum, and to 'ay the said offended 'arty the following amounts3 #P>?,???.??% 'esos as +hirty +housand #P>?,???.??% 'esos as indemnity for his in@uries2 One (undred 8ighteen +housand +hree (undred 4i)tyDine 'esos and 8ightyD:our Centaos #P00K,>=<.K7% and e!uialent in Phili''ine Pesos of &.4.L,=??.??, both as actual damages2 One Million #P0,???,???.??% 'esos as moral damages2 and, +wo Million #P1,???,???.??% 'esos as e)em'lary damages. #7% In all three cases, ordering said accused to 'ay each of the three #>% offended 'arties the sum of One Million Pesos #P0,???,???.??2 or a total of +hree Million P>,???,???.??N 'esosN for attorney-s fees and e)'enses of litigation.% People v. *nguito Facts: At about >3?? o-clock dawn, :eli'e &e+uerme , while driving his motorela with his wife 5osita on board, pic-ed up a passenger , *ngr. Wilfredo Achumbre , near the a;areno church in Cagayan de Oro. Achumbre as-ed him to bring him across the "arcos bridge towards his home. After traelling a distance of >?? meters, &e+uerme!s motorela was bumped b a white motor vehicle #Eia Ceres an%. +he vehicle -ept pushing the motorela causing it to run ver fast. Because of the iolent 'ush the motorela turned around and fell on its right side , causing the drier :eli'e and his wife to sustain serious bodily in@uries. Achumbre was able to run towards the railings at "arcos 0ridge but accused with intent to -ill him rammed and hit him with his vehicle8 cutting his right leg and thereafter ran over him which was the direct

and immediate cause of his instantaneous death. 6eorgita Achumbre, wife of the deceased, knows accused because he used to come to their house and he and her husband were both em'loyed with 6  P Builders and they used to 'lay basketball together. *hen she confronted the accused at the 'olice station why he killed her husband, 8nguito answered that he was mauled b her husband and it was an act of revenge . +he accused e)'lained that the victim became angr when he was made to pa the bills of *nguito!s friend . +he trial court rendered @udgment finding accused guilt beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of 'omicide with $ess /erious Phsical (n5uries #suffered by :eli'e 5e!uerme% with the aggravating circumstance of the use of motor vehicle .


0?

+he CA found that since the evidence showed that accused -illed the victim b means of motor vehicle, he should be guilty of the crime of "&)*& and not homicide . A''ellant contends that he )() #O, (#,*#,(O#A$$% C'OO/* the motor vehicle as a means of committing the offense , and that at most, the vehicle was the onl available means to stop the deceased from escaping . (e argues that it was his intention to apprehend and surrender the deceased to the police for his 'reious act of mauling him but in the 'rocess, he killed the deceased. A''ellant further contends that he should have been convicted of the crime of homicide with mitigating circumstances of passion and voluntar surrender . (ssues: . *hether or not 8nguito is guilty of murder with the use of a motor vehicle or onl homicide 4 "urder with the use of a motor vehicle. ;. *hether or not the mitigating circumstances of passion and voluntar surrender can be appreciated D #o. 'eld:

0. +he /* OF A "O,O& V*'(C$* 9A$(F(*/ ,'* 3($$(#2 ,O "&)*& (F ,'* /A"* WA/ P*&P*,&A,*) 0% "*A#/ ,'*&*OF . A''ellant-s claim that he merel used the motor vehicle to stop the victim from escaping is belied b his actuations . By his own admission, he testified that there was a police mobile patrol near the crossing . Accused could have easil sought the assistance of the police instead of ta-ing the law into his own hands. Moreoer, he did not stop the vehicle after hitting the deceased . Accused further used the vehicle in his attempt to escape . (e was already more than 0 kilometer away from the 'lace

of the incident when he sto''ed his ehicle u'on seeing the 'olice mobile 'atrol which was following him. 1. *e find that these mitigating circumstances cannot be a''reciated in his faor. AccusedD a''ellant was allegedly "still ery angry" while he was following, bum'ing and 'ushing the motorela which was in front of him. (e was 'reiously mauled by the deceased and allegedly rendered unconscious by the blows inflicted on him. *hen he regained consciousness, he claims that he wanted to look for a 'oliceman to re'ort that he was mauled. Clearl8 appellantBs state of mind after he was mauled and before he crushed Achumbre to death was such that he was still able to act reasonabl . In fact, he admitted having seen a police mobile patrol nearb but instead , he chose to resort to the dastardly act which resulted in the death of Achumbre and in the in5uries of the spouses &e+uerme . For passion to be considered as a mitigating circumstance , facts must be proved to show causes /FF(C(*#, ,O P&O)C* $O// OF /*$F4CO#,&O$ and to OV*&CO"* &*A/O#. +he turmoil and unreason which naturally result from a !uarrel or fight should not be

confused with the sentiment or e)citement in the mind of a 'erson in@ured or offended to such a degree as to de'rie him of his sanity and selfDcontrol.


00

+he mitigating circumstance of voluntar surrender cannot be appreciated . 8idence shows that ACC/*) WA/ P&/*) 0% ,'* PO$(C* . 4PO> Catiil testified that appellant did not surrender but onl stopped his vehicle when its &(2', ,(&* WA/ A$&*A)% F$A, . +he foregoing notwithstanding, the e1istence or non4e1istence of a mitigating circumstance in the case at bar will not affect the penalt to be imposed 'ursuant to Article => of the 5PC #under Article =>, an indiisible 'enalty cannot be affected by the 'resence of any mitigating or aggraating circumstance%. +he crime committed is the comple1 crime of murder with less serious phsical in5uries . &nder Article E, the penalt for a comple1 crime shall be the ma1imum period of the penalt for the most serious crime . +he CA was correct in im'osing the 'enalty of reclusion 'er'etua. #*(858:O58, the decision conicting accusedDa''ellant +hadeos 8nguito of the com'le) crime of Murder with 9ess 4erious Physical In@uries and sentencing him to the 'enalty of reclusion 'er'etua is hereby A::I5M8 with the MOI:ICA+IO that accusedDa''ellant is ordered to 'ay the heirs of deceased *ilfredo Achumbre the amount of P?,???.?? as ciil indemnity2 P0,=K?,???.?? for loss of earning ca'acity2 P 0=,>??.?? as actual damages2 P?,???.?? as moral damages2 and to further 'ay the s'ouses :eli'e and 5osita 5e!uerme the amount of P1?,???.?? as moral damages.% People v. Whisenhunt Facts: Accused was charged with the murder of 8lsa 4antosDCastillo, under an Information

which read3 +hat on or about 4e'tember 17, 0<<>, in the Munici'ality of 4an Fuan, Metro Manila, Phili''ines, and within the @urisdiction of this (onorable Court, the aboeDnamed accused did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously, with intent to kill and ta-ing advantage of superior strength , attack, assault and use 'ersonal iolence u'on the 'erson of one *lsa /antos Castillo by then and there stabbing her with a bladed weapon in different parts of her bod , thereby inflicting u'on her mortal wounds which were the direct and immediate cause of her death and thereafter outraged or scoffed her corpse b then and there chopping off her head and different parts of her bod . +he eidence shows that accused and the deceased were lovers. +hey met at the Ape1 "otor Corporation where accused was the "anager while *lsa was the Assistant Personnel "anager . 0oth were married but estranged from their respective spouses . In A'ril 0<<>, *lsa resigned from Ape1 'resumably to avoid the nast rumors about her illicit affair with accused . It a''ears, howeer, that she continued the affair even after she resigned . On 4e'tember 1>, emetrio 5aelo, an A'e) em'loyee assigned to drie for accused, re'orted for work at K3>? a.m. at the latters condominium unit at the Platinum Condominium in 6reenhills. Accused ordered him to fetch 8lsa at her 'arents house. (e found 8lsa standing at a


01

corner near her 'arents house, carrying three bags. (e brought 8lsa to accuseds condominium unit. +he following day, emetrio again re'orted at accusedDa''ellants unit. At around noon, 9ucy asked if he had seen a kitchen knife which was missing. (e then oerheard 9ucy ask accused who told her that the kitchen knife was in his bedroom. emetrio saw accused go inside the room and, shortly thereafter, hand the knife to 9ucy. On 4e'tember 1, emetrio re'orted at the Platinum Condominium. *hile he was there, Amy 4errano, A'e) Personnel Manager, asked him if 8lsa was still in accuseds condominium unit. (e answered yes. Amy gae him black 'lastic garbage bags which he turned oer to accused. +he latter then ordered him to drie 9ucy the maid to Cubao and to go home to get some clothes, since they were leaing for Bagac, Bataan. +hereafter, emetrio returned to the condominium. Accused asked him to check the fuel gauge of the car. (e was told to go to A'e) to get a gas sli' and then to gas u'. At around noon, he went back to the condominium and stayed in the serants !uarters. *hile emetrio was in the serants !uarters watching teleision, accused came in. (e as-ed )emetrio how long he wanted to wor- for him . emetrio re'lied that he was willing to work for him foreer, and e)'ressed his full trust in him. &'on hearing this, accused shed tears and embraced emetrio. +hen accused said, ""a problema a-o8 &io ." emetrio asked what it was, and accused told him that *lsa was dead . emetrio asked, "0a-it mo sia pinata " AccusedD answered that he did not -ill *lsa , rather she died of 7bangungot ." )emetrio suggested that *lsaBs bod be autopsied , but accused said that he had alread beheaded her. +he two of them went to 4ho''esille at the 6reenhills 4ho''ing Center and bought a big bag with a zipper and rollers .

*hen they returned to the condominium, accused as-ed )emetrio to help him wrap the bod in the blac- garbage bags . emetrio entered accusedBs bathroom and found the dismembered hands8 feet8 trun- and head of a woman. +hey 'acked all the garbage bags in the bag with the ;i''er and rollers. +hen, they brought the bag down and loaded it in the trunk of accuseds car. After that, emetrio took the wheel and accused sat beside him. Accused told )emetrio to drive around 0atangas and ,agata Cit . *hen they were near

Puting Eahoy and 4ilangan, accused told emetrio to turn into a narrow road and sto' the car. Accused too- the plastic bags and dumped them b the roadside . (e called emetrio and said, "+ayo na 5io, tulo na tao sa 0ataan ." #*hisenhunt family mansion in Bagac, Bataan% Before reaching Bagac, accused ordered emetrio to stop the car on top of a bridge . Accused told )emetrio to throw a bag into the river . 9ater, they 'assed another bridge and accused threw *lsaBs clothes oer the bridge. *hen they 'assed Pilar, Bataan, accused threw *lsaBs violet 2iordano bag . As they reached the road boundary of Bagac, accused wrung a short4 sleeved dress with violet and green stripes , and threw it.


0>

+he ne)t morning, accused ordered )emetrio to clean the trun- of the car , saying, "5io, linisan mo ang sasakyan 'ara ang com'artment hindi babaho." At 03?? '.m., they started off for Manila. As they 'assed a 'lace called EabogDkabog, he saw accused take out an A+M card. Accused burned the middle of the card, twisted it and threw it out of the window. )emetrio as-ed accused if he can get off since he wanted to go home to Fairview . Before emetrio left, accusedDa''ellant told him, "&io8 ou and our famil can go on a vacation. ( will give ou mone." AccusedDa''ellant then gae emetrio P?.?? for his trans'ortation going to : airiew. When )emetrio got home8 he immediatel told his famil what happened . 'is wife told him to report the incident to Fiscal Foey ia;. emetrio and his wife went to the house of :iscal

ia; to talk to him. +he following morning, :iscal ia;, emetrio, his wife and his brothers went to the )O@. +hey were referred to the #0( , where )emetrio gave his statement . A team of BI agents 'roceeded to Barangay Polong, 4ta. Cru;, 4ta. 5osa, 9aguna. +here, they found a crowd of people gathered around the mutilated parts of a human bod along the road. +he bod parts had been discovered b triccle drivers . emetrio 5aelo accom'anied some BI agents to retrace the route he took with accused going to Bataan, to retriee the items thrown away by accused. +hey were able to recoer a iolet bag, one brown sandal and a shirt with iolet and green floral 'rints. +he trial court rendered @udgment, conicting accused of murder +ualified b abuse of superior strength and outraging and scoffing at the corpse of the victim #Article 17K, 'ar. =%. (ssue: . *hether or not the circumstance of abuse of superior strength is present D #o. ;. *hether or not the circumstance of outraging and scoffing at the corpse of the victim is present D %es. 'eld:

0. *e do not agree with the trial court that the 'rosecution sufficiently 'roed the !ualifying circumstance of abuse of su'erior strength. Abuse of superiorit is present whenever there is ine+ualit of forces between the victim and the aggressor , assuming a situation of superiorit of strength notoriousl advantageous for the aggressor and selected or ta-en advantage of b him in the commission of the crime . +he FAC, ,'A, ,'* V(C,(" WA/ A WO"A# )O*/ #O,8 0% (,/*$F8 */,A0$(/' ,'A, ACC/*) CO""(,,*) ,'* C&("* W(,' A0/* OF /P*&(O& /,&*#2,' . +here ought to be enough proof of the relative strength of the aggressor and the ictim. A0/* OF /P*&(O& /,&*#2,' "/, 0* /'OW# A#) C$*A&$% */,A0$(/'*) A/ ,'* C&("* (,/*$F . In this case, nobod witnessed the actual -illing . #owhere in )emetrioBs testimon , and it is not indicated in an of the pieces of phsical


07

evidence , that accused deliberatel too- advantage of his superior strength in overpowering *lsa. On the contrary, this Court observed from the photograph of accused that he has a rather /"A$$ F&A"* . (ence, the attendance of the +ualifing circumstance of abuse of superior strength was not ade+uatel proved and cannot be appreciated against accused .

1. (oweer, the other circumstance of outraging and scoffing at the corpse of the victim was correctl appreciated b the trial court . +he "*&* )*CAP(,A,(O# OF ,'* V(C,("B/ '*A) CO#/,(,,*/ O,&A2(#2 O& /COFF(#2 A, ,'* CO&P/* OF ,'* V(C,("8 ,'/ 9A$(F%(#2 ,'* 3($$(#2 ,O "&)*& . In this case, accused not onl beheaded *lsa . (e further cut up her bod li-e pieces of meat . +hen, he strewed the dismembered parts in a deserted road in the countryside, leaving them to rot on the ground .

#*(858:O58, the decision of the 5egional +rial Court of Pasig City, Branch 01, in Criminal Case o. 0?1=KJ, finding accusedDa''ellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of murder, and sentencing him to suffer the 'enalty of reclusion 'er'etua, is A::I5M8 with the following MOI:ICA+IO43 AccusedDa''ellant is O5858 to 'ay the heirs of 8lsa 4antos Castillo actual damages in the amount of P?,???.??2 ciil indemnity in the amount of P?,???.??2 moral damages in the amount of P0,???,???.??2 e)em'lary damages in the amount of P0,???,???.??2 and attorneys fees in the amount of P0?,???.??.% People v. 2onzales Facts: On a day intended to 'ay homage to the dead, a pregnant woman was shot to death in the course of her husbandBs altercation with the accused and his son along the 6arden of

5emembrance within the 9oyola Memorial Park in Marikina. +he trial court found accused guilty of the comple1 crime of murder and two counts of frustrated murder and accordingly sentenced him to death. +his case is before us on automatic reiew. At about 13>? '.m. both families of 'riate com'lainant oel Andres and accused 6on;ale; were on their way to the e)it of the 9oyola Memorial Park. At the intersection near the 6arden of 5emembrance, while 6on;ale; was turning left towards the e) it and Andres was headed straight along the road to the e)it. their two vehicles almost collided . Andres was able to timel step on the bra-es . +he appellant continued driving while Andres drove behind appellantBs vehicle for some time and cut him off when he found the opportunit . Andres got out of his vehicle and -noc-ed on accusedBs car window . Andres calml told accused to be careful with his driving and informed the latter that he is with his famil and to this 6on;ale; allegedly re'lied, Accidents are accidents8 whatBs our problem/ Andres saw a''ellant turning red in anger so he decided to go bac- to his vehicle when he was bloc-ed b appellantBs son who said, Anong problema mo sa erpat -o / Andres testified that he felt threatened and so he immediatel boarded his vehicle and partiall opened the car window 5ust wide enough to tal- bac- to appellantBs son , ino. /))*#$%8 O#* OF '(/ PA//*#2*&/ /A() G0(#A&($ 3A"( ./ (e turned to his wife Feliber Andres and saw her bloodied and unconscious . (is son 3enneth and nephew 3evin were


0

also wounded. Andres admitted that he and )ino were shouting at each other so he did not hear the shot .

+he defenses ersion of the incident is that Andres cut the a''ellants 'ath by 'ositioning his : obli!uely along the a''ellants lane from the latters left side. Andres got out of his ehicle, stood beside the a''ellants car window, and re'eatedly cursed the a''ellant, Putang ina mo, ang tandaDtanda mo na hindi ka 'a marunong magmaneho. Ang boboDbobo mo./ +he a''ellant stayed inside his car and allegedly re'lied, Pasensiya ka na hindi kita nakita, nasilaw ako. Aksidente lang./ ino, a''ellants son who rode in another ehicle, arried at the scene and confronted Andres. When Andres suddenl reached for something inside his vehicle8 this prompted appellant to get his gun from the glove compartment and feeling that his son was threatened he got out of his car read to shoot . *hen he saw that Andres did not have a weapon he put down his hand holding the gun . +his is when the appellantBs daughter ,risha arried at the scene, hugged her father and in the process held his hand holding the gun . W(,' ,&(/'AB/ /0/,A#,(A$ 0O)% W*(2', P/'(#2 A2A(#/, '("8 APP*$$A#, $O/, '(/ 0A$A#C* A#) ,'* 2# ACC()*#,A$$% F(&*) .

An Information for the comple1 crime of "urder8 )ouble Frustrated "urder and Attempted "urder was filed against accused. +he case records show that :eliber Andres, lied to gie birth to a baby girl by caesarian section and died the following morning. Eenneth and Eein were treated for e)traction of metallic fragments on their faces. +hey were discharged from the hos'ital = days later. +he trial court rendered @udgement finding that the shooting was attended b the !ualifying circumstance of treacher and held the a''ellant guilt of the comple1 crime of murder for the death of :eliber Andres and two counts of frustrated murder for the in@uries sustained by Eenneth Andres and Eein $alde; and sentenced the a''ellant to the ma)imum of the im'osable 'enalty which is death. +he trial court too- 5udicial notice on the feature of the automatic pistol used in this case which is capable of un+uestionable demonstration or ought to be known to @udges because of their @udicial functions. Practically, the stages before an automatic firearm would be capable of firing are as follows3 0% the loading of a bullet into the chamber of the gun2 1% the coc-ing of the hammer , if uncocked2 >% the releasing of the safet pin2 7% the pressing of the trigger to unleash the hammer so that the firing 'in will hit the cartridge to 'ro'el the bullet out to hit the target. &ealisticall , it demonstrates that a gun will not fire even if the bullet is loaded in its chamber if the hammer is uncoc-ed 2 or even if coc-ed if the safet pin is engaged 2 or even if the safet pin is disengaged if the trigger will not be pressed . (oweer, even if the gun is fired if it is not aimed and leveled to the target8 the purpose of firing it shall not be achieved .


0=

Contrarily, O#C* A 2# (/ )&AW# A2A(#/, A P*&/O#8 ,'* "*A#/8 "*,'O)/ A#) FO&"/ *"P$O%*) FO& (,/ *H*C,(O# (/ A$&*A)% CO#C*(V*) . And once it is tended directly and s'ecifically to insure its e)ecution, it conse!uently P&O)C*/ ,'* CO#/C(O/ A#) )*$(0*&A,* (#,*#,(O# . +he defense asserts that the eidence for the 'rosecution failed to establish the attendance of treachery and without the attendance of the said !ualifying circumstance the crime committed is homicide, not murder. A''ellant 'oints out that the shooting ha''ened in a matter of seconds and that it was 'receded by a heated argument between the 'arties. 4uch being the case, it is argued that the shooting could not hae been attended by treachery. +here was no time for the a''ellant to consciously and deliberately em'loy the mode of attack to insure its e)ecution and at the same time to eliminate any form of retaliation from the alleged intended  ictim. A''ellant also aers that the trial court erred in e!uating the use of an automatic 'istol with treachery. +he fact that the gun was drawn and fired does not mean that the mode of attack was consciously and deliberately em'loyed. (ssue: *hether or not the crime was attended b treacher 'eld: #o. +he shooting was not attended by treachery and accordingly the crime committed for the death of :eliber Andres is homicide and not murder.

+reachery under Article 07, 'aragra'h 0= of the 5PC is defined as the deliberate em'loyment of means, methods or forms in the e)ecution of a crime against 'ersons which tend directly and s'ecially to insure its e)ecution, without risk to the offender arising from the defense wh ich the intended ictim might raise. :or treachery to be a''reciated two elements must concur3 0% the emploment of means of e1ecution that would insure the safet of the accused from retaliator acts of the intended victim and leaving the latter without an opportunit to defend himself and 1% the means emploed were deliberatel or consciousl adopted b the offender . +he means emploed for the commission of the crime or the mode of attac- must be shown to have been consciousl or deliberatel adopted by the accused to insure the consummation of the crime and at the same time eliminate or reduce the ris- of retaliation from the intended ictim. C'A#C* *#CO#,*&/8 ("P$/* 3($$(#2 O& C&("*/ CO""(,,*) A, ,'* /P& OF ,'* "O"*#, O& ,'A, W*&* P&*C*)*) 0% '*A,*) A$,*&CA,(O#/ A&* 2*#*&A$$% #O, A,,*#)*) 0% ,&*AC'*&% FO& $AC3 OF OPPO&,#(,% OF ,'* ACC/*) ,O )*$(0*&A,*$% *"P$O% A ,&*AC'*&O/ "O)* OF A,,AC3 . +he encounter between oel Andres and the a''ellant was a chance encounter . +hey were total strangers before their vehicles almost collided . :or the rules on treachery to a''ly, the sudden attac- must have been preconceived b the accused , une1pected b the victim and without provocation on the 'art of the latter.


0J

#*hether or not the attack succeeds against its intended ictim or in@ures another or whether the crime committed is graer than that intended is immaterial, as long as it is shown that the attack is attended by treachery, the said !ualifying circumstance may still be considered by the co urt. +hus, the determining factor on whether or not the commission of a crime is attended b treacher is not the resulting crime committed but the mode of attac- emploed in its e1ecution .% ,&*AC'*&% (/ #*V*& P&*/"*) . It is re+uired that the manner of attac- must be shown to have been attended b treacher A/ CO#C$/(V*$% A/ ,'* C&("* (,/*$F.

+he FAC, ,'A, ,'* APP*$$A#, F(&*) '(/ 2# F&O" 0*'(#) ,'* V(C,(" )O*/ #O, 0% (,/*$F A"O#, ,O ,&*AC'*&% . +here is no evidence on record that the appellant deliberatel positioned himself behind the victim to gain advantage over him when he fired the shot . On the contrary, the eidence before us reeals that the 'osition of the a''ellants car was not of his own doing but it became so when oel Andres oertook his car and cut off his 'ath. #As regards the in@uries sustained by the two children we find that the crime committed are two counts of slight 'hysical in@uries. +he intent to kill determines whether the crime committed is 'hysical in@uries or homicide and such intent is made manifest by the acts of the accused which are undoubtedly intended to kill the ictim. Considering the nature and location of their in@uries and the number of days re!uired for their treatment, we find that the crime committed for the in@uries sustained by the children are two counts of slight 'hysical in@urie. For evident lac- of criminal intent to -ill complainant8 the information for attempted homicide must fail . +he mitigating circumstances of oluntary surrender, 'assion and obfuscation, incom'lete defense of a relatie and lack of intent to commit so grae a wrong, 'leaded by the defense, were not conincingly 'roed and none can be considered in the im'osition of 'enalties. +he testimony of 'rosecution witness contradicts the a''ellants 'retense of oluntary surrender. *itness 5amos testified that the a''ellant droe away towards the gate of the memorial 'ark while he was !uestioning him after the shooting and had not oel Andres and onlookers blocked his 'ath the a''ellant could hae fled the scene of the crime. +he mitigating circumstance of 'assion and obfuscation is also not obtaining. :or this mitigating circumstance to be considered, it must be shown that #0% an unlawful act sufficient to 'roduce 'assion and obfuscation was committed by the intended ictim2 #1% that the crime was committed within a reasonable length of time from the commission of the unlawful act that 'roduced the obfuscation in the accuseds mind2 and that #>% the 'assion and obfuscation arose from lawful sentiments and not from a s'irit of lawlessness or reenge. #oel AndresB act of shouting at the appellantBs son8 who was then a nurse and of legal age8 is not sufficient to produce passion and obfuscation . Besides, ino was shouting back at oel Andres. It was not a case wherein the

a''ellants son a''eared hel'less and o''ressed that the a''ellant lost his reason and shot at the : of oel Andres.


0K

+he same holds true for the a''ellants claim of 'roocation on the 'art of oel Andres. Proocation must be sufficient to e)cite a 'erson to commit the wrong committed and that the 'roocation must be commensurate to the crime committed. +he sufficiency of 'roocation aries according to the circumstances of the case. +he aggressive behavior of #oel Andres towards the appellant and his son ma be demeaning or humiliating but it is not sufficient provocation to shoot at the complainantBs vehicle . +he 'lea for the a''reciation of the mitigating circumstance of incom'lete defense of a relatie is also unmeritorious since the act of Andres in cursing and shouting at the appellant and his son do not amount to an unlawful aggression against them . :inally, the 'lea for the a''reciation of the mitigating circumstance of lack of intent to commit so grae a wrong is likewise deoid of merit. +his mitigating circumstance is obtaining when there is a notable dis'arity between the means em'loyed by the accused to commit a wrong and the resulting crime committed. +he intention of the accused at the time of the commission of the crime is manifested from the wea'on used, the mode of attack em'loyed and the in@ury sustained by the ictim. +he appellantBs use of a gun , although not deliberately sought nor em'loyed in the shooting, should have reasonabl placed the appellant on guard of the possible conse+uences of his act . +he use of a gun is sufficient to 'roduce the resulting crimes committed.% #*(858:O58, the decision of the trial court is hereby MOI:I8. +he a''ellant is h ereby found guilty of homicide for the death of :eliber Andres and is sentenced to an indeterminate sentence of K years and 0 day of 'rision mayor in its medium 'eriod, as minimum, to 07 years K months and 0 day of reclusion tem'oral in its medium 'eriod, as ma)imum. :or each count of the slight phsical in5uries committed against Eenneth Andres and Eein $alde;, the a''ellant is hereby sentenced to 1? days of arresto menor.% People v. lep Facts: In the aftermath of an incident where a certain 0uenaventura Wapili went berser- at Mundog 4ubdiision, Poblacion Eida'awan, Cotabato, Police Officer 8rnesto lep was found guilt of murder for -illing Wapili .

Around 1 AM, Buenaentura Wapili was having a high fever and was heard tal-ing insensibl to himself in his room. (is brother4in4law 9eydan heard a disturbance inside the room, as if Wapili was smashing the furniture . &nable to 'acify *a'ili, $edan called Pastor Bonid of the Alliance Church of Eida'awan to hel' him "pra over7 Wapili , but the could not enter the latter-s room as he became wild and violent . 4uddenly, Wapili bolted out of his room na-ed and chased $edan . +hereafter, 9eydan with the aid of two of his neighbors attem'ted to tie *a'ili with a ro'e but was unsuccessful as *a'ili was much bigger in built and stronger than anyone of them. Wapili8 who appeared to have completel gone craz8 -ept on running without an particular direction . +hus, $edan went to the house of a policewoman Plando, a neighbor, and as-ed for assistance . As Wapili 'assed by the house of Plando, he banged PlandoBs vehicle 'arked outside. &sing a handDheld radio, Plando then contacted 4PO0 8rnesto lep, 4PO0 8dilberto


0<

8s'adera and 4PO1 Cris'in Pillo, all members of the P#P assigned to secure the premises of the nearby 5oman Catholic Church of Eida'awan. 4PO0 &le' together with 4PO0 8s'adera and 4PO1 Pillo arried at the scene. +he three 'olice officers, all armed with MD0= rifles, alighted from the @ee' when they saw the na-ed Wapili approaching them . +he kind of wea'on Wapili was armed with is dis'uted. +he police claimed that he was armed with a bolo and a rattan stool , while *a'ili-s relaties and neighbors said he had no bolo, but only a rattan stool. lep fired a warning shot in the air and told Wapili to put down his wea'ons or they would shoot him. But Wapili retorted 7pusilaI7 =7fire Q"% and continued advancing towards the 'olice officers. When Wapili was onl about ;4 meters awa from them, $*P /'O, ,'* V(C,(" W(,' '(/ "4J &(F$*8 '(,,(#2 '(" (# VA&(O/ PA&,/ OF '(/ 0O)% . As the ictim slum'ed to the ground, lep came closer and pumped another bullet into his head and literall blew his brains out .

+he 'ost mortem e)amination concluded that the shots were fired at close range , 'erha's within ;E inches , @udging from the 'owder burns found around some of the wounds in the body, and that the wound in the head , which caused the ictim-s instantaneous death, was inflicted while "the victim was in a ling position ." +he Office of the Ombudsman for the Military filed an Information for murder against 4PO0 &le'. +he accused insisted during the trial that he acted in self4defense . (oweer, the trial court rendered @udgment conicting the accused of murder and sentencing him to death. +he trial court held that the means emploed by the accused to 'reent or re'el the alleged aggression is not reasonable because the victim was alread on the ground , therefore, there was no necessit for the accused to pump another shot on the back 'ortion of the victim!s head. Clearly the gravit of the wounds sustained by the ictim belies the pretension of the accused that he acted in self4defense ./ #A''ellant 'rays for his ac!uittal on the basis of his claim that the -illing of the ictim was in the course of the performance of his official dut as a police officer , and in self4defense .% (ssue: *hether or not there was treacher 'eld: #o. +his Court disagrees with the conclusion of the court a !uo that the killing of *a'ili was attended by treachery, thus !ualifying the offense to murder. *e discern nothing from the evidence that the assault was so sudden and une1pected and that accused deliberatel adopted a mode of attac- intended to insure the -illing of Wapili , without the victim having the opportunit to defend himself .

On the contrary, the victim could not have been ta-en b surprise as he was given more than sufficient warning b accused before he was shot , i.e., accused fired a warning shot in the air, and s'ecifically ordered him to lower his weapons or he would be shot . +he killing of *a'ili was not sought on 'ur'ose. Accused went to the scene in 'ursuance of his official duty as a


1?

'olice officer after haing been summoned for assistance. +he decision to -ill was made in an instant and the V(C,("!/ '*$P$*// PO/(,(O# WA/ "*&*$% (#C()*#,A$ ,O '(/ 'AV(#2 0**# P&*V(O/$% /'O, 0% ACC/*) (# ,'* P*&FO&"A#C* OF '(/ OFF(C(A$ ),% .

+here is treachery when the offender commits any of the crimes against 'ersons, em'loying means, methods, or forms in the e)ecution thereof which tend directly and s'ecially to insure its e)ecution, without risk to himself arising from the defense which the offended 'arty might make. CO#/()*&(#2 ,'* &$* ,'A, ,&*AC'*&% CA##O, 0* (#F*&&*) 0, "/, 0* P&OV*) A/ F$$% A#) CO#V(#C(#2$% A/ ,'* C&("* (,/*$F8 A#% )O0, A/ ,O (,/ *H(/,*#C* "/, 0* &*/O$V*) (# FAVO& OF ACC/*) . Accordingly, for failure of the prosecution to prove treacher to !ualify the killing to murder, accused may onl be conicted of homicide .

#Before the @ustifying circumstance of fulfillment of a duty under Art. 00, 'ar. , of the 5PC may be successfully inoked, the accused must 'roe the 'resence of two re!uisites, namely, that he acted in the performance of a dut or in the lawful e1ercise of a right or an office , and that the in@ury caused or the offense committed be the necessar conse+uence of the due 'erformance of duty or the lawful e)ercise of such right or office. +he /*CO#) &*9(/(,* (/ $AC3(#2 (# ,'* (#/,A#, CA/* . Accused and the other 'olice officers inoled originall set out to perform a legal dut 3 to render police assistance , and restore peace and order at Mundog 4ubdiision where the ictim was then running amuck. +here were two stages of the incident at Mundog 4ubdiision. uring the first stage, the victim threatened the safet of the police officers b menacingl advancing towards them , notwithstanding accused-s 'reious warning shot and erbal admonition to the ictim to lay down his wea'on or he would be shot. As a 'olice officer, it is to be e)'ected that accused stand his ground. p to that point8 his decision to respond with a barrage of gunfire to halt the victim!s further advance was 5ustified under the circumstances .

(oweer, he cannot be e1onerated from OV*&)O(#2 his dut during the second stage of the incident D when he fatall shot the victim in the head , even after the latter slumped to the ground due to multiple gunshot wounds . +he V(C,(" A, ,'A, PO(#, #O $O#2*& PO/*) A ,'&*A, and was already inca'able of mounting an aggression against the 'olice officers. It cannot therefore be said that the fatal wound in the head of the victim was a necessar conse+uence of accusedBs due performance of a dut or the lawful e1ercise of a right or office . 9ikewise, the eidence at hand does not faor his claim of selfDdefense. +he elements in order for selfDdefense to be a''reciated are3 #a% unlawful aggression on the 'art of the 'erson in@ured or killed by the accused2 #b% reasonable necessity of the means em'loyed to 'reent or re'el it2 and, #c% lack of sufficient 'roocation on the 'art of the 'erson defending himself. +he presence of unlawful aggression is a condition sine +ua non . +here can be no self4 defense8 complete or incomplete8 unless the victim has committed an unlawful aggression


10

against the 'erson defending himself. In the 'resent case, the records show that the victim was ling in a prone position on the ground D bleeding from the bullet wounds he sustained, and 'ossibly unconscious D when accused shot him in the head . +he A22&*//(O# ,'A, WA/ (#(,(A$$% 0*2# 0% ,'* V(C,(" A$&*A)% C*A/*) W'*# ACC/*) A,,AC3*) '(" .%

#*(858:O58, the a''ealed Fudgment is MOI:I8. AccusedDa''ellant 4PO0 8584+O &98P is found guilty of 'O"(C()*, instead of "urder, and is sentenced to an indeterminate 'rison term of four #7% years, two #1% months and ten #0?% days of 'rision correccional medium as minimum, to si) #=% years, four #7% months and twenty #1?% days of 'rision mayor minimum as ma)imum. (e is further ordered to indemnify the heirs of Buenaentura *a'ili in the amount of P?,???.??, and to 'ay the costs.% People v. Antonio Facts: *hat should hae been an amiable game of cards between two erstwhile friends turned

into a deadly confrontation resulting in the fatal shooting of one by the hand of the other. +he victim , Arnulfo "Arnie" ,uadles, a former professional bas-etball plaer , succumbed instantaneously to a single gunshot wound right between the ees , inflicted with deadly 'recision by the bullet of a .
security guard who testified as to how the shooting of +uadles occurred. On the other hand, Antonio testified that ,uadles suddenl grabbed AntonioBs gun from ato' a side table. Fearing for his life8 Antonio claimed that he reached for ,uadlesB hand and the grappled for possession of the gun . As the wrestled8 a single shot roared8 ,uadles fell face down to the floor. Antonio alleged that the shooting was accidental , and his only motiation was to defend himself.


11

Antonio convinced the two securit guards to accompan him to his home in 6reenmeadows

4ubdiision, Rue;on City, after which they 'roceeded to the 4an Fuan Police 4tation. *ith them was 4PO7 ieto, a member of the 4an Fuan Police :orce. +hey remained at Antonios residence for seeral hours, during which time Antonio made 'hone calls and summoned his lawyer. At around > in the afternoon, Antonio, accom'anied by 4PO7 ieto, 'laced himself and his gun in the custody of 4an Fuan Mayor Finggoy 8strada and the 'olice authorities. An Information was filed against Antonio for the crime of murder. Also charged as accessories were /POE #ieto and /PO Cartalla . #ieto for harboring or assisting the accused, by then and there failing to arrest and surrender immediatel said accused to the authorities and by giing false information which tended to deceie the inestigating authorities. Cartalla for concealing or destroying the effects or instruments of the body of the crime, in order to 'reent its discoery, by removing the laser sight of the gun used in shooting +uadles, deliberatel omitting to ta-e steps to preserve the evidence at the scene of the crime , and 'ur'osely failing to call on the crime laboratory serice

of the 'ro'er agencies for a''ro'riate action. All three accused were found guilty as charged. (ssue: *hether or not treacher was present 'eld: #o. +here was no treachery in this case. It is not onl the sudden attac- that +ualifies a -illing into murder . ,here must be a conscious and deliberate adoption of the mode of attac- for a specific purpose . /uch deliberate or conscious choice is non4e1istent where the attac- was the product of an ("P$/* OF ,'* "O"*#, . Conscious deliberation or conscious adoption of the mode of attac- has to be proved beond reasonable doubt . +he same degree of 'roof to dis'el any reasonable doubt is re!uired before any conclusion may also be reached res'ecting the attendance of treachery. +here is no such proof in this case .

+here would be no treacher when the V(C,(" WA/ P$AC*) O# 2A&)8 such as when a '*A,*) A&2"*#, P&*C*)*) ,'* A,,AC3 , or when the victim was standing face to face with his assailants and the initial assault could not have been unforeseen. =,'(/III>

It is also clear that a''ellant Antonio did not set out or 'lan to kill +uadles in the first 'lace. (is criminal act was an offshoot of their argument which neither of them had foreseen. (ence, there was no treachery because treacher re+uires that the mode of attac- must have been thought of b the offender . It was A#,O#(O!/ /))*# A#2*& A#) '*A,*) PA//(O# W'(C' )&OV* '(" ,O P$$ '(/ 2# A#) /'OO, ,A)$*/ . /A() PA//(O#8 'OW*V*&8 CA##O, CO4*H(/, W(,' ,&*AC'*&% . In 'assion, the offender loses his reason and control. In


1>

treachery, on the other hand, the means em'loyed is ado'ted consciously and deliberately. One who8 in the heat of passion8 loses his reason and self4control8 cannot consciousl emplo a particular means8 method or form of attac- in the e)ecution of the crime. =,'(/I>

Moreoer, the 'ro)imate distance of three feet between +uadles and Antonio immediately before the fatal shooting allowed and gae +uadles o''ortunity to defend himself. Conse!uently, Antonio can only be conicted of the lesser crime of homicide. #It is submitted that the nonD'roduction of the laser sight by Cartalla did not make him an accessory to the crime committed by Antonio, although he may be administratiely liable for the loss of a 'art of the eidence for the 'rosecution in this case.=K *(858:O58, in iew of all the foregoing, the a''ealed ecision in Criminal Case o. 0001>1D( is hereby MOI:I8. AccusedDa''ellant Alberto "Ambet" Antonio is found 6&I9+S beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of (OMICI8 and is corres'ondingly sentenced to suffer the indeterminate 'enalty of ten #0?% years and one #0% day of 'rision mayor, as minimum to fourteen #07% years and eight #K% months of reclusion tem'oral, as ma)imum. AccusedDa''ellant Fuanito ieto y emer is likewise found 6&I9+S beyond reasonable doubt as accessory to the crime of (OMICI8, and is corres'ondingly sentenced to suffer the indeterminate 'enalty of si) #=% months of arresto mayor, as minimum, to four #7% years of 'rision correccional, as ma)imum. AccusedDa''ellant Antonio is likewise ordered to 'ay to the heirs of Arnulfo B. +uadles the following sums3 #0% P?,???.?? as indemnity for the death of Arnulfo B. +uadles2 #1% P11=,1= as actual damages2 #>% PK,??0,???.?? as com'ensatory damages for loss of earning ca'acity2 #7% P??,???.?? as moral damages2 and #% Costs. :or failure to 'roe accusedDa''ellant 4PO0 (onorio Cartalla, Fr.-s guilt beyond reasonable doubt as accessory to the crime, he is ACR&I++8 and absoled of all liability, both criminal or ciil. In case of insolency of a''ellant Alberto 4. Antonio T "Ambet", a''ellant Fuanito ieto y emer shall be liable to 'ay oneDhalf #0U1% of the aboeDad@udicated sums or the amount of P7,>KK,=7<.0K unto the said heirs of Arnulfo B. +uadles. In all other res'ects, the @udgment of the trial court is A::I5M8.% People v. ,omas Facts: In an Information, the three accused were indicted for the crime of murder, allegedly

committed as follows3


17

+hat on or about Fuly 0<, 1??=, at around 0?3?? oclock in the eening, Munici'ality of Mayantoc, Proince of +arlac, Phili''ines and within the @urisdiction of this (onorable Court, the aboeDnamed accused with intent to kill, with treacher and evident premeditation , cons'iring, confederating and mutually hel'ing one another, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously attack, assault and shot several times one *strella )octor Casco which causedN her instantaneous death. +he ictim, 8strella octor Casco, was based in the &nited 4tates, working there as a 'rocurement s'ecialist with 4afeway, Inc. and as a 'lanner. 4he arried in the Phili''ines about 0? days before the incident. At around <37 PM, *strella8 with her mother )amiana and careta-ers 9ie;l +oledo and Angelita u!ue, were traversing the road towards her house in +arlac after she had par-ed her rented car at the house of 9ie;ls motherDinDlaw. +hey had @ust come from the clinic of r. 4alador for a medical checkDu' of amiana. *strella was wal-ing slightl ahead when appellants +omas, octor and 6atchalian suddenl came out from the side of the road . ,omas8 /r. and )octor are cousins of *strella . W(,'O, /A%(#2 A#%,'(#28 ,O"A/ )&*W A 2# A#) /'O, */,&*$$A ,W(C* A, A )(/,A#C* OF A0O, .< "*,*&/ AWA% . 2atchalian , without a gun, supported ,omas b standing in a bloc-ing position along the road , while )octor positioned himself at the bac- of )amiana and Angelita and po-ed a handgun at them , telling them to lie face down on the ground, though they did not totally dro' on the road but were in a kneeling

'osition. *hen +omas fired the first two shots at 8strella, the latter fell down but the former still followed it with ,'&** "O&* /'O,/ when she was alread prone on the ground . +he three accused fled towards the house of +omas. 9ie;l shouted for hel'. 8strella was declared dead on arrival at the hos'ital.

At the 'olice station, both 9ie;l and Angelita categorically identified the three accused as the ones who 'er'etrated the crime. On the same day, defendants were arrested in their res'ectie homes. 9ie;l o'ined that what 'robably 'rom'ted the three accused to murder 8strella were the facts that3 #0% ,omas was removed as administrator of *strellaBs properties in +arlac2 #1% ,omas lost several cases against *strellaBs father , Cecilio2 #>% ,omas accused *strella of instigating and financing several cases filed against him 2 and #7% Cecilio filed a case against the father of accused )octor , involving an easement of a propert . efendants aerred that they were in their res'ectie homes slee'ing when the incident ha''ened. 4ince +omas suffered a cardiac arrest in ecember 0

1

+he 5+C rendered its ecision finding the accused guilty of murder. +he 5+C appreciated treacher in the swiftness and une1pectedness of the attac- upon the unarmed *strella without the slightest provocation . +he CA affirmed. A''ellants contend , among others, the absence of treacher, since their simultaneous and sudden a''earance could not amount to it, for ,omas still had to draw his gun before shooting *strella, and )octor still had to position himself behind )amiana and Angelita before ordering them to drop or lie face down on the ground . 8idently, the V(C,(" 'A) A"P$* OPPO&,#(,% ,O )O)2* O& )*F*#) '*&/*$F . (ssue: *hether or not there was treacher 'eld: %es. While the part of *strella was wal-ing , appellants suddenl appeared from the side of the road . Without uttering an word , ,omas drew his gun and shot *strella twice , while )octor simultaneousl po-ed a gun at Angelita and amiana. And when *strella alread fell down , ,omas shot her thrice more  perhaps to ensure her death . +hen a''ellants fled. It is, thus, clear that the shooting of *strella was done with treacher . +he nefarious act was )O#* (# A F*W "O"*#,/ 2 it was #*HP*C,*) as it was /))*#. +he AC, OF )OC,O& (# (""O0($(K(#2 A#2*$(,A A#) )A"(A#A (# ,'O/* 0&(*F "O"*#,/ AFFO&)*) A#) *#/&*) APP*$$A#,/B ("P#(,% .

#*(858:O58, 'remises considered, this Court finds accused +ony +omas, 4r. and Benedicto octor guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the offense of "urder and hereby sentences each of them to suffer the 'enalty of 5eclusion Per'etua. +his Court also finds accused estor 2atchalian guilty beyond reasonable doubt as an accomplice to the offense of Murder. All of the said accused are hereby ordered to 'ay @ointly the heirs of the ictim, the following3 0.% +he amount of PhP ?,???.?? as ciil indemnity2 1.% +he amount of PhP ?,???.?? as moral damages2 >.% +he amount of PhP >?,???.?? as e)em'lary damages2 7.% +he amount of PhP >K,70=.>> and another amount of &4 1,0K1.JK or its e!uialent in Phili''ine 'esos at the time of its 'ayment as actual damages2 and, .% +he amount of &4 >=K,??? or its e!uialent in Phili''ine 'esos at the time of its 'ayment for loss of income of the ictim.% %apuco v. /andiganbaan Facts: +hese are 'etitions for reiew on certiorari assailing the ecision of the 4andiganbayan in

three Criminal Cases. +he cases are 'redicated on a shooting incident in 4an :ernando, Pam'anga which caused the death of $eodevince $icup and in5ured #oel Villanueva . Accused were all charged with murder8 multiple attempted murder and frustrated murder . Accused were all members of the (ntegrated #ational Police stationed at the 4indalan 4ubstation in 4an :ernando, Pam'anga, baranga captains of Ruebiawan and el Carmen, members of the Civil 'ome )efense Force or civilian volunteer officers in Barangays Ruebiawan, el Carmen and +elebastagan.


1=

+hat on or about the th day of A'ril 0
'arts of the body, thereby causing the direct and immediate death of the latter. On the eening of the incident, $illanuea, :lores, Calma, e $era, Panlican and 9icu' were at the residence of 4alangsang as guests at the barrio fiesta celebrations . +he com'any decided to leave at around J3>? '.m., shortly after the religious procession . *ith 9icu' in the 'assenger seat and the rest of his com'anions at the back of his +amaraw @ee'ney, $illanuea allegedly 'roceeded at D0? k'h with headlights dimmed. /uddenl8 as the were approaching a curve on the road8 the met a burst of gunfire and instantly, $illanuea and 9icu' were both wounded and bleeding 'rofusely. Both :lores and $illanuea allegedly did not see any one on the road flag them down. After the shooting, :lores @um'ed out of the @ee'ney when he saw 'etitioner Pamintuan emerging. Pamintuan reproved them for not stopping when flagged . $illanuea cried out and told :lores to summon 4alangsang for hel' as he and 9icu' were wounded. :lores dashed back to 4alangsangs house as instructed and, returning to the scene, he obsered that 'etitioner Su was also there, and Villanueva and $icup were being loaded into a /arao 5eepne b two armed men together with Pamintuan8 to be ta-en to the hospital . As soon as :lores and his com'anions had been dro''ed off at the hos'ital, the drier of the 4arao @ee'ney immediately droe off together with his two armed com'anions. 9icu' later e)'ired at the hos'ital. :lores claimed that all the accused had not been known to him 'rior to the incident, e)ce't for Pamintuan whom he identified to be his wifes uncle and with whom he denied haing had any rift. +he bullet holes on the +amaraw @ee'ney were all on the 'assenger side and that there were no other bullet holes at the back or in any other 'ortion of the ehicle. 4alangsang testified that he caught a glance of Mario 5eyes on the wheel of an ownerDty'e @ee'ney idling in front of the illDfated +amaraw2 it was the same @ee'ney which he remembered to be that fre!uently used by Sa'yuco in 'atrolling the barangay. Only %apuco took the stand for the defense. (e identified himself as the commander of the /indalan Police /ubstation in 4an :ernando, Pam'anga. (e narrated that he and his men received a summon for police assistance concerning a reported presence of armed #PA members in 9uebiawan . Sa'yuco decided to res'ond and instructed his men to 'ut on their

uniforms and bring their MD0= rifles with them.


1J

Sa'yuco and his grou' met with Pamintuan who told him that he had earlier spotted four men carring long firearms . As if si;ing u' their collectie strength, Pamintuan intimated that he and baranga captain "ario &ees had also brought in a number of armed men and CAF2 members . Moments later, Pamintuan announced the approach of his suspects8 hence %apuco8 Cunanan and Puno too- post in the middle of the road at the curve where the ,amaraw 5eepne conveing the victims would ma-e an inevitable turn . A/ ,'* @**P#*% CA"* "C' C$O/*&8 PA"(#,A# A##O#C*) ,'A, (, WA/ ,'* ,A&2*, V*'(C$* , so they allegedl flagged it down and signaled for it to stop . (e claimed that instead of sto''ing, the 5eepne accelerated and swerved to its left . +his ins'ired them to fire warning shots but the 5eepne continued 'acing forward, hence the were impelled to fire at the tires thereof and instantaneously, gunshots allegedl came bursting from the direction of a nearb house directl at the sub5ect 5eepne . =ma msterious shooter daw>

Sa'yuco recalled that one of the occu'ants of the @ee'ney then alighted and e)claimed at Pamintuan that they were 4an Miguel Cor'oration em'loyees. (olding their fire, Sa'yuco and his men then immediately searched the ehicle but found no firearms but instead, two in@ured 'assengers whom they loaded into his @ee'ney and deliered to nearby 4t. :rancis (os'ital. :rom there he and his men returned to the scene supposedl to investigate and loo- for the people who fired directl at the 5eepne . +hey found no one2 the +amaraw @ee'ney was likewise gone. +he /andiganbaan found 'etitioners guilty onl of 'O"(C()* for the eentual death of $icup, and of attempted homicide for the in@ury sustained by Villanueva. +he 4andiganbayan found that the !ualifying circumstance of treacher has not been proved because first, it was not shown how the aggression commenced and how the acts causing in5ur to $illanuea and 9icu' began and developed , and second, ,'(/ C(&C"/,A#C* "/, 0* /PPO&,*) 0% P&OOF OF A )*$(0*&A,* A#) CO#/C(O/ A)OP,(O# OF ,'* "O)* OF A,,AC3 A#) CA##O, 0* )&AW# F&O" "*&* /PPO/(,(O#/ O& F&O" C(&C"/,A#C*/ (""*)(A,*$% P&*C*)(#2 ,'* A22&*//(O#.

+he same finding holds true for evident premeditation because between the time %apuco received the summons for assistance and the time he and his men responded at the scene , there was no sufficient time to allow for the materialization of all the elements of that circumstance . (ssue: *hether or not there was treacher 'eld: #o. +he 4andiganbayan correctly found that 'etitioners are guilty as coD'rinci'als in the crimes of homicide and attem'ted homicide only. +he allegation of *V()*#, P&*"*)(,A,(O# has not been proved beond reasonable doubt because the eidence is consistent with the fact that the urge to -ill had materialized in the minds of petitioners as instantaneousl as the perceived their suspects to be attempting flight and evading arrest . +he same is true with ,&*AC'*&%, inasmuch as there is #O C$*A& A#) (#)0(,A0$*


1K

P&OOF ,'A, the "O)* OF A,,AC3 WA/ CO#/C(O/$% A#) )*$(0*&A,*$% A)OP,*) 0% P*,(,(O#*&/ .

#*(858:O58, the instant 'etitions are 8I8. +he @oint decision of the 4andiganbayan in Criminal Case os. 0==01, 0==0> and 0==07, dated Fune 1J, 0<<, are hereby A::I5M8 with the following MOI:ICA+IO43 #a% In Criminal Case o. 0==01, 'etitioners are sentenced to suffer the indeterminate 'enalty of si) #=% years and one #0% day of 'rision mayor, as the minimum, to twele #01% years and one #0% day of reclusion tem'oral, as the ma)imum2 in Criminal Case o. 0==07, the indeterminate sentence is hereby modified to +wo #1% years and four #7% months of 'rision correccional, as the ma)imum, and 4i) #=% months of arresto mayor, as the minimum. #b% Petitioners are I58C+8 to indemnify, @ointly and seerally, the heirs of 9eodeince 9icu' in the amount of PJJ,???.?? as actual damages, P?,???.?? in moral damages, as well as oel $illanuea, in the amount of P0,J??.?? as actual and com'ensatory damages, and P1?,???.?? as moral damages.% People v. ,ac4an Facts: 5enato +acDan and :rancis 8scano were close friends being classmates in high school and

members of the local Bron) gang. :rancis withdrew from the gang on the adice of his mother who saw that 5enato carried a handgun on his isits to their home. +hings started turning sour between the two, and came to a head on ec 07, 0

1<

that Francis must have anticipated his return and thus had sufficient time to prepare for the coming of appellant . A''ellant likewise contends that there was no evident premeditation , 'ointing out that 0A&*$% < "(#,*/ had elapsed from the time &enato left his *nglish ((( class and the time he returned with a gun . (ssue: . *hether or not illegal possession of a firearm is a special aggravating circumstance in homicide and murder D #o. ;. *hether or not there was treacher D %es. . *hether or not there was evident premeditation 4 'eld:

0. #o. +here is no law which renders the use of an unlicensed firearm as an aggraating circumstance in homicide or murder. nder an information charging homicide or murder , the fact that the death weapon was an unlicensed firearm cannot be used to increase the penalt for the second offense of homicide or murder to death or reclusion 'er'etua. +he unlicensed character or condition of the instrument used in destroing human life or committing some other crime8 is not included in the inventor of aggravating circumstances set out in Article E of the 5PC. (oweer, under an information for unlawful possession #or manufacture, dealing in, ac!uisition or dis'osition% of a firearm or ammunition, P.). #o. JJ authorizes the increase of the imposable penalt for unlawful possession or manufacture, etc. of the unlicensed firearm where such firearm was used to destro human life . 1. %es. +he Court 'ointed out that &enato must have -nown that Francis while inside &oom < had no means of escape there being onl one door and &oom < being on the second floor of the building. &enato in effect bloc-ed the onl e1it as he stood on the teacher-s 'latform closest to the door and fired as :rancis and 5uel sought to dash through the door. &enato!s +uestion 7where is Francis7 cannot reasonabl be regarded as an effort to warn Francis for he shot at Francis the instant he sighted the latter , seated and talking to 5uel

&ngab. ,hat &enato fired three shots before hitting Francis with the fourth shot, can onl be ascribed to the indifferent mar-smanship of &enato and to the fact that Francis and the other students were scurring from one part of the room to the other in an effort to eade

the shots. +he attac- u'on :rancis had been carried out in a manner which disabled Francis from defending himself or retaliating against &enato . :inally, the circumstance that 5enato, haing been informed that :rancis was still alie, reDentered 5oom 0 and fired again at :rancis


>?

who lay on the floor and bathed with his own blood, manifested &enato!s conscious choice of means of e1ecution which directl and especiall ensured the death of his victim without ris- to himself .

>. #o. In order that eident 'remeditation may be taken into account, there must be proof of #a% the time when the offender formed his intent to commit the crime 2 #b% an action manifestl indicating that the offender had clung to his determination to commit the crime 2 and #c% of the passage of a sufficient interval of time between the determination of the offender to commit the crime and the actual e1ecution thereof, to allow him to reflect upon the conse+uences of his act . +he defense. *hile there was testimony to the fact that before that fatal da8 anger and resentment had alread welled up between Francis and &enato , there was #O *V()*#C* /'OW(#2 W'*# &*#A,O 'A) FO&"*) ,'* (#,*#,(O# A#) )*,*&"(#A,(O# ,O ,A3* ,'* $(F* OF F&A#C(/ . Accordingly, we must discard eident 'remeditation as an

aggraating circumstance. #ACCO5I69S, the decision of the trial court dated >0 Fuly 0
In Criminal Case o. 7??J, a''ellant shall suffer the 'enalty of reclusion 'er'etua2

1. In Criminal Case o. 7?01  #a% the aggraating circumstances of eident 'remeditation and of haing acted with contem't of or insult to the 'ublic authorities shall be 898+8 and not taken into account2 and #b% the s'ecial aggraating circumstances of acting while under the influence of dangerous drugs and with the use of an unlicensed firearm shall similarly be 898+8 and not taken into account. +here being no generic aggraating nor mitigating circumstances 'resent, the a''ellant shall suffer the 'enalty of reclusion 'er'etua. As so modified, the decision of the trial court is hereby A::I5M8.% People v. Puga Facts: Pugay and 4amson were charged with murder with the +ualifing circumstance of treacher and the aggraating circumstances of evident premeditation and superior strength8

and the means em'loyed was to weaken the defense2 that the wrong done in the commission of the crime was deliberately augmented by causing another wrong, that is the burning of the bod of Bayani Miranda. 0aani "iranda , a ;<4ear old retardate , and Puga were friends . "iranda used to run errands for Puga and at times the slept together . On the evening of the incident, a town fiesta fair was held in the public plaza of &osario8 Cavite .

+he accused Puga and /amson with several companions arrived . +hese 'ersons appeared to be drun- as the were all happ and nois . As the group saw the deceased wal-ing


>0

nearb, they started ma-ing fun of him . +hey made the deceased dance b tic-ling him with a piece of wood .

ot content with what they were doing, P2A% ,OO3 A CA# OF 2A/O$(#* F&O" #)*& ,'* *#2(#* OF ,'* F*&&(/ W'**$ and PO&*) (,/ CO#,*#,/ O# ,'* 0O)% OF ,'* "(&A#)A . +hen, /A"/O# /*, "(&A#)A O# F(&*8 "A3(#2 A '"A# ,O&C' O, OF '(" . +he ferris wheel o'erator later arried and doused with water the burning body of the deceased. 4ome 'eo'le around also 'oured sand on the burning body and others wra''ed the same with rags to e)tinguish the flame. +he deceased was rushed to the 6race (os'ital for treatment. +he trial court rendered a decision finding both accused guilt but crediting in faor of Puga the mitigating circumstance of lac- of intention to commit so grave a wrong . (ssue: *hether or not there was treacher 'eld: #o. +here is absence of proof that /amson had some reason to -ill the deceased before the incident . On the contrar , his act was merel a part of their fun4ma-ing that evening . For the circumstance of treacher to e1ist , the attac- must be deliberate and the culprit emploed means8 methods8 or forms in the e1ecution thereof which tend directl and speciall to insure its e1ecution8 without ris- to himself arising from an defense which the offended part might ma-e .

As no sufficient eidence a''ears establishing any !ualifying circumstances, /amson is onl guilt of 'O"(C()* . *e are dis'osed to credit in his faor the ordinary mitigating circumstance of no intention to commit so grave a wrong as that committed . +he eyewitness testified that Puga and /amson were stunned when the noticed the deceased burning . (aing taken the can from under the engine of the ferris wheel and holding it before 'ouring its contents on the body of the deceased, Puga -new that the can contained gasoline . +he stinging smell of this flammable li!uid could not have escaped his notice een before 'ouring the same. Clearly, he failed to e)ercise all the diligence necessary to aoid eery undesirable conse!uence arising from any act that may be committed by his com'anions who at the time were making fun of the deceased. Accused is onl guilt of 'O"(C()* ,'&O2' &*C3$*// ("P&)*#C* . #+here is nothing in the records showing that there was previous conspirac or unity of criminal 'ur'ose and intention between the two accused immediately before the commission of the crime. +here was no animosit between the deceased and the accused. +heir meeting at the scene of the incident was accidental . It is also clear that the accused Pugay and his grou' merely wanted to make fun of the deceased. (ence, the res'ectie criminal responsibilit of Puga and /amson arising from different acts directed against the deceased is individual and not collective , and each of them is liable only for the act committed by him.%


>1

People v. 0uensuceso Facts: +his is an a''eal from the ecision of the C:I of Bataan, conicting a''ellants B&84&C84O, A6&I9A5, IVO and FO4O, all members of the police force of )inalupihan8 0ataan , of "urder.

Between D= in the afternoon, while 'rosecution witness A'olonio 4alador was in his small store beside the market near the munici'al building of inalu'ihan, Bataan, he saw Patrolman Aguilar and Pariseo ,aag conversing as they were walking side by side, each resting his hand on the shoulder of the other , going towards the municipal building . Aguilar was tring to ta-e the fan -nife of ,aag , but could not take it because ,aag prevented him from taking it b gripping it with his right hand and swaing it left and right as if plaing . At the suggestion of Aguilar, ,aag readil agreed to go to the office of the chief of police.

*hen they arried in the said office, there were two 'ersons there3 Mallo and Mallari. Mallari was the munici'al guard and in uniform. 4ubse!uently, A '*A,*) A&2"*#, ,OO3 P$AC* 0*,W**# A2($A& A#) ,A%A2 A&(/(#2 F&O" ,'* $A,,*&!/ &*F/A$ ,O 2(V* '(/ FA# 3#(F* ,O ,'* FO&"*& . Patrolman de la Cru; a''eared

at the doorway *hen +ayag was about to leae the office, Chief of Police Canlas arried and in!uired what the trouble was an about. Aguilar answered that the two of them had been cursed by +ayag. +ayag asserted that he did not curse either of them, but that Aguilar was forcing him to gie u' his knife. ,aag hurriedl left the office . (e was followed b Aguilar8 "allari and de la Cruz who walked fast, with Aguilar and "allari holding guns . After having gone out of the building , A2($A& F(&*) '(/ 2# PWA&) . (earing the shot, +ayag turned around, then retreated backwards until he reached the fence of the 'la;a. *hen +ayag was near the wooden fence, A2($A& A("*) '(/ 2# A, ,A%A2 A#) F(&*)8 '(,,(#2 '(" A0OV* ,'* &(2', 3#** . ,aag continued to run towards his house. "allari and Aguilar went to the waiting shed to intercept ,aag . +hen there were several successive gun shots , more or less nine in number . After the commotion, +ayag was seen lying 'rostrate on the ground. A defense witness, a waitress, testified that the deceased together with some com'anions had drunk beer inside :reddie-s 5estaurant before the shooting incident. +he trial court found them guilty of Murder. (ssue: *hether or not there was treacher 'eld: %es. +he crime is Murder, !ualified by treachery. +he victim was alread retreating bac-wards until he reached the fence of the town plaza when A2($A& fired his revolver8 hitting the victim above the right -nee . #O,W(,'/,A#)(#2 ,'A, '* WA/


>>

A$&*A)% '(, A#) WO#)*) , '* WA/ /,($$ /0@*C,*) ,O /CC*//(V* /'O,/. Certainly, the means emploed b the accused tended directl and speciall to insure the e1ecution of the crime without ris- to themselves arising from an defense which the victim might have made .

+he killing of the ictim was aggravated b abuse of superior strength as shown b the number of assailants , which circumstance , howeer, is A0/O&0*) 0% ,&*AC'*&%. People v. /alufrania Facts: 4alufrania, by bo1ing and strangling Marciana AbuyoD4alufrania, his wife and who at the time was  months pregnant , caused upon her in5uries resulting in her instantaneous death and the death of the child who was still in its maternal womb . +hus :ilomeno was charged with the comple1 crime of parricide with intentional abortion .

One of the witnesses for the 'rosecution was Pedro 4alufrania, son of a''ellant and deceased. (e stated that his father and mother +uarrelled at about = in the eening2 that during said !uarrel, he saw his father 0OH '(/ P&*2#A#, "O,'*& O# ,'* /,O"AC' and, once fallen on the floor , his father /,&A#2$*) '*& ,O )*A,' 2 that he saw blood ooze from the eyes and nose of his mother and that she died right on the spot where she fell . Pedro further testified that after killing his mother, the accused went out of the house to get a hammoc- 2 that his brother Ale) and he were the only ones who witnessed how the accused killed their mother because his sister and other brothers were already aslee'2 that their father arrived earl the ne1t morning with the hammoc- and after placing their dead mother on the hammoc- , the accused carried her on his shoulder and brought the cadaver to the house of his sister Conching in +igbinan2 that from +igbinan the corpse was transferred to 6abon, +alisay, Camarines orte for burial . Pedro stated that he is now living with his uncle , arciso Abuyo and refused to live with his father , because the latter has threatened to -ill him and his other siblings should he reveal the true cause of his mother!s death .

+he third witness for the 'rosecution was arciso Abuyo. +he children first informed their uncle that their mother died of stomach ailment and headache. *hen he asked why the children refused to go home with their father, his ne'hew Ale) told him that the real cause of death of their mother was not stomach ailment and headache, rather, she was bo)ed on the stomach and strangled to death by their father. Immediately after learning the true cause of death of his sister, arciso brought the matter to the attention of the 'olice authorities. +he trial court found the a''ellant guilt of the crime charged and sentenced him to the 'enalty of death. Appellant alleges that the trial court erred in finding him guilty of the com'le) crime of 'arricide with intentional abortion, as there is no evidence to show that he had the intention to cause an abortion .


>7

(ssue: *hether or not the accused is liable for parricide with intentional abortion 'eld: #o. (e should not be held guilty of the com'le) crime of Parricide with Intentional Abortion but of the comple1 crime of Parricide with #(#,*#,(O#A$ A0O&,(O# .

+he elements of &nintentional Abortion are as follows3 0. +hat there is a 'regnant woman. 1. +hat iolence is used u'on such 'regnant woman without intending an abortion. >. +hat the iolence is intentionally e)erted. 7. +hat as a result of the iolence the fetus dies, either in the womb or after haing been e)'elled therefrom. It has been clearly established3 #a% that Marciana Abuyo was L4 months pregnant when she was -illed 2 #b% that violence was voluntaril e1erted upon her by her husband2 #c% that, as a result of said violence , Marciana Abuyo died together with the fetus in her womb. (oweer, the intent to cause an abortion has not been sufficientl established . "ere bo1ing on the stomach8 ta-en together with the immediate strangling of the victim in a fight , is not sufficient proof to show an intent to cause an abortion . In fact, a''ellant must hae merely intended to kill the ictim but not necessarily to cause an abortion. #*(858:O58, as modified, the @udgment a''ealed from is A::I5M8. AccusedDa''ellant is hereby sentenced to suffer the 'enalty of reclusion 'er'etua. +he indemnity of P01,???. ?? awarded to the heirs of the deceased Marciana Abuyo is increased to P>?,???.?? in line with the recent decisions of the Court.% People v. Porras Facts: On the night of the incident, accused Fohn Porras and 4ergio 8melo went to the 'olice

4tation looking for 5oldan 8melo of the Caite City PP, a cousin of the latter and was directed to where he was. +hey had some food and drinks at the Banaue 5estaurant and 8melo asked for his black ammo 'ouch and some .>K caliber ammunition. +hey proceeded to the Aroma 0eer 'ouse where the victim8 &osendo "ortel8 was tabled and wherein some misunderstanding happened and &onnie "ortel went out and was shot at close range b either Porras or *melo as seen by a waitress. After seeing 5osendo s'rawled on the ground and bloodied, Poras fled into an alle and thereafter returned and shot the prostrate victim twice , -illing the victim instantaneousl.

An Information was filed charging a''ellants for murder and frustrated murder , res'ectiely. +he trial court rendered @udgment finding Porras and *melo guilty of murder and *melo guilty of frustrated homicide .


>

(ssue: Whether or not there was treacher 'eld: #o. +he trial court erred in a''reciating the !ualifying circumstance of treachery against a''ellants. ,reacher must be proved b clear and convincing evidence , or as conclusivel as the -illing itself .

+o a''reciate it, two conditions must concur3 #a% the emploment of means of e1ecution that gives the person attac-ed no opportunit to defend himself or to retaliate , and #b% that said means of e1ecution be deliberatel and consciousl adopted . +he prosecution failed to definitivel establish the manner in which the initial assault against the victim was committed to 5ustif the appreciation of treacher . (# O&)*& ,O APP&*C(A,* ,&*AC'*&% A/ A "O)(F%(#2 C(&C"/,A#C* (# A CO#,(#O/ A22&*//(O#8 ,'* /A"* "/, 0* /'OW# P&*/*#, A, ,'* (#C*P,(O# OF ,'* A,,AC3 .

*ith res'ect to the shooting of Bermas by a''ellant 8melo, the trial court properl discarded the +ualifing circumstance of treacher and correctl ruled that the crime committed is Frustrated 'omicide and not Frustrated "urder as alleged in the (nformation . +he shooting of 0ermas who was full aware of the ris-s in pursuing appellants was8 at best8 done in a spur of the moment , an act which can hardl be characterized as treacherous for it was #OW'*&* P&OV*) ,'A, ,'* /A"* WA/ )*$(0*&A,*$% A)OP,*) ,O )*#% 0*&"A/ ,'* OPPO&,#(,% ,O )*F*#) '("/*$F .

#*hen an act done is beyond the contem'lation of the coDcons'irators and is not a necessary or logical conse!uence of the intended crime then only the actual 'er'etrators are to be held liable. In this case, the cons'iracy 'roen concerns solely the killing of Mortel and not the shooting of Bermas. +hus, 8melo alone should be held liable for the crime of :rustrated (omicide.% #*(858:O58, in iew of the foregoing, @udgment is hereby rendered in Criminal Case o. 17D<0, finding the a''ellants FO( F8 PO55A4 and 4856IO 8M89O guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of (omicide, Considering the absence of any mitigating or aggraating circumstance and a''lying the Indeterminate 4entence 9aw, a''ellants are hereby sentenced to suffer an indeterminate 'enalty ranging from 8ight #K% years and One #0% day of Prision Mayor, as minimum, to :ourteen #07% years, 8ight #K% months and One #0% day of 5eclusion +em'oral, as ma)imum, res'ectiely, and to indemnify, @ointly and seerally, the heirs of the deceased 5osendo Mortel the amount of P?,???.??, 'lus actual damages and funeral e)'enses in the amount of P=J,???.??. +he award for moral damages in the amount of P0??,???.?? which we find to be e)cessie is hereby reduced to P?,???.??. (oweer, in Criminal Case o. 17=D<0, the @udgment a''ealed from is hereby affirmed in toto.% People v. Castillo


>=

#ote: +analega was already a 'harmacy graduate, but she had not yet taken and 'assed the

goernment e)amination conducted by the Board of Pharmaceutical 8)aminers2 and she had worked as a 'harmacy clerk in different drug stores in the City of Manila, before her em'loyment in the same ca'acity in the 8scudero rug 4tore. Facts: A''ellants r. 9eon Castillo and ena +analega 5aymundo was accused of the crime of frustrated murder b poisoning through rec-less imprudence , committed as follows3

4ilino Belarmino 'resented a 'rescri'tion at the 8scudero rug 4tore and re!uested r. Castillo to 're'are for him 0U> of the formula. )r. Castillo and ,analega helped each other prepare and dispense the said prescription. In the afternoon of the same day, Belarmino took one of the ca'sules with a glass of water, and left his house for a walk2 and about ;? minutes after he had ta-en said medicine , he became ill. (e felt dizz and had difficult in breathing , and he could hardl stand as his -nees became sha- . About two hours after , complainant!s legs began to stiffen , his stomach to harden, his lips to draw bac- , and his tongue to shrin- to his throat , and he could not tal- 2 and so com'lainant-s family sent for a 'hysician, r. 5eyes. +he following day, com'lainant e)'lained to him all that had ha''ened and showed him the remaining four ca'sules. +he 'hysician adised com'lainant not to take any more of said remaining four ca'sules. 0elieving there must have been something wrong with the medicine he had 'urchased from the 8scudero rug 4tore, 0elarmino sent two of the four capsules to the 0ureau of /cience for e1amination . +he chemist submitted a report in which it was shown that appellants had *&&O#*O/$% /*) A#) "(H*) /,&%C'#(#* /$P'A,*8 A '(2'$% PO(/O#O/ /0/,A#C*8 (#/,*A) OF /PA&,*(# /$P'A,* .

Belarmino consulted his 'hysician r. 4ison, informing the latter of the medicine 'urchased by him from the 8scudero rug 4tore and the sym'toms he e)'erienced. +he said phsician informed him that he had been a victim of poisoning . It has also been shown by e)'ert testimony that ?. milligrams of strychnine sul'hate found in one of the ca'sules e)amined was sufficient to cause the death of herein com'lainant, if not for the fact that, in com'ounding said 'rescri'tion, 'henobarbital and carbromal had been mi)ed therewith, which two substances diminished the deadly effect of strychnine sul'hate as 'oison. Com'lainant caused the filing of an Information for frustrated murder b poisoning through rec-less imprudence against r. 9eon Castillo and ena +analega, as manager and pharmac cler- of the 8scudero rug 4tore, res'ectiely. +he lower court rendered @udgment finding ,analega guilt of the crime charged, but ac+uitting her co4accused )r. Castillo . +he CA found ,analega guilty of slight phsical in5uries through rec-less imprudence . (ssue: *hether or not appellants are liable for frustrated homicide


>J

'eld: #o. In iew of the facts stated aboe, said @udgment of coniction is untenable, on the ground that the offense of frustrated homicide re+uires the concurrence of the *//*#,(A$ &*9(/(,* OF (#,*#, ,O 3($$ , W'(C' (/ (#CO"PA,(0$* W(,' ,'* C'A&2* OF &*C3$*// ("P&)*#C* . Although, a charge for phsical in5uries8 serious or less serious8 through rec-less imprudence8 is legall proper under the law, as in that case the act sought to be punished is the material damage or in5ur actuall done .

A''ellant claim, among others, that no evidence has been adduced to show the nature or e1tent of the in5ur , if any8 sustained, and whether such in5ur , if any, had been caused b the drug sold to him by the 8scudero rug 4tore, as no specimen had been ta-en from the contents of the stomach of complainant for chemical e1amination and analysis2 and that it has not been 'ossible, of course, to make any e)amination of the stomach of the com'lainant. :urthermore, een admitting for the sake of argument, that the offense of slight phsical in5uries through rec-less im'rudence were im'utable to a''ellant, the corres'onding action should have been instituted against her within the 'eriod of ; months as 'rescribed under article M? of the 5PC. +he information haing been filed L months after the alleged offense was committed , the corresponding criminal action had alread prescribed . #efendant and a''ellant ena +analega 5aymundo is found guilty of haing ' re'ared one medicine for another, under a false name, in violation of section L< of the &evised Administrative Code 2 and, in accordance with the 'roisions of section 1=J= thereof, she is hereby sentenced to 'ay a fine of two hundred 'esos #P1??%, with subsidiary im'risonment in case of insolency, and to 'ay the costs of this instance2 and with this modification the @udgment of the Court of A''eals for 4outhern 9u;on is u'held.% Cortez v. CA Facts: Assailed in this 'etition for reiew are the decision of the Court of A''eals dated May 1=,

0J= and 7>JJ and less serious 'hysical in@uries in Criminal Case o. 7>J, and the resolution of Fune 1, 0J and 7>JJ. In both cases they were sentenced to suffer the indeterminate 'enalty of from = years and 0 day of 'rision mayor to 0J years, 7 months and 0 day of reclusion tem'oral, ordered to indemnify @ointly and seerally the heirs of 8scolastica Pingol and 9uis Balta;ar in the sum of =,??? 'esos and to 'ay each, one third of the costs. In Criminal Case o. 7>J=, the trial court found Arcadio Corte; and Paulino 4am'ang guilty of less serious 'hysical in@uries and sentenced


>K

to four #7% months of arresto mayor and to 'ay each, one third of the costs. Ben@amin $illanuea was ac!uitted by the court in those three cases ''. 11D1>, rec.N :rom the @udgment, Arcadio Corte; and Paulino 4am'ang a''ealed to the Court of A''eals. +he latter court rendered the !uestioned decision, the dis'ositie 'ortion of which reads as follows3 *herefore, finding no cogent reasons to reerse the @udgment a''ealed from, being in accordance with the law and eidence on record, the same is hereby affirmed e)ce't the indemnity in the two homicide cases, which is raised from P=,???.?? to P01,???.?? 'esos in each case and each accused a''ellant to 'ay 0U> of the costs in this instance. #'. >7, 5ollo.% +he coniction was based on the following facts as found by the Court of A''eals3 Between 0?3?? and 003?? o-clock on the night of October 10, 0<=0 while 4antiago Balta;ar, his wife 8scolastica Pingol and his four sons 5uben, Pablo, Orlando and 9uis, all of tender ages, were slee'ing in their house at Barrio Mitla, Porac Pam'anga, the said 4antiago Balta;ar was awakened by the barking of the dogs %''. 0D1, < t.s.n, o. 1J, 0<=12 ''. 01D0>, t.s.n., Fan. 07, 0<=>%. +hen he heard a oice which he recogni;ed as that of Arcadio Corte; for he knew him long before the incident, asking "Are the owners of the house inG" #''. 1D>, t.s.n., o. 1J, 0<=1., ''. 01D0>, Fan. 07, 0<=>%. (e 'ee'ed through a hole and there o n the ground he saw and recogni;ed, for the moon was ery bright, another man, Paulino 4am'ang, whom he knew ery well before the incident #''. 1, <, t.s.n., o. 1J, 0<=12 '. 07, t.s.n., Fan. 07, 0<=>%. Being the owner of the house, 4antiago Balta;ar had no alternatie but to go downstairs, howeer, before he did that, he told his wife who was also awaken sicN by the barking of the dogs that there were three 'ersons in all near their house #''. >D7, t.s.n., Fan. 17, 0<=>%. &'on reaching the ground, 4antiago Balta;ar a''roached Paulino 4am'ang who was armed with a .11 cal. gun and asked him3 "*hat is it you want, AbeG," to this !uestion, 4am'ang re'lied3 "If you want to know, you come and see our Commander." *hen he said "Commander he was referring to Arcadio Corte; who was under a bullcart. #''. JD00, t.s.n., Fan. 17, 0<=>2 '. >, t.s.n., o. 1J,0<=1%. *hen 4antiago Balta;ar a''roached Arcadio Corte;, the latter moed awa y from him and holding a #6%arand with his two hands oer his head, told Balta;ar3 "6o back to your wife." Balta;ar started moing towards the house and u'on reaching the foot of the stairs, he faced them #Arcadio Corte; and Paulino 4am'ang%. At this instance, Corte; and 4am'ang began shooting at the house and also at him. Balta;ar was hit in the right thigh. (e fell and lost consciousness #'. 7, t.s.n., o. 1J, 0<=1%. *hen he regained consciousness, he saw nobody on the ground but he heard a oice inside the house saying, "6o on, 6o on." At the same time he also heard a thud as if someone was hacking somebody with a bolo. (e tried to rise but he was shot again in the right ear and conse!uently fell unconscious a second time #'. =, t.s.n., o. 1J, 0<=1. *hen he regained consciousness again he felt that his son Pablo was embracing him, saying ":ather you hae been wounded." And while he heard the screaming of his other children, he


><

managed to go under the house and with a 'iece of rag he bound his wound. +hen he crawled u'stairs. +here he saw his wife and youngest son already dead. (e e)amined her body and found her haing a bolo wound on her left shoulder and a bullet wound on the breast #'. =, t.s.n., o. 1J, 0<=1%, Peo'le began coming to the 'remises. Among them was $iceDMayor 6enaro imalanta to whom 4antiago Balta;ar gae two unfired bullets which he found on the ground. +hey fell when the 6arand held by Arcadio Corte; @ammed twice #''. =DJ, t.s.n., o. 1J, 0<=1, ''. 01, 0J t.s.n., Fan. 17, 0<=>%. +he iceDmayor in turn brought 4antiago Balta;ar to the Pam'anga Proincial (os'ital where he was hos'itali;ed for two weeks. *hile there he was isited by two P.C. men, one of them was Ma@or 9im. +hey asked him whom he sus'ected and he said he didn-t know, ... After haing been discharged from the 'roincial hos'ital, Balta;ar was treated for more than two months in the clinic of r. Benita Ayson in Manibaug Porac, Pam'anga #''. =DK, t.s.n., o. 1J, 0<=1.% MedicoDlegal certificate issued by r. Bienenido Ignacio of the Pam'anga Proincial (os'ital #8)h. , '. <, roll of e)hibits% disclosed the following in@uries sustained by 4antiago Balta;ar3 0. 6unshot wound, tragus through and through with the entrance below and the e)it, aboe the tragus. 1.

6unshot wound, slight of the su'erior 'ortion of the right Pinna of the ear.

>. 6unshot wound, 0 0U1 cm. in diameter antero medical 'ortion of the middle third of the right thigh with hematoma 1 inches aboe the wound. 7.

Probing direction of the wound u'ward, > 0U1 inches in length.

. Dray of the thigh, right.  Metallic foreign body in the muscle tissue, median 'ortion of the buttocks. eath certificate of 8scolastica Pingol #8)hibit 8% stated that the cause of death as certified by ra. Benita Ayson, was hemorrhage due to total wounds #gunshot%. And the death certificate of 9uis Balta;ar #8)hibit :% disclosed that the cause of death as found by the same 'hysician wall internal hemorrhage caused by trauma on the chest. #''. 1=D1<, 5ollo2 Italics su''lied.% 0. In the instant 'etition, 'etitioners- main contention is that there was insufficient Identification in law to sustain a @udgment of coniction. +hey assert that although 4antiago Balta;ar identified them in court on oember 1J, 0<=1, he failed to reeal their names to P.C. inestigators on October 11, 0<=0, the morning after the crime was committed thus showing that there was no 'ro'er Identification in law to sustain their con ictions.


7?

In not a few decisions, this Court has ruled that delay in diulging the name of the 'er'etrators of the crime, if sufficiently e)'lained, does not im'air the credibility of the witness and his testimony Peo'le . Catao 6.5. o. 9D<>1,0?J Phil. K=0 #0<=0%2 Peo'le . Bulan, 6.5. o. 9D 07<>7, 0?K Phil. <>1 #0<=?%2 Peo'le . 9ao *an 4ing, 01 Phil. 7> #0<==%, 0K 4C5A 0?J=2 Peo'le . 4alcedo, 6.5. o. 9D>J?K?, 011 4C5A <7, <1 4C5A <>> #0<>%2 Peo'le . Cabanit 6.5. o. 9D=1?>?D>0, Oct. 7,0< 4C5A <72 Peo'le . Cru;, 6.5. o. 9D=KK? Fuly <, 02 Peo'le . Andres, 6.5. o. J>, October 1<, 0
id you not say that somebody introduced himself as Ma@or 9imG

A3 Ses, 4ir, he introduced himself as such, but I doubted his true Identity. Besides I was confident I would recoer from my wound and I would be allowed to tell the whole story later on. R3

*hat came to your mind when you said you doubted the Identity of the inestigatorG

A3 Because I was afraid that my family was still in the house and that these 'ersons might come back and harm them. +hat is the reason I did not mention these 'eo'le. R3

*ho are these 'ersons you referred toG

A3 Arcadio Corte;, Paulino 4am'ang and Ben@amin $illanuea #''. 11D1>, t.s.n., o. 0<=1%. +he aboe e)'lanation of 4antiago Balta;ar sufficiently accounts for his failure to reeal immediately the identity of the cul'rits. It is both credible and conincing. (is fear and a''rehension for the safety of his family and his guarded sus'icion of the identity of the inestigators were reasonable reactions of an ordinary man agitated by a frightful and shocking occurrence. (e had @ust witnessed the iolent deaths of his wife and youngest son. *ith the memory of the traumatic e)'erience still fresh in his mind, he reasonably entertained the belief that to reeal the identities of the cul'rits would be tantamount to initing their retribution. +hus, in one case where the witnesses for the 'rosecution failed to diulge immediately the identity of the criminals, +his Court said3


70

+he failure of the 'rosecution witnesses to re'ort the malefactors to 'olice officers who inestigated the crime immediately after the occurrence is understandable, considering that the witnesses feared for their lies as the killers were still at large and armed, and with the shock of the ambush still fresh in their minds, 'erha's they considered the 'rotection of the 'olice inade!uate. Peo'le . 4am'ang, March >0, 0<==, 6.5. o. 9D0K7>, 0= 4C5A 0=.N Moreoer, the delay com'lained of is 'artly attributable to the acts of 'etitioners and their counsel. +he records show that the criminal com'laint was filed on October 1J, 0<=0. Petitioners- counsel moed for the 'ost'onement of the second stage of the 'reliminary inestigation three times, filed a motion to !uash, 'ost'oned its hearing, changed his mind and withdrew the motion to !uash and with the conformity of 'etitioners, asked that trial on the merits ensue. A 'eriod of four months had ela'sed by them. Petitioners cannot now com'lain of the belated identification considering that they are 'artly to blame for it. otwithstanding Balta;ar-s credible e)'lanation for the delay, still, this Court e)amined the record to ascertain the 'ositieness of Balta;ar-s testimony. After careful scrutiny, the Court finds that Balta;ar-s narration of the facts is straightforward, direct and full of details which could not hae been the result of deliberate afterthought. As such it deseres full faith and credence. (e stated that he saw 4am'ang twice2 first, when he 'ee'ed through a hole, and second, when he went down the house. (e een saw 4am'ang 'oint the gun at him before the latter fired. (e also identified Corte; whom he saw sitting under the bullcart and with who he conersed. By !uoting 'ortions of the transcri't of stenogra'hic notes of Balta;ar-s testimony, 'etitioners would like this Court to beliee that when asked if he knew of any sus'ects, Balta;ar mentioned the names 8ligio Ayson, Pablo Bengco and Celestino Bengco as his sus'ects. A careful e)amination of the records shows that the three were mentioned by Balta;ar not as his sus'ects but as the 'eo'le who went to his home re!uesting that his wife treat a sick 'erson they brought with them ''. 0.N 1. Petitioners ne)t !uestion the credibility of Balta;ar-s testimony. +hey contend that een if the testimony is 'ositie, it should not be belieed as it is uncorroborated and as it contains contradictions. +here is no law re!uiring that a testimony be corroborated in order to be belieed. It has been held that the testimony of a single witness if credible and 'ositie, is sufficient to 'roduce coniction Peo'le . 9ao *an 4ing, su'ra, Peo'le . Canada, o. =>J1K, 4e'tember 0, 0K>7, oember 17, 0

71

case, such findings are generally not disturbed on a''eal Peo'le . 9ao *an 4ing, su'ra2 Peo'le . Baluarte, 6.5. o. 9D>00K?DK0, October >?, 0=, Peo'le . Brioso, 6.5. os. J1?1KD>0, oember <,0. Petitioners ne)t contend that the failure of the court a !uo to a''reciate the ballistics and chemistry re'orts as 'roof clearly tending to show their innocence, is in grae abuse of its discretion. +his contention is untenable. +he eidence for the defense shows that si) .>? caliber cartridges #8)hibit 0% recoered from the scene of the crime and a .11 caliber slug #8)hibit 1% e)tracted from 4antiago Balta;ar-s thigh were e)amined to determine whether they came from eleen #00% 6arand rifles and from one .11 caliber rifle rounded u' the day after the crime was committed. +he ballistics re'ort states that the si) .>? caliber cartridges were fired from one gun but not from any of those confiscated and that due to foreign marks, it cannot be determined from which gun the .11 caliber slug came from. +he Court agrees with the 4olicitor 6eneral that there is no certainty that the fatal wea'ons were included in those confiscated Brief for 5es'ondents, at '. K.N +he Courts of A''eals and the +rial Court therefore did not err when they found that the ballistics re'ort was "of no moment in determining the guilt or innocence of the accused" Court of A''eals, 5ollo, at '. 0>.% +he defense likewise 'resented a re'ort #8)hibit "J"% on the negatie findings of a 'araffin test taken on Arcadio Corte; fie days after the commission of the crime ote that Paulino 4am'ang was not sub@ected to a similar test, hence this defense is 'ertinent only with res'ect to Corte;.% +he 4olicitor 6eneral contends that the 'araffin test should not be considered in determining the innocence of the accused as during the 'eriod of fie days the gun'owder residue may already hae disa''eared. +he contention is well taken. +he chemical e)'ert who conducted the test was Ma@or Fose :ernande;, of the P.C. Central laboratory who testified as follows3 )))

)))

)))

R3 According to the findings a''earing in 'aragra'h J #fiscal !uoting e)hibit J% miscrosco'ic e)amination on Arcadio Corte;, etc. reeal the absence of gun'o wder residue. +hat was your findingG


7>

A3

Ses, 4ir.

)))

)))

)))

R3 +o refresh your memory, I want to inform you that the crime sub@ect of this case was committed on October 10, 0<=0. It is a fact, is it not, that 'araffin residue can be remoed from the hands by washing with soft sicN or by other chemicalsG A3 6un'owder may remain in the hands of the sus'ect within a 'eriod of J1 hours or more, if there are so many rounds fired or four days more. R3 8en without doing anything on the hand, 'araffin residue will disa''ear from the hand after that 'eriod of time you hae mentionedG A3 Ses, 4ir, so that washing with soft sicN and water will not remoe it. *ithin J1 hours is the a''ro)imate time of the stay of the gun'owder, because we hae to consider if the 'erson is 'ers'iring. )))

)))

)))

R3 As I hae said before, the crime sub@ect matter of this case was committed at about 0?3?? o-clock on October 10, 0<=0. In 8)hibit >, which is the letter of Col. 4angalang re!uesting your office to e)amine the 'araffin casts on both hands of Arcadio Corte; and others, states that the same 'araffin casts were taken at about 1>?? hrs. on October 1, 0<=0 so that from 0?3?? o-clock October 10, 0<=0, four days and one hour had already ela'sedG A3

Ses, 4ir.

R3

+hat four days and one hour is e!uialent to
A3

Ses, 4ir.

R3

According to you, 'araffin residue may disa''ear at a''ro)imately in J1 hoursG

A3

Maybe in J1 hours.

R3 4o that if Arcadio Corte; and others fired guns at about 0?3?? on October 10, 0<=0 and their hands 'araffin cast
o gun'owder may be found anymore.

R3 Sou said that if a 'erson fires a gun in door sicN without doing anything, in J1 hours the 'owder residue will disa''earG 4u''osing said 'erson at the same time fires in door sicN seeral times, will the 'owder residue stay more than J1 hoursG


77

A3

Ses, sir.

R3 In your e)'erience, as a chemical e)'ert, hae you come across cases where 'araffin cast disa''ear in less than J1 hoursG A3 Ses, sir, in o'en outdoor, naturally, little residue will be de'osited and when there is little gun'owder it may not be im'ressed on the hands of the firer. R3 In those cases where the firing was done in o'en air, the 'araffin residue disa''eared in one day or two daysG A3

+his is a factor of not haing gun'owder in the hands of the firer when the wind is strong.

R3 Sou came across cases where the 'erson fired a gun and e)amined him within one day and you did not find any 'araffin residueG A3

Ses, 4ir in cases where there was strong wind. #tsn, ''. >K7?, Fanuary 0>, 0<=7%.

)))

)))

)))

A careful scrutiny of the re'ort and testimony shows that the 'araffin test is of weak 'robatie alue, as it was taken fie days after the incident ha''ened, within which time the traces of gun'owder may already hae been erased. 7. Petitioners ne)t assail the trial and a''ellate court-s reliance on their e)tra@udicial confessions which are alleged to hae been e)ecuted inoluntarily, hence inadmissible. +he confessions were taken on October 10, 0<=0, long before the 0 Constitution took effect. +he 'reailing rule then was that e)tra@udicial confessions were 'resumed in law to be oluntary and thus admissible. +he burden of oercoming that 'resum'tion rested on the accused. +his rule was subse!uently reersed such that, on the 'rosecution was im'osed the burden of first 'roing that constitutional guarantees were obsered before an e) tra@udicial confession may be admitted in eidence Peo'le . Fara, 6.5. no. =0>=DJ, 4e'tember >?, 0K7 &.4. 7>= #0<==%N in section 1? of the 0 Constitution. +his rule howeer has no retroactie effect Magtoto . Manguera, 6.5. o. 9D>J1?0D?1, March >, 0 4C5A 7, citing &.4. $. de los 4antos, 7 Phil. >1<2 Peo'le . Page, 6.5. o. 9D>J?J, Fune J, 07K2 Peo'le . Castaneda, 6.5. o. 9D>1=1, August >0, 0 4C5A =2 Peo'le . 6arcia, 6.5. o. 9D7?0?=, March 0>, 00?<, Fune 1<, 0? 4C5A JJ2 Peo'le . Banaan, 6.5. o. 9D7<>KDKJ, Fuly 1, 0J2 Peo'le . Petenia, 6.5. o. 9D01=, August 01, 0 4C5A >=02 Peo'le . Pia, 6.5. o. 9D<=?7, oember 07, 000.N


7

As the confessions here were made before the effectiity of the 0 Constitution which incor'orated the Miranda rule, they are 'resumed oluntary until the contrary is 'roed by the 'etitioners. +o rebut the 'resum'tion, the defense introduced as eidence the medical certificates e)ecuted by r. Marcelino Benosa and his testimony that he e)amined the accused a day after they were a''rehended. *hen he took the stand, he aerred that he found contusions and swellings on the bodies of the accused for which he 'rescribed certain medicines. (e also stated that it was Atty. Clemente 4oriano, counsel for the accused, who recommended him to relaties of the accused to e)amine the latter and that he had 'ersonally known Atty. 4oriano since 0<7 as they were townmates, being both from Macabebe, Pam'anga. In addition, he also said that his 'ractice was in Angeles, Pam'anga, and that he went to Porac and left his clinic @ust to e)amine the condition of the 'etitioners. +he defense did not attem't to e)'lain why they did not aail of the serices of a 'hysician from Porac nor did they show that there was none aailable. On the other hand, the 'rosecution 'resented as witness the Clerk of Court, Mr. Marcelo Mendo;a, who testified that when the accused were brought before him, they neer com'lained to him of any maltreatment2 that he translated and e)'lained to them each of the !uestions 'ro'ounded and the answers they had gien in their statements and that afterwards, the accused swore to the truth of the contents. of their confessions, and signed them in his 'resence. +his testimony was corroborated by those of the inestigators who took the statements of the accused and who ehemently denied maltreating them. In iew of the Clerk of Court-s credible testimony and the admission of r. Benosa during the trial that the contusions he found may not hae been caused by the alleged maltreatment of the accused, this Court finds that the 'resum'tion of oluntariness2 has not be en satisfactorily oercome. More im'ortantly, the statements are re'lete with details which only the accused could hae known and which the inestigators could not hae su''lied, as follows3 that 8scolastica Pingol or "+ecang" was a witch2 that although they knew that such c ould not be belieed by courts of law, they knew for a fact, that she was ictimi;ing certain members of the community2 that Corte; was in fact a ictim of her witchery, as was 4am'ang-s mother2 and that they went to +ecang-s house only to scare her but when they heard her and her family shouting for hel', they started firing. +he confessions also reeal that they utili;ed Ben@amin $illanuea to guide them to +ecang-s house as well as the direction they took in getting there. All these details are earmarks of oluntariness. . Contrary to 'etitioner-s contention, cor'us delicti here has also been 'roen. As early as Peo'le . Mones K Phil.  #0<>>%N, this Court has held that cor'us delicti is the fact of s'ecific loss or in@ury and that in homicide, the fact of death, whether or not feloniously caused, is the cor'us delicti. +his has been sufficiently shown by the death certificates of the ictims and the testimony of 4antiago Balta;ar. *ith sufficient 'roof of the cor'us delicti, the e)tra@udicial confessions are thus sufficient to conict Corte; and 4am'ang of homicide and less serious 'hysical in@uries.


7=

onetheless, een if *e were to disregard the e)tra@udicial confessions, the 'ositie Identification made by 4antiago Balta;ar is still am'le eidence to establish the guilt of the accused to a moral certainty. = 9astly, we consider the defense raised by 'etitioners. Corte; claimed that he was in a neighboring sitio guarding his growing cro's against wild 'igs while 4am'ang alleged that he was at home attending to his sick child. Alibi is easily fabricated such that courts must acce't it only with great caution. :or such defense to 'ros'er, it is not enough that the accused were somewhere else but that it must be clearly shown that it was 'hysically im'ossible for them to hae been at the 'lace of the crime or its immediate icinity at the time of its commission Peo'le . Perante Fr., 6.5. os. 9D=>J? 4C5A =2 Peo'le . 6a'asin, 6.5. o. 9D1?0J, October 1J, 0>0, Fanuary 1<, 0?,???.??. (ssue: 'eld:

People v. )alaba5an Facts: +his is an a''eal inter'osed by (ernando, ominador, and :ernando, all surnamed

alaba@an. On May 10, 0

7J

then and there wilfully, unlawfully, and feloniously attack, assault and stab with a bladed wea'on, strike with a banca 'addle and 'iece of wood one Amado Vabalo Fr., hitting him arious ital 'arts of his body and inflicting u'on him in@uries which were the direct and immediate cause of his instantaneous death. CO+5A5S +O 9A* and committed with aggraating circumstances of treachery, eident 'remeditation and taking adantage of su'erior strength. &'on arraignment on se'arate dates, the aforesaid accused, duly assisted by counsel, oluntarily entered se'arate 'leas of "not guilty-- to the offense charged in the information. In the course of trial, the charges against Megdonio 4abinet, a'oleon dela +orre and Charlie Paduga were dismissed for insufficiency of eidence u'on recommendation of the 'roincial 'rosecutor. +he facts of the case, as found by the trial court, are as follows3 4ometime on Fanuary 0, 0? to 7? meters away from the shore, they hel'ed one another in hitting him with bladed instruments, wooden clubs and a boat 'addle on different 'arts of his body. +hereafter, the three accused left the already unmoing body of the ictim which was face down in the water and 'roceeded back towards the seashore. At this @uncture, Melencio dela Cru;, who was hiding behind the bushes by the seashore from where he watched the incident ha''en, then went to the house of the ictim and re'orted the incident to the latter-s relaties. Melencio dela Cru; also testified that he was able to witness the incident at the sea thirty meters from his hiding 'lace and saw it clearly since it was full moon on that fateful night. +here were many 'eo'le who went to the shore and witnessed the incident in !uestion, but most of these 'eo'le belonged to the alaba@an clan. +his was the reason why he hid in the bushes, for fear of being discoered by any member of the alaba@an clan, a clan re'uted in their community for their clannishness. (e also feared for his life because most of the Barangay +anods were related to the alaba@ans. (e was able to follow the whole incident from the time Amado Vabalo, Fr. was attacked in front of the Barangay (all to the time the latter was chased and killed at sea. 1 Amado Vabalo, 4r., the father of the ictim, testified that, shortly after the incident, he was informed about it by some residents of their barangay. (e immediately 'roceeded to the 'lace of the incident and saw the already dead body of his son. +he cadaer of the ictim was then brought to the Barangay (all. *hen the 'olicemen arried at 0?3?? o-clock that night, they conducted an inestigation and made a sketch showing the wounds sustained by the ictim. o


7K

auto'sy was conducted on the ictim-s cadaer since there was no doctor aailable. > +he 'rosecution howeer submitted a death certificate in this connection signed by the ictim-s father and the 9ocal Ciil 5egistrar. 9olito Carceller, a member of the 'olice force of umaran, Palawan testified that he was a member of the 'olice team that inestigated the incident in !uestion. (e was also the one who 're'ared the sketch of the ictim-s body showing the stab wounds and in@uries sustained by the ictim. &'on his e)amination, he saw that the cadaer of Amado Vabalo, Fr. bore the following wounds, to wit3 one on the u''er 'ortion of the head, a stab wound on the left eye, a stab wound on the left ear, a stab wound on the left 'ortion of the mouth, a stab wound on the right cheek and a stab wound on the stomach. In addition, the two fingers on the left hand of the ictim were dislocated. 7 On the other hand, one of the herein accusedDa''ellants, (ernando alaba@an, gae a different ersion of the incident. (e contends that at around midnight on ecember >0, 00, 0< K. +hey were re!uested by their Barangay Ca'tain 8ulogio 4abinet, to maintain 'eace and order there in iew of the dance to be held as 'art of the ew Sear-s ee celebration. +he said dance started at around 013?? midnight. It was only the following day that he learned of Amado-s death in the sea. (e denies any 'artici'ation in the killing of the deceased. = :or his 'art, :ernando alaba@an did not een 'resent any eidence, nor did he testify in order to controert the 'rosecution-s assertion linking him to the killing.


7<

On :ebruary 1=, 0<02 >. a nitong mga huling araw 'agkata'os kong magsagawa ng sariling 'agsisiyasat ay na'agDalaman ko sa aking buong kasiyahan na ang mag amang si ominador at :ernando alaba@an ay wala 'alang mga kasalanan at anumang kaugnayan sa 'agkamatay ng anak kong si Amado Vabalo Fr., at si (ernando alaba@an naman ay na'ilitang magtanggol na lamang ng kanyang sarili sa'agkat siya ay 'inagtulungan nina Amado Vabalo Fr., at ng kanyang mga kasamahan2 7. a hindi na ako interesado 'ang i'ag'atuloy ang demanda ko laban sa nasabing magD aama kaya-t iniuurong ko na ang nasabing demanda laban sa kanila2 . a aking isinagawa ang sinum'aang salaysay na ito ng kusang loob at buong laya, at ako-y hindi tinakot at inalok ng anumang 'abuya o 'angako at ginawa ko ang salaysay na ito u'ang 'atutuhan ang lahat ng aking mga isinasaad sa itaas. E&4A6 loob kong nilagdaan ang salaysay na ito nitong ikaD1= ng Pebrero, 0<0, 0<

?

I, M898CIO 8 9A C5&V, :ili'ino, of legal age, married, and residing at Calero, Puerto Princesa City, under oath allege3 0. +hat I was 'resented in court as one of 'rosecution witnesses in Criminal Case o. =>0 entitled "Peo'le of the Phili''ines ersus (85AO A9ABAFA et al." for "Murder" now 'ending in Branch ? of the 5egional +rial Court of Palawan and Puerto Princess City. 1. +hat the truth of the matter is that I arried at the scene of the incident only after AMAO VABA9O, F5., the ictim, was brought to the shore and already dead. (ence, I was not able to witness the actual ha''enings which led to his death. >. +hat there being no witness at the time the inestigation was being conducted by the 'olice concerning the death of AMAO VABA9O, F5., I was 'reailed u'on by the ictim-s father, AMAO VABA9O, 45., to testify for the 'rosecution and when I refused to coo'erate he threatened to kill me. +hus, I was forced to sign an affidait to attest that I saw the actual killing of AMAO VABA9O, F5., by the accused OMIAO5 A9ABAFA, (85AO A9ABAFA, and :85AO A9ABAFA while accused M86OIO 4ABI8+, C(A59I8 PA&6A and APO98O 89A +O558 were in the shore holding 'ieces of wood and waiting for AMAO VABA9O, F5. to come ashore so that they could block him. 7. +hat I am recanting my aforesaid affidait as well as my testimonies in court because I am being bothered by my conscience for haing testified against the accused without witnessing the whole incident. :&5+(85 A::IA+ 4AS8+( A&6(+. 4gd., M898CIO 89A C5&V Affiant In addition, the accusedDa''ellants also submitted, along with their A''ellants- Brief, a co'y of a 4inum'aang 4alaysay e)ecuted by one Manuela 6abineteDacuan, a Barangay Eagawad, on August >, 0<<0, wherein she stated that eerything Melencio dela Cru; said during his testimony is false since the latter was not 'resent at the crime scene at the time of the incident. (oweer, 6abineteDacuan was neer 'resented as a witness for the defense during the trial 'ro'er. +hese three documents were 'resented to the trial court as anne)es in an &rgent Motion for 5elease on Bail K filed by the alaba@ans only after the 'romulgation of the decision conicting them. +he trial court did not find the accusedDa''ellants- defense 'lausible and accordingly found them guilty beyond reasonable doubt of murdering Amado Vabalo, Fr. It thus stated in the dis'ositie 'ortion of its ecision3 < *(858:O58, and in iew of the foregoing consideration, @udgment is hereby rendered finding the > accused in the aboeDentitled case guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of murder


0

as the same is defined and 'enali;ed under the 5eised Penal Code, sentencing all the > accused to suffer the 'enalty of reclusion 'er'etua as well as to 'ay the costs. +he > accused furthermore are hereby ordered @ointly and solidarily to indemnify the heirs of the deceased the sum of P?,???.?? as and for the death of the deceased. +hey are furthermore ordered to indemnify @ointly and seerally the heirs of the deceased the sum of P0,???.?? and for actual damages. 4O O5858. +he accusedDa''ellants are now before us on a''eal with the following assignment of errors3 I +(8 +5IA9 CO&5+ 8558 58$854IB9S I O+ ACCO5I6 ACC&48 +(8I5 CO4+I+&+IOA9 5I6(+ +O B8 P584&M8 IOC8+ A +O A IMPA5+IA9 +5IB&A9. II +(8 +5IA9 CO&5+ 8558 58$854IB9S I ACCO5I6 *8I6(+ +O +(8 &+5&4+ *O5+(S A I :AC+ :AB5ICA+8 +84+IMOS O: +(8 4O98 4&PPO48 8S8*I+844 :O5 +(8 P5O48C&+IO. III +(8 +5IA9 CO&5+ 8558 58$854IB9S I CO$IC+I6 ACC&48DAPP899A+4. +he accusedDa''ellants, in denying cul'ability for the death of Amado Vabalo, Fr., insist that the latter was killed as a result of a tumultuous affray. +hey further insist that the testimony of the sole eyewitness, Melencio dela Cru;, be disregarded for being manifestly fabricated, more so now that the latter has e)ecuted an affidait of desistance. *e find the a''eal unmeritorious. A recantation does not necessarily cancel an earlier declaration. 9ike any other testimony, it is sub@ect to the test of credibility based on the releant circumstances and es'ecially the demeanor of the witness on the stand. Moreoer, it should be receied with caution as otherwise it could "make solemn trial a mockery and 'lace the inestigation of truth at the mercy of unscru'ulous witnesses." 0? In the case at bar, ela Cru;-s recantation came o nly after a la'se of almost four #7% years from the date of his last testimony in o'en court. +he case was submitted for decision before the trial court as early as Fanuary 01, 0<

1

It is highly doubtful that the eyewitness ela Cru;, after going through the trouble of being sworn in, testifying in o'en court, and being sub@ected to a rigid crossDe)amination by the defense counsel, wherein he unhesitatingly 'ointed to the accusedDa''ellants as the 'er'etrators of the crime, would, after four years, suddenly turn around and reerse himself. *e hae 'reiously held that mere retraction by a 'rosecution witness does not necessarily itiate the original testimony if credible. 00 +he Court looks with disfaor u'on retractions of testimonies 'reiously gien in court. +he rationale for the rule is obious3 Affidaits of retraction can easily be secured from witnesses, usually through intimidation or for a monetary consideration. 5ecanted testimony is e)ceedingly unreliable. +here is always the 'robability that it will later be re'udiated. 01 A testimony solemnly gien in court should not be set aside lightly, least of all by a mere affidait e)ecuted after the la'se of considerable time. In the case at bar, although the Affidait of 5ecantation was e)ecuted almost a year 'rior to the 'romulgation of the decision, the accusedD a''ellants saw it fit to inform the lower court of its e)istence only after the said 'romulgation, by attaching it as an anne) in their &rgent Motion for 5elease on Bail filed on August =, 0<<0. 0> Moreoer, the 'romulgation of the decision was delayed and reset a number of times due to the failure of the accusedDa''ellants to a''ear as scheduled. +hus, it is clear that the retraction is an afterthought and should not be gien 'robatie alue. +he accusedDa''ellants, in 'raying that the case at bench be remanded to the lower court for new trial, insist that the Affidait of esistance e)ecuted by ela Cru; constitutes newly discoered eidence. *e hold that it is not. 4ection 1 of 5ule 010 of the 5ules of Court 'roides that the only grounds for new trial are3 #a% +hat errors of law or irregularities hae been committed during the trial 're@udicial to the substantial rights of the accused2 #b% +hat new and material eidence has been discoered which the accused could not with reasonable diligence hae discoered and 'roduced at the trial, and which it introduced and admitted, would 'robably change the @udgment. Obiously, an affidait of desistance, een @udging from the meaning of this ca'tion itself, can not be said to be newly discoered eidence. Anyway, the delay on the 'art of the accusedDa''ellants in 'resenting the Affidait of esistance casts serious doubt u'on the eracity of the statements made therein. +he case of &.4. s. acir 07 first enunciated the 'rinci'le regarding affidaits of recantation as basis for a new trial3 In general, motions for new trial based on affidaits of this kind are entitled to but scant consideration. +he mere fact that after a solemn trial in a court of @ustice has been terminated, one of the witnesses, in conersation with friends or under 'ressure from interested 'arties, may tell a different story as to the incidents testified to by him, does not necessarily destroy the 'robatie testimony when on the witness stand. If new trials were granted in eery instance


>

where the interested 'arty or 'arties succeed in inducing some of the witnesses to ary or modify their testimony outside of court and after the trial, there would neer be an end of criminal litigation. . . . +he alue as eidence of the testimony of a witness gien in o'en court in the course of a trial had therein is due for the most 'art to the following considerations3 +hat under such conditions it is gien under the sanction of an oath and of the 'enalties 'rescribed for 'er@ury2 that the witnessstory is told in the 'resence of an im'artial @udge in the course of a solemn trial in o'en court2 that the witness is sub@ect to crossDe)amination, with all the facilities afforded thereby to test the truth and accuracy of his statements and to deelo' his attitude of mind toward the 'arties, his dis'osition to assist the cause of truth rather than to further some 'ersonal end 2 that the 'roceedings are had under the 'rotection of the court and under such conditions as to remoer, so far as is humanly 'ossible, all likelihood that undue or unfair influences will be e)ercised to induce the witness to testify falsely2 and finally, that under the watchful eye of a trained @udge his manner, his general bearing and demeanor and een the intonation of his oice often unconsciously disclose the degree of credit to which he is entitled as a witness. Manifestly, loose statements or een sworn statements of witnesses, made after the trial has closed, arying o r contradicting their testimony gien at the trial, will rarely be sufficient in the absence of s'ecial circumstances, to raise such a doubt as to the truth of their testimony gien at the trial and acce'ted as true by the trial @udge, as to @ustify the granting of a new trial. +he Affidait of esistance e)ecuted by the ictim-s father also merits scant consideration, for it is a)iomatic in our @urisdiction that for such desistance to benefit the accused, it must be gien 'rior to the filing of a criminal com'laint. 0 (ere, the Affidait of esistance was filed long after the trial had concluded. As such, like the Affidait of 5ecantation e)ecuted by ela Cru;, Amado Vabalo, 4r.-s sworn statement cannot sere as basis for the ac!uittal of the accusedD a''ellants. *e cite with a''roal the argument of the 4olicitor 6eneral with regard to the said affidaits3 8en on their merits, the sworn statements are not im'ressed with faith and credit. Melencio dela Cru; alleges that he testified for the 'rosecution because Amado Vabalo, 4r. "threatened to kill me." If true, why did it take him more than four long years to wean away from the threat and retract his testimonyGN On the other hand, Amado Vabalo, 4r.-s affirmation of the alleged innocence of accusedDa''ellants is deoid of any 'robatie alue being hearsay and a mere factual conduction. And Eagawad Manuela 6abineteDacuan-s narration of the alleged incident e)cul'ating the accusedDa''ellants is clearly and indubitably a fabricated afterthought. either constituting newly discoered eidence nor of such 'robatie weight as would 'robably change the @udgment, the sworn statements in !uestion cannot een be a alid ground for new trial under 5ule 010 of the 5ules of Court. According to this (onorable Court in Peo'le s. Bigcas #100 4C5A =>?%3 As a general rule a motion for new trial will not be granted if based on an affidait of recantation of a witness whose effect, is to free the a''ellant from 'artici'ation in the commission of the crime. It would be a dangerous rule to re@ect the testimony taken before the court of @ustice sim'ly because the witness who has gien it later on changed his mind for one reason or another,


7

for such a rule will make a solemn trial a mockery and 'lace the inestigation at the mercy of unscru'ulous witnesses. Because affidaits of retraction can easily be secured from 'oor and ignorant witnesses, usually for monetary consideration, the Court has inariably regarded such affidaits as e)ceedingly unreliable #de 6u;man s. IAC, 0K7 4C5A A'ril 7, 0<?% to #7?% meters. +his contention is incorrect. It had been established that ela Cru; witnessed the attack on Amado Vabalo, Fr. by the accusedDa''ellants from the time of its ince'tion, when (ernando alaba@an stabbed the ictim, to the time when the ictim tried to esca'e by wading out to sea, and u' to its horrible clima) when the ictim was mercilessly killed by the three accused who unrelentingly 'ursued him. ela Cru; fully witnessed the attack on the ictim. (ernando alaba@an insists that ela Cru; was not 'resent at the time of the incident. (oweer, u'on crossDe)amination, it can be gleaned that his only basis for such an assertion is that he did not see ela Cru; that night, but he did not discount the 'ossibility that ela Cru; was somewhere in the icinity but out of sight. 0= +he trial court correctly a''reciated the aggraating circumstance of treachery in !ualifying the criminal offense to murder3 +he Court in assessing the circumstances of the killing of the deceased Amado Vabalo, Fr. by all the > accused who actiely hel'ed one another in 'er'etrating the killing could not but rule that the killing was attended by treachery to !ualify the offense to murder. +he aboe finding was 'rimarily 'remised on the fact that at the time the attack was launched at the sea by the > accused, the ictim was not in a 'osition to defend himself. +hus, at the time of attack the ictim was in the water with a de'th u' to his arm'it. In the situation he found himself, it is !uite obious his freedom of moement to ade!uately 'rotect and defend his 'erson was ery much restricted taken in con@unction with the > aggressors who were riding in a banca and hitting him all at the same time. :rom the manner of attack em'loyed by the accused, it may reasonably be deduced or inferred that accused consciously ado'ted the mode of attack em'loyed by them to insure its success.




*hen they 'ursued the ictim who run towards the seashore and o'ted to go to the water, it must be construed when they aailed themseles of a banca, they did so with a decided adantage on their 'art without risk to their 'ersonal safety. It can thus be seen that at the time the fatal b lows were deliered treachery can thus be firmly a''reciated against them. +reachery may not be 'resent at the ince'tion of the attack, but if the attack is continuous and treachery e)isted at the time of the consummation of the killing the crime committed is not homicide but murder. #Peo'le s. Cario, et al., K 4C5A 0=%. *e find no merit in the contention of accusedDa''ellants that Amado Vabalo, Fr. died on the occasion of a tumultuous affray. Pertinent 'roision of the 5eised Penal Code on death cau sed in a tumultuous affray reads3 eath caused in a tumultuous affray.  *hen, while seeral 'ersons, not com'osing grou's organi;ed for the common 'ur'ose of assaulting and attacking each other reci'rocally, !uarrel and assault each other in a confused and tumultuous manner, and in the course of the affray someone is killed, and it cannot be ascertained who actually killed the deceased, but the 'erson or 'ersons who inflicted serious 'hysical in@uries can be identified, such 'erson or 'ersons shall be 'unished by 'rision mayor. . . . #Art. 10 of the 5eised Penal Code% Penalties omittedN Conse!uently, the following elements must concur3 #0%

+hat there be seeral 'ersons2

#1% +hat they did not com'ose grou's organi;ed for the common 'ur'ose of assaulting and attacking each other reci'rocally2 #>% +hat these seeral 'ersons !uarreled and assaulted one another in a confused and tumultuous manner2 #7%

+hat someone was killed in the course of the affray2

#%

+hat it cannot be ascertained who actually killed the deceased2

#=% +hat the 'erson or 'ersons who inflicted serious 'hysical in@uries or who used iolence can be identified. In the case at bench, there were no grou's of 'ersons organi;ed for the common 'ur'ose of assaulting and attacking each other reci'rocally. Conse!uently, there was no affray among seeral grou's of 'ersons in the course of which Amado Vabalo, Fr. died. +he fact is that there was only one grou' of 'ersons, the accused themseles, who caused an attack on a single ictim, Amado Vabalo, Fr. +his grou' of 'ersons, motiated as they were, attacked and killed the aforesaid ictim. +he 'ersons who assaulted and killed the ictim were clearly identified. 4ince it was ascertained as to who actually killed the deceased, the death of the ictim cannot be said to hae been caused in a tumultuous affray.


=

+here is, a''reciated herein, as recommended by the 4olicitor 6eneral, the mitigating circumstance of oluntary surrender in the case of (ernando alaba@an. +his mitigating circumstance is, howeer, offset by the aggraating circumstance of eident 'remeditation and abuse of su'erior strength. +reachery has !ualified the killing to murder. Conse!uently, as correctly found by the trial court, the 'enalty of reclusion 'er'etua should be im'osed. *(858:O58, the @udgment of the court a !uo is hereby A::I5M8 in all res'ects. (ssue: 'eld:

People v. /ion Facts: In its decision 0 in Criminal Case o. D0?J<= dated 1? Fanuary 0<<>, but 'romulgated

on K :ebruary 0<<>, Branch 77 #agu'an City% of the 5egional +rial Court of the :irst Fudicial 5egion decreed as follows3 *(858:O58, the Court finds accused :eli'e 4ion alias "Funior" and :ederico isu alias Miguel isu guilty beyond reasonable doubt as 'rinci'als of the crime of Murder 'ursuant to Article 17K of the 5eised Penal Code, and in iew of the attendance of the aggraating circumstance of cruelty which is not offset by any mitigating circumstance, the two accused are hereby sentenced to suffer the 'enalty of 5eclusion Per'etua, and to indemnify @ointly the heirs of the ictim the sum of P?,???.?? and to 'ay the costs of the 'roceedings. Accused :eli'e 4ion alias "Funior" and :ederico isu alias Miguel isu are ordered to 'ay @ointly the heirs of the ictim the sum of P00,<0?.?? as actual damages. 4O O5858. :eli'e 4ion alias "Funior," whose full name is :eli'e 5odrigue; 4ion, Fr. 1 #hereafter a''ellant 4ion%, and :ederico isu alias "Miguel" #hereafter a''ellant isu%, seasonably a''ealed therefrom to this Court > in iew of the 'enalty im'osed. 7 +he case against a''ellants commenced with the filing of a criminal com'laint for Murder  on 0< oember 0<<0 in Criminal Case o. 1070 #4PD<0% before the :ourth Munici'al Circuit +rial Court of 4an :abianD4an Facinto in the Proince of Pangasinan. Charged with a''ellants therein were Fohnny Fuguilon, 8dong 4ion, :eli) 4ion alias "8llet," and "four #7% other Fohn oes." After a''ro'riate 'reliminary e)amination, Fudge 4ergio 6arcia of said court issued a warrant for the arrest of the accused with no bail fi)ed for their tem'orary liberty. = (oweer, the warrant was sered only on a''ellant isu, while the rest then remained at large. &'on a''ellant isu-s motion for bail, to which Asst. Proincial Prosecutor 5estituto umlao, Fr., recommended that bail be fi)ed at P7?,???.?? for said accused only, the court fi)ed said accused-s bail at such amount2 and u'on filing and a''roal of the bail bond, a''ellant isu was ordered released. J


J

4ubse!uently, one Atty. :ernando Cabrera filed, for the rest of the accused, a motion to reduce the bail from P7?,???.?? to P1?,???.??. K As Proincial Prosecutor umlao agreed to a reduction of P0?,???.??, the court granted the motion and fi)ed bail at P>?,???.??. one of them, howeer, filed a bail bond. :or failure of the accused to submit the re!uired counterDaffidaits, the Munici'al Circuit +rial Court, finding 'robable cause against all the accused for the crime of murder on the basis of the eidence for the 'rosecution, ordered the transmittal of the record of the case, including the bail bond of accused :ederico isu, to the Office of the Proincial Prosecutor of Pangasinan for a''ro'riate action. < On 10 Fanuary 0<<1, an Information 0? was filed with the 5egional +rial Court #5+C%, :irst Fudicial 5egion, in agu'an City, Pangasinan, against a''ellants 4ion and isu and Fohnny Fuguilon, 8dong 4ion, :eli) 4ion alias "8llet," and four #7% unidentified 'ersons #designated as Fohn, Peter, 5ichard and Paul oe%, accusing them of the crime of murder committed as follows3 +hat on or about October 0=, 0<<0 in the eening at Brgy. Binday, munici'ality of 4an :abian, 'roince of Pangasinan, Phili''ines and within the @urisdiction of this (onorable Court, the aboeDnamed accused, armed with stones and a bladed wea'on cons'iring, confederating and mutually hel'ing one another with intent to kill with treachery and eident 'remeditation did, then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously hurl with stones, attack and stab :ernando Abaoag inflicting u'on him the following in@uries3  stab wound 0 0U1 inches in width, < inches in de'th between 0?D00 IC4, mid a)illary area slanting u'wards hitting the left lobe of the lung 

stab wound right lateral side of the neck 0 0U1, inch in de'th



stab wound 0 0U1 inches in width, 0 0U1 in de'th mid sca'ular area, left



contusion su'erim'osed abrasion left eyebrow

which caused his instant death, to the damage and 're@udice of his heirs. CO+5A5S to Art. 17K, 5eised Penal Code. +he information was docketed as Criminal Case o. D0?J<= and assigned to Branch 77 thereof. On 1 Fune 0<<1, accused 4ion was arrested. 00 +hen on 0? Fune 0<<1, the 5+C annulled and oided the bail earlier granted to a''ellant isu by the MC+C Fudge 4ergio 6arcia for luck of 'ro'er hearing, denied the motion for bail filed by a''ellant 4ion, and ordered their detention in @ail. 01 4ince only a''ellants 4ion and isu were arrested, the case 'roceeded against them only. &'on arraignment, both 'leaded not guilty to the charge and waied 'reDtrial. 0>


K

+he 'rosecution-s witnesses were Cesar and :elicitas Abaoag, the brother and the wife of the ictim, res'ectiely2 r. 9eo'oldo Manalo, 4an :abian Munici'al (ealth Officer2 5osendo Imuslan, barangay ca'tain of Barangay Binday2 and 4PO0 5icardo Abrio. On the other hand, the defense 'resented as its witness a''ellant isu2 a''ellant 4ion2 Cora;on 4 ion, wife of a''ellant 4ion2 and r. 9eo'oldo Manalo. +he eidence for the 'rosecution as established by the testimonies of its witnesses is 'artly summari;ed by the Office of the 4olicitor 6eneral in the Brief for the A''ellee, as follows3 On or about J3?? o-clock in the eening of October 0=, 0<<0, Cesar Abaoag was at the barangay road in front of his house situated in Binday, Binda y, 4an :abian, Pangasinan. (e was with his elder brother Carlos Abaoag Abaoag and 5icardo Manuel #'. =, +4, August 1?, 0<<1% when all of a sudden, 5onnie Manuel arried coming from the west com'laining that he was being chased by :eli'e 4ion and Fohnny Fuguilon #'. J, +4, id.%. On that same occasion, :ernando Abaoag also arried at the scene. (e said to 5onnie, "why 5onnie, you are making trouble again." +he latter answered, "I am not making trouble uncle because while I was inside the house of 8ling Alcantara, :eli'e 4ion and Fohnny Fuguilon were trying to stab me. #'. K, +4, id.%. 4econds later, :eli'e 4ion and Fohnny Fuguilon a''eared and started throwing stones. :ernando Abaoag told them to sto' throwing stones but before they the y desisted and left, one of them uttered "een you Andong, you are interfering, you will also hae your day, ula of your mother, you AbaoagsN" #''. , +4, id.%. Instead, he ran to his brother-s house and informed :elicitas, the wife, about the hel'less condition of :ernando #''. 11D1>, +4, id.%. &'on being informed, :elicitas accom'anied by Carlos Abaoag, went to the 'lace of the incident. +he assailants were no longer there. 4he only saw her husband lying 'rostate on the ground ery weak in the state of dying. *hen she in!uired what ha''ened, :ernando answered "naalaak" which in 8nglish means "I was hit" #''. 7D, +4, Fuly 1J, 0<<1%. :ernando told his wife that his assailants were :eli'e 4ion, Miguel isu, 8dong 4ion, Fohnny Fuguilon and :eli) 4ion #'. =, = , +4, id.%


<

+he ictim was rushed to 4t. Blaise (os'ital in 4an :abian but he was 'ronounced dead on arrial #''. 17D1, +4, August 1?, 0<<1%. r. 9eo'oldo Manalo, a Munici'al (ealth Officer of 4an :abian, Pangasinan conducted 'ost mortem e)amination #8)h. A% on the body of the ictim. +he result of his findings showed that :ernando Abaoag sustained the following in@uries, to wit3 0% stab stab woun woundd 0 0U1 0U1 inche inchess in wid width th,, < inche inchess in de' de'th th bet betwe ween en 0?D0 0?D00, 0, IC4 IC4,, mid mid a)ill a)illar aryy area area slanting u'wards hitting the left lobe of the lung 1%

stab stab woun woundd right right late latera rall sid sidee of the the neck neck 0 0U1 0U1 inch inches es in in widt width, h, 0 0U1 0U1 inch inch in in de't de'thh

>%

stab stab woun woundd 0 0U1 0U1 inc inche hess in in wid width th,, 0 0U1 0U1 in in de't de'thh mid mid sca'u sca'ula larr are area, a, left left

7%

cont contus usio ionn su' su'er erim im'o 'ose sedd abr abras asio ionn lef leftt ey eyebro ebrow w. 07

r. Manalo further testified testified that the stab wounds were caused cau sed by a shar'D'ointed instrument, 'ossibly a dagger, with the first first wound hitting the lower lobe of the left lung causing seere bleeding and its eentual colla'se. (e determined the cause of death to be hemorrhagic shock secondary to multi'le stab wounds. 0 Barangay Ca'tain Imuslan testified that he and Eagawad :ernando 6atchalian, on the night of the incident, found a small bolo and a bloodied doubleDbladed wea'on #dagger% near the scene of the crime. 0= Cesar Abaoag recogni;ed this wea'on as the one used by a''ellant 4ion in stabbing the ictim. 0J On her 'art, :elicitas Abaoag declared that she s'ent more than P00,???.?? for the wake and burial of her husband whose death saddened her, she being left alone to take care of their children. 0K In his defense, a''ellant 4ion, brother and cousin of accused 8dong 0< 4ion and :eli) 4ion alias "8llet," res'ectiely, admitted that on the night in !uestion, he 'artici'ated in a stoneDthrowing incident and "freeDforDall rumble" between his grou' #the 4ions and Fohn ny Fuguilon% on one hand, and the Abaoags and Manuels, on the other. (oweer, he 'rofessed his innocence, claiming that it was his brother 8dong 4ion and Fohnny Fuguilon who stabbed the ictim.  ictim. 1? (is ersion of the incident was summari;ed by the trial court, thus3 On October 0=, 0<<0 at about J3?? '.m., he, together with Fohnny Fuguilon went to the house of 8ling Alcantara as he wanted to talk with his son, his friend. 5onnie Manuel was already there when they arried. *hile at the 'lace, Fohnny Fuguilon and 5onnie Manuel came out and started fighting with each other. 5onnie and Manuel ran and 'roceed ed to the 'lace of his cousin. (e was 'acifying Fohnny Fuguilon and 5onnie Manuel but Fohnny Fuguilon threw stones at 5onnie Manuel. At this 'oint, :ernando Abaoag Abaoag interened in the !uarrel saying, "ula of your mother Fohnny, you are too much, you will also hae your day." day." Fohnny Fuguilon answered "ula of your mother Andoy, do not interfere because you are not our enemy." enemy." After the erbal e)change, he took Fohnny Fuguilon to their #4ion-s% house . . . . At about <3?? '.m., that same eening, they stoned their house, its sides and the stairs. (e and Idong and Fohnny Fuguilon looked for Cesar


=?

Abaoag, 5onnie Manuel, 5icky Manuel, Andong Abaoag Abaoag and two #1% other com'anions. +hey were at the 'lace of Marta 4oriano. 4o riano. After After that, they still threw stones towards them. +here was a free for all rumble between 5onnie Manuel, 5icky Manuel, the Abaoags and Idong 4ion, and Fohnny Fuguilon, 8llet 4ion and himself, in front of the house of 9oly 6aldones. (e denied the testimony of Cesar Abaoag that he stabbed :ernando Abaoag three times and before he was stabbed Fohnny Fuguilon stoned him #:ernando Abaoag%. It was Idong 4ion and Fohnny Fuguilon who stabbed :ernando Abaoag. After :ernando Abaoag was stabbed, they ran away. (is grou' also ran away. (e went home and rushed towards Fohnny Fuguilon because b ecause he was stabbed. (e brought Fuguilon to the 4t. Blaise Clinic and (os'ital. (e did not re'ort the incident to Barangay Ca'tain 5osendo Imuslan. On October 0J, 03?? '.m., he 'resented himself to Eagawad 9agman who brought him to the Police 4tation . . . . 10 In his defense, a''ellant isu offered denial and alibi. (e declared that he had no 'artici'ation in the killing of :ernando Abaoag, and during the whole night of 0= October 0<<0, while the !uarrel, stoning and stabbing incidents in !uestion were taking 'lace, he was resting and slee'ing in the house of his em'loyer, :elicidad 6atchalian, after driing the latter-s @ee'ney the entire day. (oweer, (oweer, before 'roceeding home from work that afternoon, a fternoon, he went to the store of O'ing Fuguilon to buy cigarettes and dro''ed by the house of a''ellant 4ion where he stayed for about fie minutes. (e only learned about the killing the following morning when he was told that he was one of the sus'ects. (e was arrested about a month after the incident. 11 On rebuttal, Cesar Abaoag refuted the testimony of a''ellant 4ion. Cesar asserted that neither his brothers, the Manuels nor himself threw stones at 4ion-s 4ion-s house2 there was no freeDforDall fight fight between the 4ions and the Abaoags2 Fohnny Fuguilon and 8dong 4ion merely threw stones at, but did not stab, :ernando Abaoag2 and it was only a''ellant a'' ellant 4ion who stabbed :ernando Abaoag. 1> After the conclusion of trial, the court granted a''ellants- motion to file a memorandum within fifteen days. es'ite the e)tension gien, a''ellants- counsel coun sel did not file the memorandum. +hus, in its order of 00 ecember 0<<1, the trial court declared the case submitted for decision. 17 On K :ebruary 0<<>, the trial court 'romulgated its decision, 1 the dis'ositie 'ortion !uoted in the introductory 'aragra'h of this 'onencia. As to the cul'ability of a''ellants 4ion and isu, the trial court found3 +he defense of accused :ederico : ederico isu alias Miguel isu and :eli'e 5odrigue; 4ion, Fr. desere desere scant consideration. Cesar Abaoag narrated in detail how his brother :ernando Abaoag was stoned by accused Fohnny Fuguilon, :ederico isu and :eli) 4ion and how accused :eli'e 4ion stabbed :ernando Abaoag three times. Cesar Abaoag saw Fohnny Fuguilon throw stone hitting the left eyebrow of :ernando Abaoag, and when his brother #:ernando Abaoag% turned left, accused :ederico isu alias Miguel isu, Idong 4ion 4 ion and :eli) 4ion simultaneously threw stones toward him #:ernando Abaoag%. +hen, at a distance of two #1% meters, Cesar Abaoag saw accused :eli'e 4ion stab :ernando Abaoag three times, hitting the left side b elow the arm'it, then on the left waistline and the right side of the neck below the @aw of the deceased with the use of a shar' double bladed b laded dagger.


=0

Cesar Abaoag could not be mistaken in the identification because he was two meters away when he saw the accused :eli'e 4ion stab his brother, and, moreoer, there was a light illuminating the 'lace of the incident coming from the houses of Marta 4oriano and 9oly Caldones. Cesar Abaoag Abaoag identified the dagger #8)hibit %. +he narrations of Cesar Abaoag are bolstered by the testimony of r. 9eo'oldo Manalo, the doctor who conducted the 'ostmortem e)amination on the cadaer of :ernando Abaoag. r. Manalo stated that "stab wound 0 0U1 inches in width, < inches in de'th de' th between 0?D00 IC4, midD a)illary area slanting u'wards hitting the left lobe of the lung" is located below the left arm'it. +he second stab wound, "stab wound right lateral side of the neck 0 0U1 inches in width, 0 0U1 in de'th," is located at the right side of the neckN at the back. +he doctor stated that the wounds were caused 'ossibly by a dagger. dagg er. :inally, it is well to !uote the statement uttered by b y :ernando Abaoag in the 'resence of :elicitas Abaoag, to wit3 "naalaak, which means, I was hit, take note of this because I cannot surie these in@uries of mine". :ernando Abaoag told :elicitas Abaoag, :eli'e 4ion, Miguel isu, Idong 4ion, Fohnny Fuguilon and :eli) 4ion stabbed him. #1D01 tsn Fuly 1J, 0<<1%. +his is a dying declaration because it was made under a consciousness of im'ending death #4ection >J, 5ule 0>?, 5ules of Court%. 1= +he trial court likewise found that cons'iracy was duly established by the 'rosecution, thus3 As stated in the decision, accused Fohnny Fohnn y Fuguilon threw stone, hitting the left eyebrow of :ernando Abaoag, and 8dong 4ion, :eli) 4ion and :ederico #Miguel% isu simultaneously threw stones u'on the deceased, while accused :eli'e 4ion alias "Funior" stabbed him #ictim% three times, resulting in the latter-s death. 1J It then a''reciated against a''ellants #a% the !ualifying circumstance of treachery because the "attack was so sudden that the ictim  ictim had no time to defend himself" and #b% the generic aggraating circumstance of cruelty because "there were three stab wounds" and the first wound  which "caused seere bleeding and colla'se of the lung" and the death of :ernando Abaoag  "was deliberately augmented by inflicting the other wounds which are unnecessary for its commission." 1K It did not, howeer, a''reciate eident 'remeditation for lack of "substantial" eidence2 1< nor gie the benefit of oluntary surrender in faor of a''ellant a'' ellant 4ion since his surrender was merely "forced by circumstances," as he "'resented himself to Eagawad 9agman because he was sus'ected as one of the 'ersons who stabbed the ictim." >? A''ellants, through counsel, seasonably filed their otice of A''eal. >0 In their eightD'age A''ellant-s Brief, filed by counsel co unsel de oficio Atty. Iris Iris 9. Bonifacio, >1 a''ellants 'lead for their ac!uittal, contending that the trial court erred3 #0% in conicting them of murder2 #1% in taking into account the aggraating circumstance of cruelty2 #>% in ruling that cons'iracy was established2 #7% in not a''reciating the 'resence of oluntary surrender2 and #% in disregarding the defense of a''ellant 4ion that it was 8dong 4ion and Fohnny Fuguilon who were res'onsible for the death of :ernando Abaoag.


=1

In su''ort of their first assigned error, a''ellants attack the identification made of them by 'rosecution witnesses. +hey claim that if witness witness Cesar Abaoag Abaoag actually saw a''ellant 4ion stab the ictim, then Cesar should hae immediately informed :elicitas Abaoag, Abaoag, the ictim-s wife, of this fact. Cesar-s failure was then unusual and unnatural. unna tural. +hen, too, :elicitas Abaoag-s testimony on her husband-s alleged ddying ying declaration was "not s'ecific" as far as the assailant-s a ssailant-s identities were concerned because the ictim merely said "naalaak" #"I was hit"%, without identifying a''ellant 4ion as the one who stabbed him2 and, her claim that her husband identified all the fie #% accused as the ones who "stabbed" him was "an im'ossibility." Moreoer, the 'rosecution witnesses were limited to relaties of the ictims2 "other ital witnesses"  such as Marta 4oriano, 9oly 6aldones, or 8ling Alcantara  should hae been 'resented to corroborate the "biased" testimonies of Cesar and :elicitas Abaoag. A''ellants further contend that3 #0% there was no treachery since the stabbing of the ictim was not "sudden"2 #1% cruelty was not 'roen because "there is no clear testimony" that the first stab wound was fatal and the second and third wounds were "unnecessary"2 #>% cons'iracy cannot be deduced from the mere fact that all the accused threw stones at the ictim  ictim before the stabbing2 #7% a''ellant 4ion oluntarily surrendered een before the 'olice started inestigating the case when he was not yet a sus'ect2 and #% a''ellant 4ion could co uld not hae testified that it was 8dong 4ion and Fohnny Fuguilon who stabbed the ictim if such were not true, considering that the former is his brother and the latter his barriomate2 and #=% a''ellant 4ion bore no grudge against the ictim and did not esca'e. On the other hand, the Office of the 4olicitor 6eneral, in its Brief for the A''ellee, su''orts the trial court-s findings and conclusions, e)ce't as to the a''reciation of cruelty, which it concedes to be erroneous. Our careful reiew of the record of the eidence adduced by the 'arties coninces us that 'rosecution witness Cesar Abaoag Abaoag 'ositiely identified a''ellants as being 'resent during the incident in !uestion and saw a''ellant a''e llant 4ion stab the ictim thrice. As correctly found by the trial court3 Cesar Abaoag could not be mistaken in the identification because he was two meters away when he saw the accused :eli'e 4ion stab his brother, and, moreoer, there was a light illuminating the 'lace of the incident coming from the houses of Marta 4oriano and 9oly Caldones. Cesar Abaoag Abaoag identified the dagger #8)hibit %. Cesar Abaoag also saw the rest of the accused, including a''ellant isu, throwing stones at the ictim. (e was definite, howeer, that it was only accused Fohnn y Fuguilon who was able to hit the ictim at the left eyebrow. +he three stab wounds inflicted by a''ellant 4ion and the in@ury at the left eyebrow caused by the stone thrown by Fuguilon @ibed with the 'ost mortem findings of r. Manalo as he described the in@ury on the left eyebrow as "contusion su'erim'osed abrasion left eyebrow." >> If Cesar had any ulterior motie to testify against a''ellant isu, he could hae declared that it was isu, and not Fuguilon, who hit the ictim with a stone. Cesar then honestly narrated what he obsered.


=>

+hat Cesar did not at once inform :elicitas Abaoag Abaoag that it was a''ellant 4ion 4 ion who stabbed her husband, was not 'roof, as a''ellants a''e llants suggest, that Cesar was absent from the crime when it was committed. Cesar-s 'resence was admitted by a''ellant 4ion himself on direct e)amination, thus3 R id id you you see see Cesa Cesarr Abao Abaoag ag on on that that occa occasi sion on any anywhe where re nea nearr :ern :ernan ando do Abao Abaoag ag whe whenn you you said he was stabbed by Fohnny Fuguilon and Idong 4ionG A

Ses, sir. >7

:urthermore, Cesar satisfactorily e)'lained his failure to forthwith inform :elicitas of this fact. At that time, Cesar himself was running away from the accused who had hit him with a stone. (is 'ressing concern then was to get someone to hel' his wounded brother2 besides, he h e was scared of accused :eli) 4ion, uncle u ncle of a''ellant 4ion, who was a "notorious" character in their neighborhood. > It is settled that delay in diulging the name of the 'er'etrator of a crime, if sufficiently e)'lained, does not im'air the credibility of the witness nor destroy its 'robatie alue. >= In any an y eent, in his sworn statement >J which was submitted sub mitted on 11 October 0<<0 before Fudge 4ergio 6arcia, he narrated what he had witnessed and mentioned a''ellants 4ion and isu as among the 'er'etrators 'er'e trators of the crime. +he identifications of a''ellants and their coDaccused were further bolstered by the declaration made by the ictim to his wife, :elicitas Abaoag. +he trial court correctly characteri;ed this as a "dying declaration," >K haing been made under the consciousness of im'ending death. +he ictim was already weak his wife saw him and he knew that he would not surie the in@uries he sustained2 he een died a few minutes later while on the way to the hos'ital. >< *hen :elicitas saw her husband, he told her what had ha''ened to him, who caused his in@uries and that he did not e)'ect to lie, thus3 R

*hat *hat ha'' ha''en ened ed ne)t ne)t afte afterr tha thatt whe whenn you you met met you yourr hus husba band ndGG

A

Imm Immedi ediatel atelyy aske askedd him him what what ha'' ha''en ened ed to him him.

R

And wh what was was the an answer of of :e :ernando ndo Ab Abaoag oagG

A

(e sai said, "naa "naallaak, aak,"" which hich means eans,, I was was hit hit.

CO&5+3 R

id yo you as ask hi him wh why he he sa said "n "naalaak"G

A

(e sa said he he wa was st stabbed an and he he wa was in in@ure ured.

R

*hat do you mean by word "naalaak"G

A

I was hit.

CO&5+3


=7

Proceed. P5O48C&+O5 &M9AO3 R

o you kn know the reason why he was hitG

A *hat *hat I under underst stand and is is that that in in the the cour course se of of his his 'aci 'acify fyin ingg the the troub trouble le bet betwe ween en his his ne' ne'hew hew and the rest, he was stabbed, sir. R Asid Asidee from from the the sta state teme ment nt of of your your husban husbandd :ern :ernan ando do Aba Abaoag oag that that he he was was hit, hit, what what else else did did he say, if you knowG A

(e sai said, d, tak takee note note of of thi thiss becau because se I know know I canno cannott sur suri ie e wit withh thes thesee in@u in@uri ries es of of min mine. e.

CO&5+3 R

*hat hat el else di did he he tel telll yo you as aside fr from tha thattG

A (e sai said, d, rem remem embe berr that that in in case case I can cannot not sur suri iee with with the the in@ in@ur urie iess that that I sust sustai ained ned,, the the men men who stabbed me are :eli'e 4ion, 4 ion, Miguel isu, Idong 4ion, Fohnny Fuguilon and :eli) 4ion, sir. 7? #em'hasis su''lied% *e find these statements gien by the ictim to his wife to hae met the re!uisites of a dying d ying declaration under 4ection >J of 5ule 5u le 0>? of the 5ules of Court, i;3 #a% death is imminent and the declarant was conscious of that fact2 #b% the 'reliminary facts which bring the declaration within its sco'e must be made to a''ear2 #c% the declaration relates to the facts or circumstances 'ertaining to the fatal in@ury or death2 and #d% the declarant would hae been com'etent to testify had he suried. 70 ying declarations are admissible in eidence as an e)ce'tion to the hearsay rule because of necessity and trustworthiness. ecessity, because the declarant-s death renders im'ossible his taking the witness stand, and it often ha''ens that there is no other e!ually satisfactory 'roof of the crime2 and a nd trustworthiness, for it is "made in e)tremity, when the 'arty is at the 'oint of death and eery ho'e of this world is gone2 when eery motie to falsehood is silenced, and the mind is induced by the most 'owerful consideration to s'eak the truth. 71 *e find no ulterior motie on the 'art of :elicitas to fabricate the declarations of her husband. *e likewise likewise find to be without basis a''ellants- claim that all the 'rosecution witnesses were biased due to their relation to the ictim-s family. family. Plainly, Plainly, witnesses Imuslan Imuslan #the barangay ca'tain% and r. Manalo were not related to the ictim, while the relationshi' of witnesses Cesar Abaoag and :elicitas Abaoag to the ictim, as brother and wife, res'ectiely, neither dis!ualified them as witnesses nor rendered their testimony unworthy of belief. It is not to be lightly su''osed that relaties of the deceased would callously iolate their conscience to aenge the death of a dear one by blaming it on 'ersons whom they beliee to be innocent thereof. 7> A witness- relationshi' to a ictim, far from rendering his testimony biased, would een render the same more credible as it would be unnatural for a relatie who is interested in indicating the crime to accuse somebody other than the real cul'rit. 77


=

either was the failure of the 'rosecution to 'resent other witnesses, such as those mentioned by the a''ellants, fatal to the cause of the Peo'le. It is wellDsettled that the decision as whom to 'resent as witnesses for the 'rosecution is addressed to the sound discretion of the 'rosecutor handling the case and the nonD'resentation of certain witnesses by the 'rosecution is not a 'lausible defense. 7 +he 'rosecution is not obliged to 'resent all 'ossible witnesses, es'ecially if their testimony will only sere to corroborate that of another e yewitness- testimony, in which case the former may eery well be dis'ensed with considering that the testimony of a single witness, if credible and 'ositie to 'roe the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, would suffice. 7= +he trial court correctly re@ected a''ellant 4ion-s defense that it was not he who stabbed the ictim, but his brother 8dong 4ion and Fohnny Fuguilon, both of whom fled after the incident. Constituting a mere denial of Cesar Abaoag-s 'ositie testimony that it was a''ellant 4ion who stabbed the ictim, such must fail in light of the settled rule of eidence that 'ositie testimony is stronger that negatie testimony. 7J Moreoer, the claim was mad e rather late in the day, casting serious doubt as to its eracity. :rom the time that a''ellant 4ion 'resented himself to Eagawad 9agman and the 'olice authorities on 0J October 0<<0, and during his subse!uent incarceration, he neer told anyone nor made any statement that he was not one who stabbed the ictim2 he did not een so inform his close relaties, not een his wife who isited him in @ail. 7K Also, during the 'reliminary inestigation, when he had the o''ortunity to submit counterDaffidaits and other eidence to refute the charges, he did not care to dis'ute the statements of :elicitas and Cesar Abaoag identifying him and detailing his 'artici'ation in the crime. 7< (e raised this claim for the first time only during his testimony in court almost one #0% year after the stabbing incident and his initial surrender, and notably, only after the ho'e of a''rehending Idong 4ion and Fohnny Fuguilon, together with the other accused, already seemed remote. 4uch failure to immediately disclose the information as soon as he was im'licated in the crime and his 'rolonged silence on a ital matter hardly ins'ire belief, being unnatural and inconsistent with ordinary hab its of men and common e)'erience. +hat a''ellant 4ion did not flee, unlike his brother 8dong and Fohnny Fuguilon, neither 'roed his innocence. onDflight  unlike flight of an accused which alidly seres as a badge of guilt  is sim'ly inaction which may be due to seeral factors2 hence, it should not be construed as an indication of innocence. ? A''ellant 4ion-s claim of lack of illDfeeling or grudge against :ernando Abaoag was belied and contradicted by his admission in court that @ust before the stabbing of the ictim, he and his coD accused hurled stones at and fought with the Abaoags, including :ernando, whom he blamed for allegedly stoning his house. 0 It is also belied by his actuation and utterance made earlier in the eening of 0= October 0<<0 when :ernando Abaoag interfered in the !uarrel between a''ellant 4ion and :ernando-s ne'hew, 5onnie Manuel, which 'rom'ted a''ellant 4ion and Fohnny Fuguilon to curse and warn :ernando, thus3 "een you Andong :ernando AbaoagN you are interfering, you are siding with your ne'hew 5onnie Manuel, you hae also your day . . . . you Abaoags." 1 A''ellant 4ion also admitted that he "had an illDfeeling towards" 5onnie Manuel, the ictim-s ne'hew, because "he was making trouble" inside his @ee'ney " days before the incident." >


==

In light of the 'ositie identification of a''ellants, a''ellant isu-s alibi must fail. It is settled that alibi is a weak defense for it is easy to concoct and fabricate2 it cannot 'reail oer and is worthless in the face of the 'ositie identification by credible witnesses that an accused 'er'etrated the crime. 7 *e are unable to discern any 'lausible reason, and a''ellant isu does not offer any, why he should be falsely im'licated by Cesar Abaoag and mentioned in the ictim-s dying declaration as one of the ictim- assailants, if a''ellant isu was not actually 'resent during the incident and had no 'artici'ation in the commission of the crime. As to his motie or lack thereof, a''ellant isu claims that he had no misunderstanding with :ernando Abaoag or his family.  (oweer, :eli'e 4ion, Fr., disclosed that a''ellant isu was close to the 4ion clan, which e)'lains why a''ellant isu sym'athi;ed with and @oined the 4ions and Fuguilon in assaulting the ictim3 :ederico isu was 4ion Fr.-s @ee'ney conductor for fie #% months, the latter teaching the former how to drie for three #>% months2 and when isu became a drier himself, they had the same route and saw each other eery day at the 'oblacion. = isu een admitted that on 0= October 0<<0, after 3?? '.m., he "dro''ed by" the house of :eli'e 4ion, which he often did before. J *e now rule on the 'resence or absence of cons'iracy. +here is cons'iracy when two or more 'ersons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it. K irect 'roof of a 'reious agreement to commit a crime is not necessary2 it may be deduced from the mode and manner in which the offense was 'er'etrated, or inferred from acts of the accused themseles when such 'oint to a @oint 'ur'ose design, concerted action and community of interest. < Once cons'iracy is established, the act of one is the act of all. =? In this case, a''ellants and the other accused were already at the barangay road of Binday, near the houses of 9olly 6aldones and Marta 4oriano, when :ernando Abaoag, who was looking for the 'ersons who @ust stoned his house seeral times, and Cesar Abaoag, arried. Immediately, Fohnny Fuguilon threw a stone at :ernando hitting him on the left eyebrow2 then, 8dong, and :eli) 4ion and a''ellant isu, "simultaneously" threw stones, also at :ernando. As :ernando turned away from his assailants, a''ellant 4ion "rushed" and stabbed the ictim three #>% times, een as the latter raised his arms saying, "I will not fight back." *hen Cesar Abaoag tried to hel' his brother :ernando, a''ellant isu threw and hit Cesar with a stone. A''ellant 4ion then commanded his com'anions to also kill Cesar, 'rom'ting the latter to run awa y. +hen the assailants fled, leaing behind a small bolo and a dagger. +he confluence of their acts indubitably manifested a community of interest and unity of 'ur'ose and design to take :ernando Abaoag-s life. *e also find to be unsu''orted by eidence a''ellant-s claim, through the testimony of a''ellant 4ion, that the fatal stabbing of :ernando Abaoag was a result of a "freeDforDall rumble," thereby 'ossibly tem'ering their liability to that of causing death in a tumultuous affray under Article 10 of the 5eised Penal Code, which carries a 'enalty lower than that for homicide. =0 In this case, it was ascertained beyond doubt that a''ellant 4ion inflicted the fatal stab wounds2 hence, this claim must be re@ected.


=J

(aing resoled a''ellants- liability for :ernando Abaoag-s death, we now rule on the circumstances attendant to the commission of the crime. In conicting a''ellants of murder, the trial court considered the !ualifying circumstance of treachery, and disregarded the !ualifying circumstance of eident 'remeditation, which was likewise alleged in the information. *e agree as to the latter as the 'rosecution failed to 'roe the essential elements of eident 'remeditation, i;3 #a% the time when a''ellants determined to commit the crime2 #b% an act manifestly indicating that they clung to their determination2 and #c% a sufficient la'se of time between such determination and e)ec ution to allow them to reflect u'on the conse!uences of their act. =1 *e disagree, howeer, with the trial court-s finding as regards the !ualifying circumstance of treachery. &nder the law, there is treachery when the offender commits any of the crimes against the 'erson, em'loying means, methods, or forms in the e)ecution thereof which tend directly or s'ecifically to ensure its e)ecution, without risk to himself arising from the defense which the offended 'arty might make. => *e find no clear and conincing eidence of treachery. Cesar Abaoag-s testimony as to how his brother was attacked lacks sufficient detail showing conclusiely that the mode and manner of the assault rendered the ictim entirely defenseless. (e merely testified that when he and his brother 'roceeded west of the barangay road of Binday, he saw Fohnny Fuguilon stone his brother and hit him on the left eyebrow. :ernando Abaoag then turned to the left with his back towards :eli) 4ion, 8dong 4ion, Miguel isu and the four #7% other unidentified com'anions, who then "simultaneously" threw stones at :ernando. "4econds later," Cesar saw a''ellant 4ion holding a ery shar' double bladed dagger and stab his brother three #>% times2 :ernando Abaoag, when stabbed, "was @ust standing and said -I w ill not fight.-" =7 +hey were si) #=% meters away from Fohnny Fuguilon when the latter first hurled a stone at :ernando which signaled the other accused to the same. = Considering therefore the distance between the assailants and the ictim when the attack commenced, and the fact the three were two #1% waes of stoning which 'receded the stabbing of the ictim, these should hae sufficiently forewarned him of the greater danger which loomed and 'rom'ted him to esca'e. Moreoer, in light of the absence of clear details showing conclusiely that the stabbing was inflicted from behind or the ictim was entirely hel'less when stabbed, we are not 're'ared to conclude that the attack was "so sudden and une)'ected" as to render the ictim entirely defenseless. +reachery cannot !ualify the killing to murder when the ictim was forewarned of the attack by the assailant, or when the attack was frontal, or the attack was not so sudden as to hae caught the deceased com'letely unaware. == :urthermore, the eidence does not disclose that the means of e)ecution were deliberately or consciously ado'ted by a''ellants. Absent then of any !ualifying circumstance, the crime committed was homicide as defined and 'enali;ed under Article 17< of the 5eised Penal Code. +he trial court likewise erred in a''reciating against a''ellants the generic aggraating circumstance of cruelty, =J based solely on the fact that the ictim was stabbed thrice, with the first stab wound hitting the lower left lung causing seere bleeding and its colla'se. In fact, a''ellee concedes this error of the trial court. Cruelty cannot be a''reciated in absence of any


=K

showing that a''ellants, for their 'leasure and satisfaction, caused the ictim to suffer slowly and 'ainfully and inflicted on him unnecessary 'hysical and moral 'ain2 and, the mere fact that wounds in e)cess of what was indis'ensably necessary to cause death were found on the body of the ictim does not necessarily im'ly that such wounds were inflicted with cruelty and with the intention of deliberately intensifying the ictim-s suffering. =K In the instant case, the eidence only shows that the three #>% stab wounds were deliered in succession, nothing more. *e agree with a''ellants that a''ellant 4ion is entitled to th e benefit of the mitigating circumstance of oluntary surrender, which re!uires that "the offender oluntarily surrendered himself to a 'erson in authority." =< Its re!uisites are3 #a% the offender had not been actually arrested2 #b% the offender surrendered himself to a 'erson in authority or to the latter-s agent2 and #c% the surrender was oluntary. J? :or a surrender to be oluntary, it must be s'ontaneous and show the intent of the accused to submit himself unconditionally to the authorities, either3 #0% because he acknowledges his guilt2 or #1% because he wishes to sae them the trouble and e)'ense incidental to his search and ca'ture. J0 As shown by the records, in the afternoon of 0J October 0<<0, a''ellant 4ion "'resented" himself to Eagawad Modesto 9agman who, in turn, "escorted and surrendered" him to the 'olice in the 'oblacion. J1 (is admission that he surrendered because he was already sus'ected as one of the 'er'etrators of the crime does not make his surrender "forced by circumstances" as ruled by the trial court. (is arrest at that time was neither imminent nor ineitable. At the time of his surrender, no warrant of arrest against him had yet been issued, the same haing been issued only on 0< oember 0<<0. J> In fact, he was released from custody after a few days, and was ordered committed to @ail only sometime in Fune 0<<1, after his motion for bail was denied by the trial court on 0? Fune 0<<1 and was thus taken into custody. J7 +his subse!uent fact should not diminish nor erase the faorable effect of :eli'e 4ion Fr.-s oluntary surrender on 0J October 0<<0. As has been held, whateer the accused-s reason for surrendering  either the fear of re'risal from ictim-s relaties or, in this case, his knowledge that he was already a sus'ect  "does not gainsay the s'ontaneity of the surrender, nor alter the fact that by giing himself u', he saed the 4tate the time and trouble of searching for him until arrested." J *e disagree with A''ellee-s submission that there was no oluntary surrender because a''ellant 4ion surrender to a mere barangay "Eagawad" or 4angguniang Barangay member, and not to the 'olice authorities, im'lying that the former is not a 'erson in authority. J= +his ignores 4ection >KK of the 9ocal 6oernment Code of 0<<0 which e)'ressly 'roides, in 'art, that "fNor 'ur'oses of the 5eised Penal Code, the 'unong barangay, sangguniang barangay members, and members of the lu'ong taga'amaya'a in each barangay shall be deemed as 'ersons in authority in their @urisdictions . . . ." JJ +his law e)'ands the definition of a 'erson in authority under the 5eised Penal Code, wherein among the barangay officials, only the barangay ca'tain or chairman, now called Punong Barangay, is e)'ressly considered a 'erson in authority, as 'roided in Article 01 thereof. +hus, in addition to the Punong Barangay, the members of the 4angguniang Barangay, or Eagawads, and members of the 9u'ong +aga'aya'a are now considered not merely as agents of, but as 'ersons, in authority. JK *(858:O58, the challenged decision of Branch 77 #agu'an City% of the 5egional +rial Court of the :irst Fudicial 5egion in Criminal Case o. D0?J<= is MOI:I8. As modified,


=<

a''ellants :89I:8 4IO, alias "F&IO5" or :89I:8 5O5I6&8V, F5., and :885ICO I4&, alias "MI6&89," are hereby declared 6&I9+S beyond reasonable doubt, as 'rinci'als, of the crime of (OMICI8 as defined and 'enali;ed in Article 17< of the 5eised Penal Code, with the former entitled to the mitigating circumstance of oluntary surrender, and a''lying the Indeterminate 4entence 9aw, they are sentenced, res'ectiely, to suffer an indeterminate 'enalty ranging from eight #K% years of 'rison mayor minimum, as minimum, to fourteen #07% years and eight #K% months of reclusion tem'oral as ma)imum, and an indeterminate 'enalty ranging from ten #0?% years and one #0% day of 'rision mayor ma)imum, as minimum, to seenteen #0J% years, four #7% months and one #0% day of reclusion tem'oral minimum as ma)imum, with all the accessory 'enalties therefor, and sub@ect to the 'roision of Article 1< of the 5eised Penal Code. 8)ce't as so modified, the rest of the challenged @udgment stands. (ssue: 'eld:

People v. "aramara Facts: +he eidence shows that a benefit dance s'onsored by the Cal'i 8lementary 4chool P+A

of which accusedD a''ellant is the 'resident, was held in the yard of accusedD a''ellants house in Brgy. Cal'i, Claeria Masbate in the eening of oember 0K, 0<<0. At about 01 midnight, while 5icardo onato was dancing with certain 5owena el 5osario, one ante Arce, a friend of the accusedD a''ellant, a''roached 5icardo onato and bo)ed him on the chest. :rightened, 5owena ran away while 5icardo onato scam'ered toward the fence for safety. Miguelito onato was about two meters away from where 5icardo stayed at the fence. ot for long, accusedD a''ellant took his handD gun tucked in his waist and fired at the ictim Miguelito onato, hitting the latter at the left breast. 5icardo onato tried to hel' his fallen brother Miguelito but somebody struck 5icardos head with an iron bar which knocked him out for about > minutes. *hen 5icardo regained consciousness, he hurried home and informed his 'arents of what ha''ened. +heir father immediately went to the crime scene and rushed Miguelito to the Pio uran (os'ital where the latter died early in the morning of the ne)t day. Before Miguelito e)'ired, 5egarder onato, the father, asked who shot him and Miguelito re'lied that it was accusedD a''ellant. +he auto'sy re'ort reealed that aside from gunshot, the body of Miguelito bore lacerated wounds. +hat the wounds could hae inflicted by more than two 'ersons. +he trial court ruled against the accusedDa''ellant and was held guilty beyond reasonable doubt of murder. (ssue: *hether or not "aramara should be held liable for tumultuous affra instead of murder


J?

'eld: #o. +here is no merit in the accusedD a''ellants 'osition that he should be held liable

only for death caused in a tumultuous affray under Article 10 of the 5eised Penal Code. It was in such situation that accused came at the scene and @oined the fray 'ur'ortedly to 'acify the 'rotagonists when Miguelito attacked him causing four stab wounds in different 'arts of his bodyD two on the stomach, one on the left ni''le, and one on the left arm. +hen accusedD a''ellant with his handD gun shot Miguelito. Assuming that a rumble or a freeD forD all fight occurred at the benefit dance, Article 10 of the 5eised Penal Code cannot a''ly because 'rosecution witness 5icardo and 5egarder onato 'ositiely identified accusedD a''ellant as Miguelitos killer. *hile accusedD a''ellant himself suffered multi'le stab wounds which, at first blush, may lend erity to his claim that a rumble ensued and that ictim Miguelito inflicted u'on him these wounds, the eidence is ade!uate to consider them as a mitigating circumstance because the defenses ersion stands discredited in light of the more credible ersion of the 'rosecution as to the circumstances surrounding Miguelitos death. *herefore, the Court modifies the @udgment a''ealed from. +he Co urt finds Cresenciano Maramara guilty beyond reasonable doubt of homicide. /ison v. People Facts: +ension and animosity between Cory loyalists and Marcos loyalists broke into iolence.

On Fuly 1J, 0

J0

4alcedo managed to get away but accused +an, Pacadar 'ursued him, mauling 4umilang in the 'rocess. 4alcedo 'leadfed for his life. +he mauling resumed at the 5i;al monument and continued along 5o)as Bouleard until 4alcedo colla'sed and lost consciousness. 4umilang with a hel' of traffic enforcer brought 4alcedo to Medical Center Manila but was refused admission. 4o they took him to P6( where he died u'on arrial. +he trial court rendered decision finding 5omeo 4ison, ilo Pacadar, Foel +an, 5ichard e 9os 4antos and Foselito +amayo guilty as 'rinci'als in the crime of murder !ualified by treachery. :errer was conicted as an accom'lice. +he Court of A''eals modified the decision of the trial court by ac!uitting :errer but increasing the 'enalty of the rest of the accused e)ce't for +amayo. +he court conicts +amayo of homicide. (ssue: *hether or not the CA erred in finding that the crime committed is murder and not death caused in a tumultuous affra 'eld: #o. :or Article 10 of the 5eised Penal Code to a''ly2 it must be established that3 #0%

there be seeral 'ersons2 #1% that they did not com'ose grou's organi;ed for the common 'ur'ose of assaulting and attacking each other reci'rocally2 #>% these seeral 'ersons !uarreled and assaulted one another in a confused and tumultuous manner2#7% someone was killed in the course of the affray2 #% it cannot be ascertained who actually killed the deceased2 and #=% that the 'erson or 'ersons who inflicted serious 'hysical in@uries or who used iolence be can be identified. A tumultuous affray takes 'lace when a !uarrel occurs between seeral 'ersons and they engage in a confused and tumultuous affray, in the course of which some 'erson is killed or wounded and the author thereof cannot be ascertained. +he !uarrel in the instant case, if it can be called a !uarrel, was between one distinct grou' and one indiidual. Confusion may hae occurred because of the 'olice dis'ersal of the rallyists, but this confusion subsided eentually after the loyalists fled to Maria Orosa 4treet. It was only a while later after said dis'ersal that one distinct grou' identified as loyalists 'icked on one defenseless indiidual and attacked him re'eatedly, taking turns in inflicting 'unches, kicks and blows on him. +here was no confusion and tumultuous !uarrel or affray, nor was there a reci'rocal aggression at this stage of the incident. As the lower courts found, the ictims assailants were numerous by as much as fifty in number and were armed with stones with which they hit the ictim. +hey took adantage of their su'erior strength and e)cessie force and frustrated any attem't by 4alcedo to esca'e and free himself. 4alcedo 'leaded for mercy but they ignored his 'leas until he finally lost unconsciousness. +he deliberate and 'rolonged use of su'erior strength on a defenseless ictim !ualifies the killing of murder. *herefore, the decision a''ealed from is affirmed and modified.


J1

People v. $ad5aalam Facts: :our Informations were filed against a''ellant *al'an 9ad@aalam in the 5egional +rial

Court #5+C% of Vamboanga City #Branch 0=%, three of which he was found guilty, to wit3 0% maintaining a drug den in iolation of 4ection 0DA, Article III, of 5e'ublic Act o. =71 #angerous rugs Act of 0% direct assault with multi'le attem'ted homicide. +he following information was 'roided by the 'rosecution3 0% In the afternoon of 4e'tember 17, 0<?% 'olicemen 'roceeded to the house of a''ellant and his wife to sere the search warrant when they were met by a olley of gunfire coming from the second floor of the said house. +hey saw that it was the a''ellant who fired the M07 rifle towards them. 1% After gaining entrance, two of the 'olice officers 'roceeded to the second floor where they earlier saw a''ellant firing the rifle. As he noticed their 'resence, the a''ellant @um'ed from the window to the roof of a neighboring house. (e was subse!uently arrested at the back of his house after a brief chase. >% 4eeral firearms and ammunitions were recoered from a''ellants house. Also found was a 'encil case with fifty #?% folded aluminum foils inside, each containing metham'hetamine hydrochloride. 7% A 'araffin test was conducted and the casts taken both hands of the a''ellant yielded 'ositie for gun'owder nitrates. % 5ecords show that a''ellant had not filed any a''lication for license to 'ossess firearm and ammunition, nor has he been gien authority to carry firearms. (ssue: *hether or not a''ellant can be conicted se'arately of illegal 'ossession of firearms

after using said firearm in the commission of another crime. 'eld: #o. +he a''ealed ecision was affirmed with modifications. A''ellant is found guilty

only of two offenses3 #0% direct assault and multi'le attem'ted homicide with the use of a wea'on and #1% maintaining a drug den. +he law is clear3 the accused can be conicted of sim'le illegal 'ossession of firearms, 'roided that no other crime was committed by the 'erson arrested./ If the intention of the law in the second 'aragra'h were to refer only to homicide and murder, it should hae e)'ressly said so, as it did in the third 'aragra'h. $erily, where the law does not distinguish, neither should the courtsN. +he Court is aware that this ruling effectiely e)onerates a''ellant of illegal 'ossession of an MD 07 rifle, an offense which normally carries a 'enalty heaier than that for direct assault. *hile the 'enalty for the first is 'rision mayor, for the second it is only 'rision correccional. Indeed, the accused may eade coniction for illegal 'ossession of firearms by using such wea'ons in committing an een lighter offense, like alarm and scandal or slight 'hysical in@uries, both of which are 'unishable by arresto menor. +his conse!uence, howeer, necessarily arises from the


J>

language of 5A K1<7, whose wisdom is not sub@ect to the Courts reiew. Any 'erce'tion that the result reached here a''ears unwise should be addressed to Congress. Indeed, the Court has no discretion to gie statutes a new meaning detached from the manifest intendment and language of the legislature. +he CourtsN task is constitutionally confined only to a''lying the law and @uris'rudence to the 'roen facts, and this CourtN hae done so in this case. )ado v. People Facts: On May 1, 0<<1, in order to interce't cattle rustlers from Barangay 9aguinding, 4ultan

Eudarat, the 8s'eran;a, 4ultan Eudarat Police 4tation formed three teams, which com'osed of 'etitioner 4PO7 6eromino ado and CA:6& members :rancisco 8raso, Alfredo Balinas, and 5ufo Alga. Alfredo Balinas and 5ufo Alga were both armed with M07 armalite rifles, while 'etitioner was armed with a caliber .7 'istol and accused :rancisco 8raso was carrying an M0= armalite rifle. +he team saw somebody a''roaching who was halfDnaked. *hen he was about  meters away from the team, Balinas told 8raso to wait, but before Balinas could beam his flash light, 8raso fired his M0= armalite rifle at the a''roaching man. +hereafter, 'etitioner fired a single shot from his .7 caliber 'istol. Petitioner admitted that when he heard the ra'id gun burst, he did not turn to face the source thereof and instead fired his .7 caliber 'istol in front of him 'ur'osely to demorali;e their enemy. +he ictim turned out to be 4ilestre "Butsoy" Balinas, the ne'hew of Alfredo Balinas and not the cattle rustler the team were ordered to interce't. Accused 8raso embraced Alfredo Balinas and told him that it was not intentionally done and it was merely an accident. 4ilestre Balinas died as a result of the gunshot wounds he sustained. r. 5hodora +. Antenor, who conducted the 'ostDmortem e)amination on the cadaer of 4ilestre Balinas testified that the fatal wound that caused the death of the ictim was the one inflicted on the midDinner thigh. +he bullet 'ierced through and in@ured the organs in the 'elic region where she found three irregularly sha'ed metallic fragments. 4he added that the 'osition of the ictim at that time of the shooting was higher than the assailant considering that the tra@ectory of the bullets was u'wards. &'on e)amination by BI Ballistician 8lmer elson . Piedad, the three metallic fragments recoered from the fatal wound of the ictim turned out to be fragments of a .= mm @acketed bullet. (oweer, on crossDe)amination, he declared that he is not sure whether the 1 other metallic fragments recoered from the fatal wound of the ictim are indeed 'arts of a co''er @acket of a caliber .= mm. @acketed bullet. +he trial court conicted 'etitioner and accused 8raso of the crime of homicide which was affirmed by the Court of A''eals. Accused 8raso filed a Petition for 5eiew but was denied by CA2 on the other hand, 'etitioner, filed this 'etition.


J7

(ssue: *hether or not the trial court and the Court of A''eals erred in finding the 'etitioner

guilty of homicide 'eld: %es. +he Court sustains the finding of the trial court that 'etitioner fired his .7 caliber

'istol towards the ictim. (oweer, it a''ears that there is no eidence to 'roe that 'etitioner had intent to kill the ictim. +he 'rosecution witnesses did not see whether 'etitioner aimed to kill the ictim. Intent to kill cannot be automatically drawn from the mere fact that the use of firearms is dangerous to life. Intent to kill must be established with the same degree of certainty as is re!uired of the other elements of the crime. +he inference of intent to kill should not be drawn in the absence of circumstances sufficient to 'roe such intent beyond reasonable doubt. Absent an intent to kill in firing the gun towards the ictim, 'etitioner should be held liable for the crime of illegal discharge of firearm under Article 17 of the 5eised Penal Code. +he elements of this crime are3 #0% that the offender discharges a firearm against or at another ' erson2 and #1% that the offender has no intention to kill that 'erson . +he ecision of the Court of A''eals in affirming the coniction of 'etitioner for the crime of homicide is set aside and 'etitioner is ac!uitted of the crime charged on the ground of reasonable doubt. (oweer, 'etitioner 6eronimo ado is guilty of the crime of illegal discharge of firearm. People v. "acagaling Facts: In connection with the barangay fiesta of Calabasahan, Conce'cion, 5omblon, a

coronation ball was held in the eening of May 1, 0<<0 at the 'ublic 'la;a. Present on said occasion, among others, were Antonieto :abella, barangay ca'tain of 4an Pedro, Conce'cion, 5omblon2 Anita Macagaling, mother of the deceased ennis Macagaling2 Pfc. 5o!ue :esalbon, inestigator of the local 'olice station2 and 5oger 9acambra, ste'son of +eotimo :ameronag. At about 0?3?? P.M., the aforesaid Antonieto :abella, who was also the brotherDinDlaw of ennis Macagaling, was watching the festiities when all of a sudden he noticed 9eonito Macagaling 'oint and then fire a gun at his own ne'hew, ennis Macagaling. +he bullet missed ennis but wounded +eotimo :ameronag on the right chest causing the latter to colla'se in front of ennis. ennis, on his 'art, tried to esca'e from 9eonito by running away from the scene. At this @uncture, Anita saw that her son ennis was running in a wobbly manner and she embraced him to 'reent him from falling. 9eonito grabbed the hair of ennis and yanked his head, 'ulling the latter away from his mother. Anita 'leaded to 9eonito saying, "on-t, 9eonito," but the latter 'ointed the gun at the tem'le of ennis and shot him 'ointDblank. ennis fell down #"sumubasob"% on the cement floor. 9eonito then shot the 'rostrate ennis three times successiely on the neck, uttering the e)'letie "Putang ina mo," and then tried to leae the icinity. (ssue: *hether or not accused is guilty of Illegal Possession of :irearms and 8)' losies


J

'eld: #o. +he Court held that 9eonitos ersion of the incident a''eared to be too good to be

true. In a long line of cases, it has been held that where the accused admits the killing of the ictim but inokes selfDdefense, it is incumbent u'on him to 'roe by clear and conincing eidence that he indeed acted in legitimate defense of himself. As the burden of 'roof is shifted to him, he must conse!uently rely on the strength of his own eidence and not on the weakness of that of the 'rosecution. Accordingly, the 'roerbial bone of contention with res'ect to a killing under such circumstances, is whether the accused has 'resented sufficient eidence to su''ort him claim of selfDdefense. a''ellant-s ersion and concomitant claim of selfDdefense is belied and negated 'recisely by the number of wounds sustained by the deceased and the location thereof. A''ellant maintains that while both he and ennis were struggling for control of the gun, the same accidentally fired, hitting the latter. +he Court said that &nder 4ection 0 of Presidential ecree o. 0K==, the graamen of the offense is basically the fact of 'ossession of a firearm without a license, it being assumed that it was so 'ossessed with animus 'ossidendi. *e hae heretofore e)'lained that, in iew of the te)t of said decree, the crime may be denominated as sim'le illegal 'ossession, to distinguish it from the aggraated form wherein such firearm is used in the commission of a homicide or murder. In fine, since all that can be deduced is that a''ellant was in 'ossession of the gun only on that occasion for a transitory 'ur'ose and for the short moment coeal therewith, it cannot be concluded that he had the animus 'ossidendi which is re!uired for the offense charged. +he Court affirmed the trial courts decision conicting the accused for homicide on two criminal cases but reersed the decision as to the crime of illegal 'ossession of firearms. People v. Comadre Facts: Comadre et al. were charged with Murder with Multi'le :rustrated Murder through

cons'iracy, treachery, and use of an e)'losie/. +he accused committed the crime by lobbing a hand grenade oer the roof of the house of the Agbanlogs that eentually e)'loded, killing 5obert Agbanlog and in@uring = others. After trial, the court a !uo conicted Comadre et al. of the com'le) crime of Murder with Multi'le Attem'ted Murder sentencing them to suffer the 'enalty of death, hence this automatic reiew. *hen the killing is 'er'etrated with treachery and by means of e)'losies, the latter shall be considered as a !ualifying circumstance. ot only does @uris'rudence su''ort this iew but also, since the use of e)'losies is the 'rinci'al mode of attack, reason dictates that this attendant circumstance should !ualify the offense instead of treachery, which will then be relegated merely as a generic aggraating circumstance. Incidentally, with the enactment on Fune =, 0<

J=

crimes under the amendatory law including the 'enalties for unlawful 'ossession of e)'losies% in order to rationali;e them into more acce'table and realistic leels, and this is therefore faorable to the accused. 4'ecifically, when the illegally 'ossessed e)'losies are used to commit any of the crimes under the 5eised Penal Code, which result in the death of a 'erson, the 'enalty is no longer death, unlike in P.. o. 0K==, but it shall be considered only as an aggraating circumstance. Congress likewise clearly intended 5A o. K1<7 to consider as aggraating circumstance, instead of a se'arate offense, illegal 'ossession of firearms and e)'losies when such 'ossession is used to commit other crimes under the 5eised Penal Code. It must be made clear, howeer, that 5A o. K1<7 did not amend the definition of murder under Article 17K, but merely made the use of e)'losies an aggraating circumstance when resorted to in committing any of the crimes defined in the 5eised Penal Code./ +he legislatie 'ur'ose is to do away with the use of e)'losies as a se'arate crime and to make such use merely an aggraating circumstance in the commission of any crime already defined in the 5eised Penal Code. +hus, 5A o. K1<7 merely added the use of unlicensed e)'losies as one of the aggraating circumstances s'ecified in Article 07 of the 5eised Penal Code. 9ike the aggraating circumstance of e)'losion/ in 'aragra'h 01, eident 'remeditation/ in 'aragra'h 0>, or treachery/ in 'aragra'h 0= of Article 07, the new aggraating circumstance added by 5A o. K1<7 does not change the definition of murder in Article 17K. (ssue: *hether or not the killing can be !ualified by e)'losion under Art. 17K of the 5eised

Penal Code or by the use of an e)'losie/ under the 'roisions of 5.A. K1<7 'eld: #o. 5.A. K1<7 is ina''licable in the instant case. +he crime committed is Murder

committed by means of e)'losion in accordance with Article 17K #>% of the 5eised Penal Code. +he same, haing been alleged in the Information, may be 'ro'erly considered as a''ellant was sufficiently informed of the nature of the accusation against him 5.A. o. K1<7, een though faorable to the accused, cannot be made a''licable in this case because before the use of unlawfully 'ossessed e)'losies can be 'ro'erly a''reciated as an aggraating circumstance, it must be ade!uately established that the 'ossession was illegal or unlawful, i.e., the accused is without the corres'onding authority or 'ermit to 'ossess. +his follows the same re!uisites in the 'rosecution of crimes inoling illegal 'ossession of firearm, which is a kindred or related offense under P.. 0K==, as amended. +his 'roof does not obtain in the 'resent case. ot only was it not alleged in the information, no eidence was also adduced by the 'rosecution to show that the 'ossession by Comadre of the e)'losie was unlawful. *hat the law em'hasi;es is the acts lack of authority. *hat is 'er se aggraating is the use of unlawfully manufactured X or 'ossessed/ e)'losies. +he mere use of e)'losies is not. /aco v. People Facts: 4ayco a confidential ciilian agent of the A:P was found guilty of illegal 'ossession of

firearms and ammunitions under the 'roisions of P 0K== as amended by 5A K1<7. 4ayco committed the crime by 'ossessing and carrying a

JJ

ammunitions was without 'ro'er license and authority. 4ayco, without denying 'ossession of the same, insisted that he had the re!uisite 'ermits for haing been issued a Memorandum 5ecei't and a Mission Order by the Commanding Officer of the Phili''ine Army. (oweer, the court said that Memorandum 5ecei'ts and Mission Orders do not constitute the license re!uired by law for these were not issued by the PP :irearms and 8)'losies &nit, who is the one authori;ed by law to issue the re!uired license. :urthermore, it has been 'ointed out that 4aycos reliance in good faith on the said documents is not a alid defense in the crime of illegal 'ossession of firearms. 5+C affirmed the coniction but lowered the 'enalty im'osed. CA likewise denied 4aycos 'etition for reiew as well as its Motion for 5econsideration, hence this 'etition. (ssue: *hether or not the Memorandum 5ecei't and Mission Order constitute sufficient

authority to 'ossess and carry firearms and ammunitions re!uired by P 0K== as amended by 5A K1<7 'eld: #o. It is a settled @uris'rudence that a memorandum recei't and mission order cannot take

the 'lace of a duly issued firearms license and an accused who relies on said documents cannot inoke good faith as a defense against a 'rosecution for illegal 'ossession of firearms as this is a malum 'rohibitum. +he cor'us delicti in the crime of illegal 'ossession of firearms is the accused-s lack of license or 'ermit to 'ossess or carry the firearm, as 'ossession itself is not 'rohibited by law. +o establish the cor'us delicti, the 'rosecution has the burden of 'roing that the firearm e)ists and that the accused who owned or 'ossessed it does not hae the corres'onding license or 'ermit to 'ossess or carry the same. 4ayco, a mere confidential ciilian agent #as defined under 4ection =#a% of the Im'lementing 5ules and 5egulations of P.. o. 0K==% is not authori;ed to receie the sub@ect goernmentD owned firearm and ammunitions. +he memorandum recei't he signed to account for said goernment 'ro'erties did not legitimi;e his 'ossession thereof. either was 4ayco authori;ed to bear the sub@ect firearm and ammunitions outside of his residence. +he mission order issued to 'etitioner was illegal, gien that he is not a regular ciilian agent but a mere confidential ciilian agent. *orse, he was not een acting as such confidential ciilian agent at the time he was carrying the sub@ect firearm and ammunitions. *hile this Court sustains the coniction for illegal 'ossession of firearms, a further reision of the 'enalty is warranted in iew of the s'ecial 'roision in the Indeterminate 4entence 9aw a''licable to crimes 'enali;ed by a s'ecial law. 5A K1<7, amending P 0K==, lowered the 'enalty to be im'osed 'roided no other crime was committed. +here being no attendant mitigating or aggraating circumstance, and considering that 4ayco acce'ted the sub@ect firearm and ammunitions from the goernment under the erroneous notion that the memorandum recei't and mission order issued to him legitimi;ed the 'ossession thereof, 4ayco is sentenced to sere an indeterminate 'enalty of four #7% years, two #1% months and one


JK

#0% day of 'rision correccional as minimum, to fie #% years, four #7% months and twentyDone #10% days of 'rision correccional as ma)imum. *vangelista v. People Facts: +here was an information saying that on Fanuary >?, 0<<= at AIA the accused

feloniously hae in 'ossession of the firearms without the corres'onding 'ermit or license from com'etent authority. 5+C-s ruling3 8angelista guilty beyond reasonable doubt for iolation of the illegal 'ossession of firearms and ammunitions. Petitioner filed a motion for new trial which the 5+C granted. 5+C then found the 'etitioner liable still for the offense charged but modified the 'enalty of im'risonment. CA-s ruling3 CA affirmed the findings of the trial court in its decision. It ruled that the sti'ulations during the trial are binding on 'etitioner. (ence, this 'etition. (ssue: *hether or not CA gravel erred in not ac+uitting *vangelista from the charge of the illegal possession of firearms 'eld: #o. Contrary to the arguments 'ut forward by 'etitioner, we entertain no doubt that the

crime of illegal 'ossession of firearms and ammunition for which he was charged was committed in the Phili''ines. +he accom'lishment by 'etitioner of the Customs eclaration :orm u'on his arrial at the AIA is ery clear eidence that he was already in 'ossession of the sub@ect firearms in the Phili''ines. In contrast, 'etitioner failed to establish by sufficient and com'etent eidence that the 'resent charge ha''ened in ubai. It may be well to recall that while in ubai, 'etitioner, een in a situation between life and death, firmly denied 'ossession and ownershi' of the firearms. :urthermore, there is no record of any criminal case haing been filed against 'etitioner in ubai in connection with the discoered firearms. 4ince there is no 'ending criminal case when he left ubai, it stands to reason that there was no crime committed in ubai. +he ageDold but familiar rule that he who alleges must 'roe his allegation a''lies. ./. v. @effre Facts: +eodorica 4aguinsin was in a sho' when a man named . B. Feffrey a''eared therein, and

without a''arent reason whateer, struck her three times on the hi' which caused her to fall to the ground, and being three months 'regnant, she had a miscarriage the following day. .B. Feffrey did not know that she is 'regnant and the com'laint against him is only for lesiones menos graes/. In the information read to him, it was howeer stated that miscarriage occured due to his maltreatment of her.


J<

(ssue: *hether or not @effre ma be found guilt of abortion even if the complaint does not charge him of the same 'eld: %es. In fact, what was committed is abortion, not lesiones. 8en though the criminal intent

is not abortion, the fact that without any a''arent reason whateer, he maltreated +eodorica, 'resumably not knowing that she is 'regnant, as author of the abuse which caused the miscarriage, he is liable not only for such maltreatment but also for the conse!uences thereof, to wit, for the abortion. People v. 2enoves Facts: 4oledad 5iera tried to take back by force from 6enoes a yoke of a 'low she claims she

owned. 6enoes howeer, re'eatedly struck 4oledad with his fist causing her to fall to the ground seeral times. uring which time, 4oledad was heay with child. 4oledad by such fall suffered 'ains in the abdomen. According to testimony deceased was in good health the day before. :rom the time of the incident there was hemorrhage and 'ain, which were sym'toms of 'remature deliery. 4oledad remained in said condition for days until it culminated in the 'ainful and difficult 'remature deliery of one of the twin babies that she way carrying, but the other baby could not be deliered. 4oledad and both babies died. 6enoes was then charged and conicted by C:I Occidental egros of the com'le) crime of homicide with abortion. (ssue: *hether or not the conviction of the comple1 crime of homicide with abortion is proper 'eld: #o8 the abortion in this case is unintentional abortion denounced by article 1J of the

5eised Penal Code. It is generally known that a fall is liable to cause 'remature deliery, and the eidence shows a com'lete se!uel of eents from the assault to 4oledads death. 6enoes must be held res'onsible for the natural conse!uences of his act. ./ v. 0ogel )octrine: *hen a robber stabbed a woman in one eye, and as a result of the wound thus inflicted

she lost the use of the eye, there is no mutilation. +he guilt of the accused of the crime of robbery with which they were charged was 'roen beyond a reasonable doubt. It was further 'roen that one of the accused, on the occasion of the robbery, stabbed a woman named :abiana in one eye, and that as a result of the wound thus inflicted she lost the use of the eye. +he trial court im'osed the 'enalty 'rescribed in 'aragra'h 1 of article ?> of the Penal Code, but we are of o'inion that the 'enalty which should hae been im'osed is that 'rescribed in 'aragra'h > of said article. Paragra'hs 1 and > of article ?> are as follows3


K?

One guilty of robbery with iolence or intimidation to the 'erson will be 'unished3 )))

)))

)))

1. *ith cadena tem'oral in its medium degree to cadena 'er'etua when the robbery was accom'anied by ra'e or intentional mutilation, or when for the 'ur'ose of or on occasion of the robbery any wounds are inflicted which are 'enali;ed in 'aragra'h 0 of article 70= of the Penal Code, or when the 'erson who was robbed was held 'risoner for ransom or 'eriod longer than one day. >. *ith cadena tem'oral when the 'ur'ose of or on occasion of the robbery any of the wounds are inflicted which are 'enali;ed in 'aragra'h 1 of article 70= of the Penal Code. Paragra'hs 0 and 1 of article 70= of the Penal Code 'roide that he wounds, strikes, or maltreats another will be 'unished for the crime of grae in@uries. 0. *ith 'rision mayor if as a result of the wounds the offended 'erson became an imbecile, im'otent, or blind. 1. *ith 'rision correccional in its medium and ma)imum degrees if as a result of the wounds the offended 'erson lost an eye or some 'rinci'al member, or has been inca'acitated or unfitted for the work in which 'rior thereto he was habitually engaged. &nless the 'utting out of an eye by stabbing is a mutilation in the sense in which this word is used in the aboe set out 'aragra'h 1 of article ?>, it is manifest that the 'enalty to be im'osed in this case is that 'rescribed in 'aragra'h > and not 'aragra'h 1 of said article. $iada, in his commentary on article 70, which 'enali;es intentional mutilations, 'oints out that by mutilation #mutilacion% is understood, according to the iccionario de la lengua, the lo''ing or cli''ing off #cercenamiento% of some 'art of the body, and it is eident that the 'utting out of an eye does not fall under this definition. +he commission of the offense was marked with the aggraating circumstances mentioned in 'aragra'hs 0, 1?, and K of article 0? of the Penal Code, the robbery haing taken 'lace at night and in the house of the offended 'arty, and the robbers haing disguised themseles for the 'ur'ose of committing the crime with greater security to themseles. +he 'enalty which should be im'osed in accordance with the 'roisions of the aboeDcited 'aragra'h > of article ?> of the Penal Code is that of cadena tem'oral in its ma)imum degree, which was the 'enalty im'osed by the trial @udge, he not haing taken into consideration the aboeDcited aggraating circumstances and im'osed the 'enalty 'rescribed in 'aragra'h 1 of article ?> in its medium degree. +he sentence of the trial court should be and is hereby affirmed. Aguirre v. /ec of @ustice Facts:


K0

•

•

•

•

•

• • •

9aureano #9arry% Aguirre was ado'ted from an or'hanage by Pedro Aguirre and 9ourdes Aguirre eelo'mental milestones were noted to be delayed. (e started to walk and s'eak a single word at around age . (e was enrolled in Colegio de 4an Agustin at age = where he showed significant learning difficulties that he had to re'eat 0st and 7th grades. Psychological ealuation reealed mild to moderate mental retardation, s'ecial education training was adised and he was transferred to 4t. Fohn Marie $ianney. Pedro Aguirre #9arrys guardian% wanted to hae him sterili;ed and a''roached r Agate' to 'erform the 'rocedure. r Pascual conducted tests on 9arry to ascertain whether he could alidly gie his consent to the o'eration. +he findings concluded that the res'onsibility of making the decision may be gien to his 'arent or guardian. r Agate' gae 9arry a asectomy with consent of Pedro Aguirre. Petitioner 6loria Aguirre #common law sister% charged res'ondents for mutilation. 6loria Aguirre contended that the bilateral asectomy conducted on 'etitioner-s brother, 9arry Aguirre, caused the 'er'etual destruction of 9arry-s re'roductie organs of gene ration or conce'tion and that it was 'erformed intentionally and deliberately to de'rie 9arry foreer of his re'roductie organ and his ca'acity to 'rocreate, thus, it amounted to mutilation. (ssue: *O the res'ondents are liable for the crime of mutilation 'eld: #o8 they are not liable for mutilation.

•

•

•

•

•

+he asectomy o'eration did not in any way de'ried 9arry of his re'roductie organ which is still ery much 'art of his 'hysical self. In male sterili;ation 'rocedure of asectomy, the tubular 'assage, called the as deferens, through which the s'erm cells are trans'orted from the testicle to the urethra where they combine with the seminal fluid to form the e@aculant, is diided and the cut ends merely tied. +he as deferens, is merely a 'assageway that is 'art of the duct system of the male re'roductie organ. +he ordinary usage of the term mutilation is the de'riation of a limb or essential 'art of the body. +he bilateral asectomy done on 9arry could not hae amounted to the crime of mutilation as defined and 'unished under Article 1=1, 'aragra'h 0, of the 5eised Penal Code. People v. 0u-a

At around noontime on 07 ecember 0% se'arate informations were filed on  March 0

K1

+hat on or about the 07th day of ecember, 0. +he second 1 charges them with :rustrated Murder in the case of :eli'e o!uera on account of the wounds he suffered which would hae "ordinarily cause his death . . ., but neertheless did not 'roduce it by reason of causes inde'endent of their will that is, due to the timely and able medical assistance rendered to said :eli'e o!uera which 'reented his death." +he same !ualifying and aggraating circumstances were alleged in the information e)ce't for the aggraating circumstance of disregard of res'ect due the offended 'arty on account of her se). +his was docketed as Criminal Case o. 0K<7. +he third, > docketed as Criminal Case o. 0K<, charges them with the crime of Murder in connection with the death of 8stelita Imarga and alleges the same !ualifying and aggraating circumstances as those alleged in Criminal Case o. 0K<>. +he foregoing cases were ordered archied by the trial court on >? 4e'tember 0? Fuly 0% cases were then consolidated for @oint trial as against Beren Mandong and Angel Pral, who 'leaded not guilty when arraigned on 0< oember 0

K>

After @oint trial on the merits, the lower court, 'er Fudge Marcelino 5. $alde;, rendered a consolidated decision, < 'romulgated on 1? Fanuary 0. (oweer, in Crim. Case o. 0K<7 accused is hereby sentenced to an indeterminate 'enalty of eight #K% years and twenty #1?% days of Prision Mayor as Minimum to fourteen #07% years, ten #0?% months and twenty #1?% days of 5eclusion +em'oral as ma)imum and to 'ay the following damages to the heirs of the ictims, to wit3 a% +wele +housand #P01,???.??% Pesos each by reason of the death of 8stelita Imarga and 8lena Pamoso and 4i) +housand #P=,???.??% Pesos for the :rustrated death #sic% of :eli'e o!uera2 b%

:ie +housand #P,???.??% Pesos each in conce't of actual and moral damages2

c% cost.

:ie +housand #P,???.??% Pesos each in conce't of e)em'lary damages and to 'ay the

4O O5858. +he eidence for the 'rosecution u'on which the conictions were based is summari;ed by the trial court as follows3 On ecember 07, 0? A.M. they were ambushed by the accused resulting to #sic% the death of 8stelita Imarga, 8lena Pa moso and wounding #sic% :eli'e o!uera. +he wea'ons carrier was drien by Pa!uito Alare;. Per Medical re'ort the cause of death of 8stelita Imarga was "gun shot wounds, left chest," 8lena Pamoso was "gun shot wounds, right chest" #8)hibits "" and "D0"% while :eli'e o!uera suffered in@uries, to wit3 *ound  gunshot with aulsion of outer layer of skin 7 cm. long, one cm. wide left intersca'ular area. *ound  gunshot with aulsion of outer layer of skin, = cm. long, one cm. wide right, infrasca'ular area. #8)hibit "A"% Pa!uito Alare;, drier of the wea'ons carrier which was ambushed declared that he saw the ambushers with guns and recogni;ed two of them as Beren and Purong, the real name #sic% are


K7

Beren Mandong and Purong Bilaan. (e recogni;ed these two among the ambushers because he is ac!uainted with them long time #sic% before the incident. +he others were new to him and hence did not recogni;e them. *hen they were shot at, he s'eed #sic% u' his truck until they reached atal Eangil, a 'lace three kilometers, more or less, from the ambush scene where he asked for hel' from the Barangay Ca'tain. +hey went back to retriee one of the ictims 8stelita Imarga who fell from the wea'ons carrier and brought her to atal Eangil #+4, ''. JD07, :eb. 0, 0? o-clock A.M., on ecember 07, 0, 0, 0, 0

K

+he trial court re@ected the defense of alibi 'resented by both accused, summari;ing and dis'osing of it as follows3 Conersely, accused Angel Pral took u' the defense of Alibi. (e denied haing 'artici'ated in the ambush killing at 4itio 4amlang, Brgy. atal Batong, Malungon, 4outh Cotabato, on ecember 07, 0, 03?? o-clock P.M. on that date2 that he did not go back to atal Batong on ecember 07, 0th of ecember and went back to 6eneral 4antos City on ecember 07, 0, when he sold his corn to 9ising Pem'illo, ecember 07, when he sle't in 6eneral 4antos City and ecember 0, when he went back to atal Batong. But when he was ask #sic% the date when he testified on Fuly 11, 0, 07 and 0, 0 when he hauled the corn to 6eneral 4antos City on the latter date bringing with him the accused. *hen this witness return #sic% to atal Batong on ecember 0>, 00D0>=, Fuly 1?, 0D0, 0KD0><, Fuly 1?, 0

K=

(oweer, this witness was confronted with his sworn statements before the fiscal-s #sic% Office taken on Fuly 0J, 0
4o what you declared here before the Inestigating :iscal was not trueG

A I cannot remember it correctly but what I can remember is that I deliered corn on ecember 0>, and 07 #+4, ''. 07>, Fuly 1?, 0, 07 and 0, 0, 07 and 0, 0? A.M., and one of them was accused Beren Mandong. +hey worked the whole day u' to 3?? P.M. under the direct su'erision of 4erafin 4unio. +his witness learned of the ambush at 4itio 4amlang, atal Batong which is three kilometers away from his farm. #+4, ''. 0> in number. (e also testified in o'en Court that there were more christians #sic% than bilaans #sic% while in his sworn statement with the :iscal-s Office there were more Bilaans than christians #sic%2 and when asked what were their names he only know #sic% fie, namely3 Pilang, Beren, Oro and Ondan, and nothing more. +he 'robatie alue of this line of testimony is fatally infirmed by its unreliability. Alibi is a week defense and cannot 'reail oer the testimony of truthful witnesses. +he reason is that alibi is easy of #sic% fabrication. #Peo'. s. Bulawin, 1< 4C5A J0?2 Peo'. s. 6ome;, 1K 4C5A 77?%. Court should e)ercise great caution in acce'ting the defense of alibi because it is


KJ

easily concocted #Peo'. s. Bagsican, = 4C5A 7??%. In order that an #sic% alibi as a defense may 'ros'er, the eidence to su''ort it must be clear and conincing as to 'reclude the 'ossibility of the accused-s 'resence at the scene of the crime, while the eidence as to its identification must be weak and insufficient. #Peo'. s. Famero, 17 4C5A 1?J2 Peo'. s. 9umantas, 1K 4C5A J=72 Peo'. s. Alcantara >> 4C5A K0>%. +o establish alibi, the accused must show that he was at some other 'lace for such a 'eriod of time that it was im'ossible for him to hae been at the 'lace where the crime was committed at the time of its commission #Peo'. s. 9umantas, 1K 4C5A J7%. +he claim of the accused that they were far from the scene of the crime is not credible, where there is 'robability that they might hae s'read out in the neighboring towns and barrios to eliminate their enemies #Peo'. s. Cor'u;, 0 4C5A, >>2 Peo'. s. Almeri;, > 4C5A 11%. +he defense of alibi cannot 'reail oer the 'ositie identification of witnesses #Peo'. s. Baiaga, 0 4C5A 1K>2 Peo'. s. 8strada, 11 4C5A 000%. All the foregoing doctrines 'lay a ital role against the defense of alibi of the accused. It could not be im'robable for the accused to hae been at the scene of the ambush from the 'lace where they allegedly were on the date of ecember 07, 0?, 0rd Inf. Btn., wherein four of the rebels namely3 Olding 6olac, 4o ol, +oy Maliang, and ano Pandayong admitted res'onsibility for the ambush, this court beliees that said result of the alleged confrontation cannot be taken on its face alue "hook line and sinker" because of the hearsay of the said confrontation. +he confrontation was allegedly made in Fuly, 0

KK

already been filed in court. (oweer, this witness, a Munici'al Mayor at that, did not care to gie the com'lete details of such confrontation to the court for its guidance, es'ecially at that time when the accused were all still at large and warrants of arrest had been issued against them. or was there an information gien to the 'rosecution arm of the goernment regarding said confrontation whereby four of the surrenderees admitted res'onsibility of #sic% the ambushcade #sic%. And if the accused were not really the 'er'etrators of the dastard #sic% crime, why is it that immediately after ecember 07, 0 and 0K< and frustrated murder in Criminal Case o. 0K<7, the trial court considered the !ualifying circumstances of treachery and eident 'remeditation since the "ambush or shooting was so sudden and une)'ected assault #sic% 'er'etrated by all the accused insured the killing of the two defenseless ictim 8stelita Imarga and 8lena Pamoso and the frustrated death #sic% of :eli'e o!uera." 00 &nable to acce't the erdict, accused Angel Pral and Beren Mandong, hereinafter referred to as the A''ellants, filed their otice of A''eal 01 on = :ebruary 0 the cases were then docketed as 6.5. os. =K>00D0>. In their Brief, A''ellants assign only one #0% error3 +(8 +5IA9 CO&5+ 8558 I CO$IC+I6 +(8 APP899A+4 O: +*O #1% C5IM84 O: M&585 A :5&4+5A+8 M&585 O+*I+(4+AI6 +(8 I4&::ICI8CS O: 8$I8C8 A&C8 BS +(8 P5O48C&+IO +O P5O$8 +(8I5 6&I9+ B8SO 58A4OAB98 O&B+. 07 and in su''ort thereof, they assert and argue that3 #a% +heir defense of alibi should hae been gien more credence considering that it is corroborated by two #1% other 'eo'le, namely 8lisias Pem'illo #corroborating the alibi of Angel Pral% and 4erafin 4unio #corroborating the testimony of Beren Mandong%2 0 #b% +he testimonies of Mayor :eli'e Constantino of Malungon, 4outh Cotabato and Barangay Ca'tain $enancio Malayon of Barangay Bilaan 0= that the real ambushers had already surrendered and had been granted amnesty, clearly show their innocence2 said testimonies should hae been gien more weight by the trial court2


K<

#c% +he testimonies of the 'rosecution witnesses, heaily relied u'on by the trial court in conicting the A''ellants, were full of inconsistencies such that there was a failure to 'ositiely identify the 'er'etrators of the crime2 0J #d% On the credibility of the 'rosecution witnesses, the findings of the trial court in the case at bar are not controlling and should not be gien much weight because the @udge who rendered the decision is not the same @udge who heard the case2 0K and #e% :inally, een assuming arguendo, that the A''ellants were among those who staged the ambush, they cannot be conicted for :rustrated Murder in 6.5. o. =K>01 #Criminal Case o. 0K<7 in the court below% because as 'er the testimony of 'rosecution witness r. Casimiro Mansilla, the ictim, :eli'e o!uera, would hae lied een without medical attendance considering that the wound was @ust a slight 'hysical in@ury. 0< +he Peo'le, in its Brief filed by the 4olicitor 6eneral, disagrees with the A''ellants and maintains that the 'rosecution was able to 'roe their guilt beyond reasonable doubt. It stressed that at least four #7% eyeDwitnesses 'ositiely identified them as those who ambushed the ictims. 1? It further claims that as against the 'ositie identification by the 'rosecution witnesses, the A''ellants- defense of alibi is weak and not 'lausible. 10 Anent the contention that the testimonies of the 'rosecution witnesses are full of inconsistencies, the Peo'le 'ainstakingly contradicted each and eery inconsistency mentioned, to wit3 +he a''ellants contend that the testimony of witness Pa!uito Alare; is not to be belieed because there is an inconsistency when he admitted haing 'ointed to all the accused during the 'reliminary inestigation before the fiscal, while in his testimony in court he claimed to hae recogni;ed only accused Beren Mandong and Purong Bilaan. +he contention is without merit. +here is no showing in the testimony that when counsel mentioned the word "accused", he was referring to all the accused, including those atDlarge, or that he was referring only to all the accused who had been a''rehended. (ence, the alleged inconsistency is wanting. As to the alleged testimony of the defense witness Barangay Ca'tain Malayon that when he interiewed Alare; and the other 'a ssengers, no one told him as to who were the ambushers, suffice it to say that the testimony of said witness cannot be used to im'each the testimony of eyeDwitness Alare;. Besides there is no showing that Barangay Ca'tain Malayon eer asked Alare; nor #sic% the 'assengers as to the identity of the ambushers. +he a''ellants likewise contends #sic% that eyeDwitness :eli'e o!uera is not credible because the said witness allegedly declared that when he heard gun re'orts he immediately took coer by lying face down on the roof of the wea'on #sic% carrier, and that when crossDe)amined, the said witness forgot the shirt worn by the accused, their distance from one another and their relatie 'osition from #sic% each other.


+he contention lacks merit. It is not true that e yeDwitness o!uera immediately took coer face down u'on hearing the gun re'orts. *hat he testified during crossDe)amination is that he first looked sidewise from where the gun re'ort came before taking coer. +hus3 R And when you died on the roof of the ehicle on your belly, you did that instantaneously u'on hearing the gunburstG A

Ses, sir. I looked sidewise from where the gun re'ort came #'. >>, tsn, :eb. 1, 0
As regards his failure to remember the shirt worn by the accused, their distance from one another and their relatie 'osition from #sic% each other, suffice it to say that the same is not uncommon, for under such a situation where they were ambushed, the natural tendency of a witness is only to focus his ision at the face of the 'erson firing at them in order to see recogni;e #sic% malefactors. (ence, he could not hae a clear ision of the shirts they were wearing, their distance from one another and relatie 'osition from #sic% each other. Besides, the witness testified after the la'sed #sic% of about four #7% years. (ence, h e could not hae 'ossibly remembered all the minute details which to him are not of great significance. +he a''ellant further contends that the testimony of e yeDwitness 5icardo 4alador that he recogni;ed Beren Mandong as one of the ambushers cannot also be gien full credit because 4alador was seated at the middle of the wea'on #sic% carrier and that the said ehicle has a roof which could hae 'reented him from seeing the accused who were on to' of a hill. +he contention is without merit. In the first 'lace, it is not true that the entire wea'on #sic% carrier was coered by a roof. Only the drier-s cabin has a roof, while the 'ortion at the rear thereof was uncoered. 4econdly, the ambushers were standing on the hill and were o'enly e)'osed. +here is nothing, therefore, to obstruct the iew of eyeDwitness 4alador when he glanced at the ambushers who were on to' of the hills firing at them. 11 +he Peo'le further contends that the A''ellants were correctly conicted of :rustrated Murder in Criminal Case o. 0K<7 #6.5. o. =>K00D0>, herein% because "all the elements of the crime of murder, including the intent to kill with the use of deadly wea'on, are 'resent" and "it is inconse!uential whether the wound inflicted is serious or less serious or slight." 1> 9astly, the Peo'le submits that the indemnity of P01,???.?? each, to be 'aid to the heirs of the deceased 8stelita Imarga and 8lena Pamoso, should be increased to P>?,???.?? each, in iew of the ruling in Peo'le s. ioso. 17 *e hae meticulously e)amined and 'ainstakingly scrutini;ed the records of this case and the challenged decision and *e are coninced that the A''ellants hae been 'ositiely identified as two #1% of those who staged the ambushcade whose guilt has been established beyond reasonable doubt by the testimonies gien by the 'rosecution witnesses, 'articularly that of Pa!uito Alare; #drier of the wea'ons carrier%, :eli'e o!uera #the in@ured ictim% and 9uis 8sconde and 5icardo 4alador #both 'assengers of the wea'ons carrier%.


<0

+he inconsistencies in the testimonies of Alare; and o!uera, which A''ellants ca'itali;ed on , 'ertain to minor details only and cannot destroy their credibility. Inconsistencies in the testimony of 'rosecution witnesses with res'ect to minor details and collateral matters do not affect the substance of their declaration, their eracity or the weight of their testimony. 1 In fact, these inconsistencies, if only in minor details, reinforce rather than weaken their credibility, for it is usual that witnesses to a stirring eent should see differently some details of a startling occurrence. 1= 5ather than discredit the testimony of the witnesses, such discre'ancies on minor details sere to add credence and eracity to their categorical, straightforward and s'ontaneous testimony. 1J Besides, as earlier stated, the Peo'le took e)tra efforts to e)'lain the alleged inconsistencies and, in the 'rocess, demonstrate the weakness of A''ellants- claim. As to the defense of alibi, *e agree with the trial court that it could not 'reail oer the 'ositie identification of the A''ellants. Alibi is a weak defense and cannot 'reail oer the testimony of truthful witnesses because it is easy to fabricate. 1K :urthermore, for alibi to ' ros'er, it must be established by clear eidence that the accused was in another 'lace for such a 'eriod of time as to negate his 'resence at the scene of the crime when it was committed. 1< In the case at bar, the trial court found that "it could not be im'robable for the accused to hae been at the scene of the ambush from the 'lace where they allegedly were on the date of ecember 07, 0? *e find no reason to disagree with the trial court as the A''ellants failed to show &s any basis for oerturning this findings. +he testimonies of Mayor :eli'e Constantino of the Munici'ality of Malungon and Barangay Ca'tain $enancio Malayon of barangay Bilaan do not ins'ire belief. :irstly, the alleged surrender and grant of amnesty to the "ambushers" who, as claimed by Mayor Constantino, were not the a''ellants, was not corroborated by "Col. Bumanglag", the 'erson who allegedly acce'ted the surrender and granted the amnesty. 4econdly, Constantino-s claim of an ambush is based on what he allegedly heard during the meeting. +here was no s'ecific reference to the ambush in !uestion. +hirdly, Col. Bumanglag, if he indeed een e)isted, had no authority to grant amnesty. &nder the Constitution then in force, more 'articularly 4ection 0>, Article $II of the 0 Constitution, only the President, with the concurrence of the Batasang Pambansa, had the 'ower to grant amnesty. :ourthly, there is an irreconcilable conflict between the testimonies of the Mayor and the barangay ca'tain as to the date of the alleged surrender. +he former claims that it took 'lace in Fuly 00 while the latter alleges that it was in "01 *orse, while the Mayor asserts that those who admitted to hae staged the ambush were Olding 6olaDe, 4o ol, +oy Maliang and ano Pandayong, >> witness Malayon claims that the sus'ects were +oy 6olas, Olding 6olas, 9agono 9agayong and 4o 6olaing. >7 +his witness also claims that one of the ictims of the ambush who died was 9olita Agu'itan. > Per 'rosecution-s eidence, only 8lena Pamoso and 8stelita Imarga died as a conse!uence of the ambush. :inally, A''ellants e)erted no effort to 'resent as witness any of the ambushers who "surrendered." +heir nonDaailability or hostility was not shown. +he "surrender" and "amnesty" story then is nothing but a crude fabrication. On the factual findings of the trial court, the A''ellants urge &s not to gie weight to said findings as the @udge who rendered the decision did not hear the case himself. >= As they correctly 'ointed out. "A''ellate courts will generally not d isturb the findings of fact of the trial


<1

court, >J e)ce't where the @udge who rendered the decision is not the @udge who heard the case." >K (oweer, the foregoing rule and its e)ce'tion do not a''ly in a case where the trial court-s conclusion are fully substantiated and su''orted by the eidence on record and warrants the affirmance of such findings. >< As held in the case of Peo'le s. Bocatcat3 7? :inally, the Court notes that the lower court-s @udgment was 'enned by a @udge who did not hear the eidence. And so, while the rule is settled that the findings of fact by the trial court are entitled to great weight on a''eal, as they are in better 'osition to e)amine and obsere the demeanor of witnesses, this rule does not, howeer, a''ly in the case at bar, yet, we find no cogent reason to reerse (is (onor-s @udgment as his conclusions are fully substantiated and su''orted by the eidence on record. In the case at bar, *e find that the findings of fact of the trial court are am'ly su''orted by the eidence on record. *e agree, howeer, with A''ellants that they cannot be conicted for the crime of Murder in Criminal Case o. 0K<7 because, as testified to by r. Casimiro Mansilla, the doctor who e)amined the ictim, :eli'e o!uera, the latter would hae lied een without medical attendance because the "wound was @ust a slight 'hysical in@ury." 70 Per the medical certificate, 71 the following were the in@uries inflicted on o!uera3  *ound, gunshot with aulsion of outer layer of skin 7 centimeter #sic% long, one centimeter wide left intersca'ular area.  *ound, gunshot with aulsion of outer layer of skin = centimeter #sic% long, one centimeter wide right, infrasca'ular area. which "re!uire medical attendance for the 'eriod of seen #J% to nine #<% days, unless com'lications set in or manifestation due to internal in@uries which are not a''arent at the time of the e)amination a''ear later." A crime is frustrated when the offender 'erforms all the acts of e)ecution which would 'roduce the felony as a conse!uence but which, neertheless, do not 'roduce it by reason of causes inde'endent of the will of the 'er'etrator. 7> (oweer, if the offender commences the commission of a felony directly by oert acts, and does not 'erform all the acts of e)ecution which should 'roduce the felony by reason of some cause or accident other than his own s'ontaneous desistance, the crime is only attem'ted. 77 It is !uite obious that, in res'ect to o!uera, the crime neer 'assed the "attem'ted" stage. +he trial court, in ruling that murder was committed in the case of 8lena Pamaso and 8stelita Imarga and frustrated murder in the case of :eli'e o!uera, considered the !ualifying circumstances of eident 'remeditation and treachery. *e disagree with the trial court on this score.


<>

:or eident 'remeditation to be 'resent, the following re!uisites must concur3 #0%

the time when the offender determined to commit the crime2

#1%

an act manifestly indicating that he has clung to his determination2 and,

#>% sufficient la'se of time between determination and e)ecution to allow him to reflect u'on the conse!uences of his act. 7 It must be 'roed as clearly as the crime itself and cannot be deduced from mere conclusions and inferences. 7= +he eidence 'resented against the a''ellants miserably failed to 'roe the foregoing re!uisites. +reachery is 'resent when the offender commits any of the crimes against 'ersons em'loying means, methods or forms in the e)ecution thereof which tend directly and s'ecially to insure its e)ecution without risk to himself arising from the defense which the o ffended 'arty might make. 7J *hile treachery was duly 'roen against a''ellants because the ambush was so sudden and une)'ected that the ictims were unable to defend themseles and, obiously, the means of e)ecution were deliberately and consciously ado'ted, such circumstance is not, howeer, alleged in the three #>% informations. :or treachery to !ualify the crime of homicide to murder, it must be alleged in the information, otherwise it will only be considered a generic aggraating circumstance, if 'roen. 7K +herefore, treachery is only a generic aggraating circumstance in these cases. +he informations allege that the aggraating circumstance of band attended the commission of the crimes charged. +here is a band wheneer more than three #>% armed malefactors shall hae acted together in the commission of an offense. 7< +he accusatory 'ortions of the informations elaborate this circumstance by stating that the fie #% named accused, two #1% of whom are the A''ellants, and two #1% other Fohn oes "armed with assorted highD'owered wea'ons such as 6arand rifle, shotgun and surit and with eidence 'remeditation and with deliberate intent to kill, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously ambush, attack, assault and shoot with assorted high 'owered wea'ons" the wea'ons carrier of 8don 8scobillo thereby causing the death and in@uries described therein. 8idently, the 'rosecution did not intend to make the aggraating circumstance of aid of armed men as a !ualifying circumstance under Article 17K of the 5eised Penal Code. Otherwise, it would hae e)'ressly alleged it as such as in the case of the !ualifying circumstance of treachery and eident 'remeditation. Accordingly, band absorbed aid of armed men. ? +he aggraating circumstance of disregard of the res'ect due the offended 'arty on account of se) alleged in Criminal Cases os. 0K<> and 0K< cannot be a''reciated against the A''ellants, there being no 'roof that they deliberately intended to offend the se) of the ictims or show manifest disres'ect towards them. 0 Accordingly, the A''ellants are guilty of homicide on two #1% counts and of attem'ted homicide, with the generic aggraating circumstances of treachery and band.


<7

+he 'enalty for (omicide under Article 17< of the 5eised Penal Code is reclusion tem'oral. In iew of the generic aggraating circumstances of treachery and band, the 'enalty shall be im'osed in its ma)imum 'eriod. +hey are entitled to the benefits of the Indeterminate 4entence 9aw 1 which authori;es the im'osition of an indeterminate 'enalty the ma)imum of which shall be that which, in iew of the attending circumstances, could be 'ro'erly im'osed under the rules of the 5eised Penal Code and the minimum of which shall be within the range of the 'enalty ne)t lower to that 'rescribed by the Code for the offense. +he 'enalty for attem'ted homicide #Criminal Case o. 0K<7% is, 'ursuant to Article ? of the 5eised Penal Code, two #1% degrees lower than that 'roided for in Article 17<, which is 'rision correccional. A''ellants are also entitled to the benefits of the Indeterminate 4entence 9aw. In accordance with the 'olicy of this Court, > the ciil indemnity for each death should be increased from P01,???.?? to P?,???.??. *(858:O58, in iew of the foregoing, the a''ealed @udgment is hereby modified. As modified, A''ellants Angel Pral and Beren Mandong are hereby found and declared guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of (omicide on two #1% counts for the death of 8lena Pamoso in Criminal Case o. 0K<> and for the death of 8stelita Imarga in Criminal Case o. 0K<, and of the crime of Attem'ted (omicide in Criminal Case o. 0K<7. People v. Fortich

AccusedDa''ellants Permonette Foy :ortich and 5udy 6aid were each charged with two counts of forcible abduction with ra'e, 0 one count of robbery with frustrated homicide 1 and one count of robbery. > I.

In Criminal Case o. >K?<  :orcible Abduction with 5a'e

+hat on or about March >0, 0 in the eening, in the City of Cagayan de Oro, Phili''ines, and within the @urisdiction of this (onorable Court, the aboeDnamed ac cused, with iolence and intimidation, and with the use of an unlicensed firearm, cons'iring, confederating together with one 5udy 6aid alias Boy 6aid, who is 'resently at large, and mutually hel'ing one another, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously abduct the herein com'lainant, Marilou oble;a by then and there taking and carrying her away with her sister, Maritess oble;a, and loading said com'lainant on board a stolen 'ickDu', against her will and consent and with lewd design, and brought her from Alta +ierra, Carment (ill, this city, to Malasag, this city, and while at Malasag, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously hae carnal knowledge #by accused Permonette Foy :ortich% of the herein com'lainant, against her will and consent, to her great damage and 're@udice. Contrary to Article >71 in relation to Article >> of the 5eised Penal Code. II.

In Criminal Case o. >KJJ  :orcible Abduction with 5a'e


<

+hat on or about March >0, 0, in the eening, in the City of Cagayan de Oro, Phili''ines, and within the @urisdiction of this (onorable Court, the aboeDnamed ac cused, with iolence and intimidation and with the use of an unlicensed firearm, cons'iring, confederating together and mutually hel'ing one another, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously abduct the com'lainant Maritess oble;a, by then and there taking and carrying her away with her sister, Marilou oble;a, and loading in a stolen 'ickDu' with her sister, against her will and consent and and #sic% with lewd designs, and brought her from Alta +ierra, Carment (ill, this City, to Malasag, this city, and while at Malasag, this city #sic% did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously by means of iolence and intimidation hae carnal knowledge #by accused Permonette Foy :ortich% of the com'lainant, against her will and consent, to her great damage and 're@udice. Contrary to Article >71 in relation to Article >> of the 5eised Penal Code. III.

In Criminal Case o. >KJK  :orcible Abduction with 5a'e

+hat on or about March >0, 0, in the eening, in the City of Cagayan de Oro, Phili''ines, and within the @urisdiction of this (onorable Court, the aboeDnamed #ac cused%, with iolence and intimidation, and with the use of an unlicensed firearm, and a motor ehicle, cons'iring, confederating together and mutually hel'ing one another did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously abduct the com'lainant Maritess oble;a, by then and there taking and carrying her away with her sister, Marilou oble;a, and loading in a stolen 'ickDu' with her sister, against her will and consent and with lewd designs, and brought her from Alta +ierra, Carmen (ill, this city, to Malasag, this city, and while at Malasag, this city #sic%, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously by means of iolence and intimidation hae carnal knowledge #by accused 5udy 6aid alias Boy% of the said com'lainant, against her will and consent, to her great damage and 're@udice. Contrary to Article >71 in relation to Article >> of the 5eised Penal Code. I$.

In Criminal Case o. >K<=  :orcible Abduction with 5a'e

+hat on or about March 00, 0 #sic%, in the eening, in the City of Cagayan de Oro, Phili''ines, and within the @urisdiction of this (onorable Court, the aboeDnamed accused, with iolence and intimidation and with use of an unlicensed firearm, and motor ehicle, cons'iring, confederating together and mutually hel'ing with #sic% one another, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously abduct the com'lainant Marilou oble;a, by then and there taking and carrying her away with her sister, Maritess oble;a, and loading in a stolen 'ickDu' with her sister, against her will and consent and with lewd designs, and brought her from Alta +ierra, Carmen (ill, this city to Malasag, this city #sic%, and while at Malasag, this c ity, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously by means by iolence and intimidation hae carnal knowledge #by accused 5udy 6aid alias "Boy"% of the com'lainant, against her will and consent, to her great damage and 're@udice. Contrary to Article >71 in relation to Article >> of the 5eised Penal Code.


<=

$.

In Criminal Case o. >
+hat on or about March >0, 0, at Carmen (ill, Cagayan de Oro City, Phili''ines, and within the @urisdiction on this (onorable Court, the aboeDnamed accused, armed with firearms, with iolence and intimidation u'on 'ersons, with intent of gain and against the will of the owner thereof, cons'iring, confederating together with one 5ud y 6aid alias "Boy 6aid," and mutually hel'ing one another, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously take, rob and carry away a 'olo shirt, 'ants while being worn by 9uis 4. +umang and a cash worth P0=?.??, a wrist watch #8lgin% worth P??.??, alued all in all in the total amount of P==?.??, to the damage and 're@udice of the said owner in the aforesaid sum2 that on the occasion of the robbery and to enable them to facilitate the taking and robbing #sic% the offended 'arty, and to carry out with ease the commission of the offense, accused Permonette Foy :ortich with intent to kill, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously attacked and mauled the said 9uis 4. +umang, struck and hit him with a firearm, thereby inflicting the following in@uries, to wit3 fracture de'ressed ty'e left 'erietat #sic% bone2 contussion #sic% hematoma left tem'oral area2 abrasion behind left ear2 multi'le linear abrasion both thigh and leg, which ordinarily would cause the death of the said offended 'arty, thus 'erforming all the acts of e)ecution which would 'roduce the crime of (omicide, as a conse!uence, but neertheless, did not 'roduce it by reason of some cause inde'endent of his will, that is, by the timely and able medical attendance rendered to the offended 'arty which 'reented his death. Contrary to Article 1<7 in relation to Article 17< and Article = of the 5eised Penal Code. $I.

In Criminal Case o. 70=1  5obbery

+hat on or about March >0, 0, more or less 0?3>? in the eening at Carmen (ill, Cagayan de Oro City, Phili''ines, and within the @urisdiction of this (onorable Court, the aboeDnamed accused, cons'iring, confederating together and mutually hel'ing one another, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously with intent of gain by means of iolence and intimidation on the 'erson take, steal and carry away 'olo shirt and 'ants while being worn by one 5olly #I%m'erio and a wallect #sic% contained #sic% PK.?? in cash, who was at the same time attacked and beaten u' by the said accused, inflicting u'on him 'hysical in@uries, to wit3 9aceration of 'arietal area, 1 cm. in length, to the damage and 're@udice of the said offended 'arty. Contrary to Article 1<7 of the 5eised Penal Code. &'on arraignment, accusedDa''ellants 'leaded not guilty to all the charges. On oember 1, 0, the si) criminal cases, u'on agreement of the 'rosecution and the defense, were consolidated and tried @ointly. +he eidence for the 'rosecution elicited the following facts3 On March >0, 0, at about K3?? o-clock in the eening, after attending mass at 4t. Augustine Church, Cagayan de Oro City, sisters Marilou and Maritess oble;a, together with their friends 5olly Im'erio and 9uis +umang, 'roceeded to Alta +ierra (otel in Carmen (ill using an Isu;u


'ickDu' owned by latter-s mother. After a while the grou' decided to go home. 4uddenly, two men armed with handguns who were later identified as a''ellants emerged from the rear end of the ehicle and fired a single shot which hit the left side of the 'ickDu'. +hey introduced themseles as members of the ew Peo'le-s Army #PA% and ordered the sisters to get inside the ehicle while Im'erio and +umang were instructed to stri'. 6aid thum'ed Im'erio on the head with a .>K caliber reoler causing him to fall down, while +umang was hit seeral times by :ortich in arious 'arts of the body and momentarily lost consciousness. +umang was diested of his wallet containing one hundred si)ty 'esos #P0=?.??% in cash, fie &.4. dollars #PJ?.??%, si) 4audi Arabia 5iyals P>?.71%, one 01E gold wristwatch worth P??.??, 'ants alued at P07?.??, and shoes worth P01.??. All of these items were not recoered. 7 Im'erio, on the other hand, was stri''ed of his 'ants alued at P0>.??, a wallet worth P7.?? containing PK.?? in cash, a 'air of shoes, and one tDshirt.  A''ellants droe the 'ickDu', with Marilou and Maritess at the back seat, towards Acua Beach some ten kilometers away from the city, but found it to be closed for the night. *hile traersing the highway leading to Barangay Puerto, a''ellants s'otted a military check'oint along the highway, made a hasty &Dturn, and returned to the city. All the time, the sisters were consistently threatened with summary e)ecution. Marilou 'leaded for their freedom and told them to @ust take the 'ickDu'. +he 'lea, howeer, fell on deaf ears. A''ellants detoured and entered a dirt road leading to Malasag where they 'arked the ehicle. At his @uncture, 6aid had transferred to the backseat with Marilou while Maritess was made to sit u' in front with :ortich. 6aid 'oked his gun at the right side of Marilou-s neck and ordered her to remoe her 'ants under 'ain of death. Aware that she was biding her time, he himself remoed her 'ants with the gun still 'ointed at her. 4he im'lored that she be s'ared but 6aid, who was obiously much stronger, forced her legs a'art, 'ositioned himself on to' of her, kissed and fondled her, and succeeded in consummating his bestial act. Maritess, on the other hand, was raaged by :ortich. A''ellants switched ictims twice before diesting them of their watches, a handbag containing P0.?? in cash, a shirt, toilet tissue and toothbrush, and the 'ickDu'-s stereo and tools. +hey then droe down the highway and left the sisters at a gasoline station some three kilometers from the city. &nable to contact the 'olice, the ictims 'roceeded to the Cagayan de Oro Medical Center #CMC% and submitted themseles to medical e)amination. Meanwhile, soon after a''ellants left Carmen (ill with the two sisters, Im'erio and +umang ran to the City (all and re'orted the robbery incident. Acting on this re'ort, the 'olice immediately scoured the city for the sus'ects but this 'roed unaailing. +he ictims 'roceeded to the orthern Mindanao 5egional +raining (os'ital in Cagayan de Oro City where Im'erio-s in@ury was e)amined and treated. Prosecution witness Faime 5iera testified that a''ellants went to his house at about 73?? o-clock in the morning of A'ril 0, 0, bringing with them a reoler and a bag containing a car stereo, watch and wallet. (e was a''arently asked to sell the reoler for not less than P>??.??, with a 'romise that he would receie a fifty 'ercent commission. In the course of selling the firearm, he was a''rehended by the 'olice and detained at the City (all for si) days.


Police inestigator 8ulalio 5afesora of the Cagayan de Oro Integrated ational Police #IP% testified that u'on :ortich-s arrest, the latter was a''rised of his constitutional rights which he, howeer, e)'ressly waied. Accordingly, on A'ril 7, 0, an interrogation conducted by the 'olice ensued and statements elicited therein were reduced to writing and sworn to before another 'rosecution witness, e'uty City Clerk of Court Aurelio I. Valdiar, who also reminded him of his rights. r. 4ocrates 4abanal of CMC declared that he e)amined Marilou oble;a and found her to be suffering from the following in@uries, i;.3 su'erficial abrasions #5% inner as'ect, labia minora, hematoma, anteroDmedial as'ect PU> #5% thigh. (e stated that the abrasions on the labia minora were caused by the forceful 'enetration of a 'enis into the agina. As regards Maritess, r. 4abanal reealed the e)tent of her in@uries suffered as "labial skin discoloration," 'robably caused by a 'enis or a finger. CMC Medical irector r. :rancisco 9. Oh testified that he treated 9uis +umang for the following in@uries, to wit3 #0% fracture, de'ressed ty'e left 'arietal bone2 #1% contusion hematoma left tem'oral area2 #>% abrasion behind left ear2 and #7% multi'le linear abrasions on both thighs and legs. A neuroDsurgeon of CMC, a certain r. $almores, adised +umang to seek further treatment in another hos'ital as the head in@ury could hae fatally affected the brain. +umang was admitted at the Medical City 6eneral (os'ital in Mandalu yong, Metro Manila, from A'ril J to 0=, 0, under the care of r. Bienenido B. Aldanese, incurring a total e)'ense of P11,=?>.K. Contrary to the foregoing facts, the defense relied on the uncorroborated testimonies of a''ellants. A''ellant :ortich, a 1?Dyear old drier residing at Buenaista $illage, Cagayan de Oro City, recounted that at about K3>? in the eening of March >0, 0, he left Barangay 6usa for the city and there met 6aid with whom he has a''lied for a driing @ob. (e was inited to dinner and a few drinks at 6aid-s house. After sometime, they allegedly got drunk and hied off to Carmen (ill to a''reciate its cool and bree;y atmos'here. +hereafter, a 'ickDu' arried from which a grou' of two men and two women alighted. +hey then laid a mat on the grass behind their ehicle. A''ellants were ten meters away from them when suddenly the two men, 'i!ued by their 'resence, furiously rushed towards them. :ortich allegedly defended himself by striking one of them with a flashlight causing the latter to fall down. +o esca'e the wrath of the two men, a''ellants droe the 'ickDu' with the two sisters and headed towards Acua beach which, howeer, was closed for the night. :ortich alleged that after conersing with the sisters for some time, the latter alighted at Marcos Bridge while 6aid droe him to his house in Patag. :ortich denied, among other things, that he se)ually iolated Marilou or that he een 'ossessed a firearm, as alleged by +umang and Im'erio. As regards the affidait taken during the custodial inestigation, he admitted that the signature a''earing therein was his but the same was obtained through duress.


<<

A''ellant 6aid had a slightly different ersion of what trans'ired on March >0, 0. (e narrated that after consuming hard li!uor, both of them 'roceeded to Carmen (ill. &'on reaching said 'lace, they noticed a 'ickDu' with a male and female inside and another cou'le at the o'en rear end of the ehicle. As the two 'airs were allegedly caressing and kissing, they stood watching for almost thirty minutes. 9ater, the cou'le inside emerged from the ehicle and @oined the other two at the back. All of them were naked and engaged in se)ual congress on a mat lying on the grassy s'ot. +he women, later identified as sisters Marilou and Maritess, noticed them and immediately grabbed their clothing and scam'ered inside the 'ickDu', while their male 'artners confronted the a''ellants. A scuffle ensued. After throwing seeral 'unches, 6aid darted towards the 'ickDu' and saw :ortich already seated on the drier-s seat with the sisters at the back seat. :ortich droe towards Acua beach at Baloy. uring the tri', 6aid chatted with Maritess who a''eared to be an old ac!uaintance of his. A''arently, it was Maritess who urged them to 'roceed to Acua beach. +he sisters een drank bottles of beer and smoked three sticks of mari@uana. It was 'ast midnight when they reached Acua beach and after haing gone through a horrible night, they decided to 'ark the ehicle to rest. :ortich fell aslee' while Maritess omitted. *hen the latter felt better, 6aid droe the sisters to somewhere in 9icoan and :ortich, to his house in Patag. *hile traersing the PatagDCarmen road, he obsered tha t a 'olice ehicle was following him. Alarmed, he hurriedly accelerated his s'eed. *hen he 'assed a military checkD'oint, he was fired u'on. :ortunately, only the rear 'ortion of the ehicle was hit. 6aid reached Eamarok, an interior barangay of O'ol, at about 13?? o-clock in the morning and re'aired to the house of his motherDinDlaw Beatrice 5iera. (e told his brotherDinDlaw Faime 5iera, a witness for the 'rosecution, the details of what allegedly trans'ired in the night. +wo days thereafter, he sli''ed back into the city by 'assing through another town and resumed driing his 'assenger @ee'. In its decision dated August 0, 0.K% for 'lane fare, hos'itali;ation and medical e)'enses2 and the further sum of


0??

P,???.??, for moral damages. Accused shall be credited with the 'eriod of their 'reentie im'risonment. +he homeDmade reoler .11 cal., #8)h. A% is hereby forfeited in faor of the 6oernment2 #1% :I4, in C5IMIA9 CA48 O. 70=1, both accused Permonette Foy :ortich and 5udy #Boy% 6aid, guilty beyond reasonable doubt, as 'rinci'als of the crime of 4im'le 5OBB85S, as defined and 'enali;ed under Article 1<7, 'aragra'h fie #% of the 5eised Penal Code, with the sole mitigating circumstance of drunkenness, which is not habitual, an d not offset by any aggraating circumstance, and a''lying the Indeterminate 4entence 9aw, hereby im'oses u'on each of them the indeterminate 'enalty of :our #7% Sears and +wo #1% Months of P5I4IO CO558CCIOA9, as minimum, to 4i) #=% Sears, One #0% Month and +en #0?% ays of P5I4IO MASO5, as ma)imum2 and to 'ay the costs2 and to indemnify 5O99S IMP85IO the amount of +wo (undred 4i)ty :ie #P1=.??%, alue of the cash and articles stolen2 and +wo +housand Pesos #P1,???.??% for moral damages. Accused shall be credited with the full 'eriod of their 'reentie im'risonment. +he .11 caliber homemade 5eoler #8)h. A% is hereby confiscated in faor of the 6oernment2 likewise, the ammunitions, 8)hs. AD0 to ADK. #>% :I4, in C5IMIA9 CA48 O. >K?<, both accused P85MO8++8 FOS :O5+IC( and 5&S #Boy% 6AI guilty beyond reasonable doubt as 'rinci'als of the crime of :O5CIB98 AB&C+IO *I+( 5AP8, with the use of a deadly wea'on as defined and 'enali;ed in Article >71, in relation to Article >> of the 5eised Penal Code, with the lone mitigating circumstance of drunkenness, which is not habitual and with no aggraating circumstance to offset the same, hereby im'oses u'on each of them the 'enalty of 58C9&4IO P85P8+&A2 and to indemnify MA5I9O& OB98VA, the amount of +wenty :our #P17,???% +housand Pesos2 and the costs. +he .11 cal. 5eoler #8)h. A% is hereby forfeited in faor of the 6oernment. Accused shall be credited with the 'eriod of their 'reentie im'risonment. 9ikewise, the ammunitions, 8)hs. AD0 to ADK are confiscated in faor of the goernment. #7% :I4, in C5IMIA9 CA48 O4. #sic% >K<=, that the crime herein charged is already included in the aforementioned Crim. Case o. >K?<, hence the same is dismissed, with costs de oficio. #% :I4, in C5IMIA9 CA48 O. >KJJ, both accused P85MO8++8 FOS :O5+IC( A 5&S #Boy% 6AI guilty beyond reasonable doubt as 'rinci'als of the crime o f :O5CIB98 AB&C+IO, as defined and 'enali;ed under Article >71 of the 5eised Penal Code, with the sole mitigating circumstance of drunkenness, which is not habitual, and with no aggraating circumstance to offset the same, and a''lying the Indeterminate 4entence 9aw, hereby im'oses u'on each of them the indeterminate 'enalty of 8I6(+ #K% S8A54 and O8 #0% AS, of P5I4IO MASO5, as minimum, to +*89$8 #01% S8A54 and O8 #0% AS O: 58C9&4IO +8MPO5A9, as ma)imum2 and to 'ay the costs2 and to indemnify MA5I+844 OB98VA the amount of +*89$8 +(O&4A #P01,???.??% Pesos. +he 5eoler #8)h. A% is forfeited in faor of the 6oernment2 likewise the ammunitions, 8)hs. AD0 to ADK. #=% :I4, in C5IMIA9 CA48 O. >KJK, that the crime charged herein is already included in the aforementioned Criminal Case o. >KJJ, hence the same is hereby I4MI448, with costs de oficio.


0?0

4O O5858. J :rom this @udgment, a''ellants inter'osed the instant a''eal, raising the following assignment of errors3 0. +he trial court erred in admitting the e)tra@udicial confession of accusedDa''ellant Permonette Foy :ortich des'ite the fact that it was taken in iolation of his constitutional right to counsel. 1. +he trial court erred in conicting herein accusedDa''ellants des'ite failure of the 'rosecution to 'roe their guilt beyond reasonable doubt. K *e find no reersible error im'elling a reersal of the trial court-s decision. *e cannot sustain the argument for the defense that the e)traD@udicial confession of :ortich obtained without the assistance of counsel is inadmissible in eidence. +he doctrine that an uncounseled waier of the right to counsel is not to be gien legal effect was first 'ronounced on A'ril 1=, 0, in Morales . 8nrile < reiterated in Peo'le . 6alit 0? on March 1?, 0. In the instant case, the e)traD@udicial confession and waier were e)ecuted on A'ril 7, 0. +he trial court correctly admitted the same for "there was at that time no 'ronounced guidelines re!uiring that the waier of counsel by accused can be 'ro'erly made only with the 'resence and assistance of counsel." 00 If indeed :ortich-s confession was e)tracted from him as a result of coercion by 'olicemen at the 'olice station, he could hae informed e'uty Clerk of Court Valdiar and his counsel Atty. 9eo 5oa of the maltreatment he suffered. +hus, the Court has ruled that where one who has made a confession fails to 'resent any eidence of com'ulsion or duress or iolence on his 'erson for 'ur'oses of e)tracting a confession2 where he failed to com'lain to the officers who administered the oaths, such as the fiscal in this case2 where he did not institute any criminal or administratie action for maltreatment against his alleged intimidators2 where he did not hae h imself e)amined by a re'utable 'hysician to buttress his claim of maltreatment2 and where the assailed confession is re'lete with details which could not hae been known to the 'olice officers if they had merely concocted the confession, since the statements were incul'atory in character, the e)tra@udicial confession may be admitted, with the aboe circumstances being considered as factors indicatie of oluntariness. 01 Accordingly, the e)traD@udicial confession and waier oluntarily and intelligently made by :ortich are admissible in eidence. A''ellants anchor their defense solely on the denial of the charges im'uted to them.


0?1

It is an established doctrine that the defense of denial cannot 'reail oer the 'ositie identification of the accused. 0> +he court is coninced that Marilou did recogni;e the 'hysical features of her tormentors as she was in a su'ine 'osition when a''ellants successiely mounted her. "+he ictim-s recognition of a''ellants as her attacker cannot be doubted for she had am'le o''ortunity to see the face of the man who raaged her during the carnal act." 07 4he was as close to the a''ellants as was 'hysically 'ossible, for a man and a woman cannot be 'hysically closer to each other than during a se)ual act. 0 Marilou had am'le o''ortunity to obsere a''ellants while she was being terrori;ed and, subse!uently ra'ed. +hus, there is no reason to doubt the eracity of her statement where she declared that she recogni;ed a''ellants as her transgressors. Moreoer, the latter failed to show any reason why Marilou would im'ute such a serious charge against them. eedless to state, a "straightforward, clear and 'ositie testimony, cou'led with the absence of any motie to fabricate or to falsely im'licate the accused, may be enough to conict the a''ellant." 0= Aside from being 'ositiely identified, the different ersions 'resented by a''ellants are contrary to ordinary human e)'erience. +he following declaration of the trial court that the testimonies of a''ellants are incredulous is well taken. +he claim of the accused that the de'arture from Alta +ierra, on the 'ickDu' to Acua beach was the idea of Maritess oble;a does not ins'ire belief. Marilou testified that it was the idea of one of the two accused. +he sisters, Marilou and Maritess, are single, 'resumably irgins, and absent contrary 'roof, #the accused haing adduced none% are 'resumed to be modest and chaste in kee'ing with traditional :ili'ina dis'osition. +he court cannot beliee that in a gunshotDfilled atmos'here, almost chameleonDlike #D% the girls would transfer their 'romiscuous desires #if eer they were% from their erstwhile male com'anions #+umang and Im'erio% in a brief encounter and stoically abandon the two com'anions and in turn seek 'leasure somewhere with new 'artners who had earlier allegedly come u'on them in the act of making loe on a mat behind the 'ickDu'. +he court cannot beliee that Maritess and Marilou  sisters as they are  would be so 'romiscuous and 'rofiligately #sic% libidinous that they would make loe with two male com'anions, in the 'resence, and within sight of each other. 0J It should be noted that Maritess oble;a, for unknown reasons, did not testify for the 'rosecution. Marilou-s assertion that her sister was simultaneously iolated, howeer, su''orts a finding of a''ellants- guilt. +ime and again, the Court has declared that "in crimes of ra'e, coniction or ac!uittal irtually de'ends entirely on the credibility of the ictim-s testimony because of the act that usually only the 'artici'ant can testify to its occurrence." 0K +he case at bar 'resents an unlikely situation wherein two sisters were simultaneously raaged in the 'resence of, and in 'lain iew, of the other. Accordingly, the failure of one to declare in court her ordeal may be ade!uately 'roed by the other. In light of this factual setting, there is, therefore, no doubt that Maritess was likewise a ictim of multi'le ra'es. As regards Criminal Cases o. > of the 5eised Penal Code 'roides3


0?>

Art. 1<>. *ho are guilty of robbery.  Any 'erson who, with intent to gain, shall take any 'ersonal 'ro'erty belonging to another, by means of iolence against or intimidation of any 'erson or using force u'on anything shall be guilty of robbery. +he trial court, howeer, erred in designating the crime committed as robbery with frustrated homicide. +here is no such crime. 0< +here should hae been two se'arate informations3 one for robbery and another for frustrated homicide. otwithstanding the erroneous charge in the information, the Court finds no reason to oerturn the coniction of a''ellants for the crime of sim'le robbery. +he as'ortation by a''ellants of the 'ersonal 'ro'erties was done by means of iolence against or intimidation u'on the 'ersons of Im'erio and +umang. It a''ears further that Im'erio suffered cranial in@ury which allegedly re!uired three stitches to re'air. Inasmuch as the doctor who issued the medical certificate did not testify thereon, said certificate is hearsay eidenc e as to the nature of the in@uries inflicted and, therefore, inadmissible in eidence. In Peo'le . Pesena, 1? it was ruled that when there is no eidence of actual inca'acity of the offended 'arty for labor or of the re!uired medical attendance, it is only slight 'hysical in@uries. As regards the in@uries suffered by +umang, we subscribe to the finding of the lower court that, notwithstanding the nonD'resentation of r. Aldanese of the Medical City 6eneral (os'ital at the trial, +umang-s credible testimony bolstered by documentary eidence, such as 'rogress 'ayments and 'rofessional fees for neurological management and craniatomy e)cision of de'ressed fracture, 'roed that the latter suffered less serious 'hysical in@uries, as defined in Article 1= 10 of the 5eised Penal Code. *ith res'ect to the charge of frustrated homicide in Criminal Case o. >
)))

)))

. +he 'enalty of 'rision correccional in its ma)imum 'eriod to 'rision mayor in its medium 'eriod in other cases. 1>


0?7

+he trial court correctly disregarded the aggraating circumstances of nighttime, uninhabited 'lace, and use of a motor ehicle. +he mitigating circumstance of into)ication, howeer, was erroneously a''reciated in faor of both a''ellants. octurnity is an aggraating circumstance when it is deliberately sought to 'reent the accused from being recogni;ed or to ensure his unmolested esca'e. 17 +here must be 'roof that this was intentionally sought to insure the commission of the crime and that a''ellants took adantage thereof. In the instant case, there is 'aucity of eidence that the 'eculiar adantage of nighttime was 'ur'osely and deliberately sought by the accused2 "the fact that the offense was committed at night will not suffice to sustain nocturnidad." 1 either can the use of a motor ehicle be a''reciated as an aggraating circumstance. In the case at bar, the offenses of robbery and forcible abduction with ra'e could hae been effected een without the aid of a motor ehicle. In the case of Peo'le . Mil, 1= it was held that use of a motor ehicle is not aggraating where it was not used to facilitate the crime or that the crime could not hae been committed without it. In Peo'le . 6arcia, 1J the use of motor ehicle was deemed unaggraating if its use was merely incidental and was not 'ur'osely sought to facilitate the commission of the offense or to render the esca'e of the offender easier and his a''rehension difficult. As regards the aggraating circumstance of uninhabited 'lace, the records do not show that a''ellants actually sought an isolated 'lace to better e)ecute their 'ur'ose. +he eidence needed to su''ort its a''lication are insufficient. Accordingly, this circumstance should not be considered against a''ellants. +he lower court, howeer, erred in a''reciating into)ication as a g eneric mitigating circumstance. &nder the 5eised Penal Code, into)ication is mitigating when it is not habitual or delin!uent, that is, not subse!uent to the 'lan to commit the crime. In Peo'le . A'duhan, Fr., 1K it was held that to be mitigating, the accused-s state of into)ication must be 'roed. Once into)ication is established by satisfactory eidence, in the absence of 'roof to the contrary, it is 'resumed to be nonDhabitual or unintentional. In the case at bar, a''ellants merely alleged that when the offenses were committed, they were already drunk. "+his selfDsering statement stands uncorroborated. Obiously, it is deoid of any 'robatie alue." 1< +he trial court found am'le eidence to su''ort a finding of cons'iracy. Cons'iracy e)ists when two or more 'ersons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it. >? irect 'roof is not essential to show cons'iracy as its e)istence could be inferred from the conduct of the accused before, during and after the commission of the crime, showing that the accused had acted in unison with each other, eincing a common 'ur'ose or design. >0 It is not necessary to show that two or more 'ersons met together and entered into an e)'licit agreement setting out the details of an unlawful scheme or the details by which an illegal ob@ectie is to be carried out. >1 Coniction is 'ro'er u'on eidence showing that a''ellants acted in concert, each of them doing his 'art in the commission of the offense. In Peo'le . 6undran, >> it was held that in such a


0?

case, the act of one becomes the act of all and each of the accused will thereby be deemed e!ually guilty of the crime committed. In the case at bar, the eidence reealed that a''ellants arried together at Carmen (ill and, at gun'oint, forcibly took Im'erio and +umang-s 'ersonal belongings and fled with the sisters on board the stolen 'ickDu'. After fleeing, a''ellants successiely abused Marilou and Maritess inside the ehicle. +hese acts manifestly disclose their "@oint 'ur'ose and design, concerted action and community of interest." >7 +he Court is, therefore, coninced that a''ellants- criminal cul'ability of eery charge was 'roed beyond reasonable doubt. In the case of Peo'le . Fulian, > howeer, it was ruled that when the first act of ra'e was committed by a''ellant, the com'le) crime of forcible abduction with ra'e was then consummated. Any subse!uent acts of intercourse would be only se'arate acts of ra'e and can no longer be considered se'arate com'le) crimes of forcible abduction with ra'e. Accordingly, a modification of trial court-s decision is in order. *(858:O58, the decision of the trial court dated August 0, 0K?<3 :orcible Abduction with 5a'e A''ellants Permonette Foy :ortich and 5udy 6aid are hereby conicted of the crime of forcible abduction with ra'e and, likewise, of three counts of ra'e as defined and 'enali;ed in Article >71, in relation to Article >>, of the 5eised Penal Code. Accordingly, a''ellants shall each suffer four terms of reclusion 'er'etua. In line with recent @uris'rudence, >= a''ellants are further ordered to indemnify Marilou oble;a in the amount of P1??,???.?? each as moral damages. In Criminal Case o. >KJJ3 :orcible Abduction with 5a'e A''ellants Permonette Foy :ortich and 5udy 6aid are hereby conicted of the crime of forcible abduction with ra'e and, likewise, of three counts of ra'e as defined and 'enali;ed in Article >71, in relation to Article >>, of the 5eised Penal Code. Accordingly, a''ellants shall each suffer four terms of reclusion 'er'etua. In line with recent @uris'rudence, a''ellants are further ordered to indemnify Maritess oble;a in the amount of P1??,???.?? each as moral damages. In Criminal Cases o. >

0?=

Facts: Petitioner 9i was charged before the 5+C of Makati with the crime of homicide for the

death of Christo'her Arugay. +he 'rosecution alleged that Arugay was watching teleision at home with his sisters Cristy and Baby Fane, his girlfriend dela Camara and Baby Fanes boyfriend, +an. +hey suddenly heard a noise outside. Peering through the window, they saw 9i and a certain 8duardo 4angalang taking a bath com'letely naked. +he two were facing the house of the Arugays. 8nraged, the deceased shouted something to 9i and 4angalang. +hen 'etitioner 9i shouted back. An incensed Arugay went out the house where he was met by 'etitioner carrying a baseball bat. 9i struck Arugay on the head with the bat, causing Arugay to fall. 9i ran back to his house. +he witnesses +an and dela Camara assisted Arugay and were trying to drag him back to his house when 9i reDemerged, this time with a knife. 9i then stabbed Arugay once. Immediately thereafter, they were able to see 4angalang stab Arugay at least once. Petitioner 9i denies killing Arugay. (e contends that he hit first with a baseball bat Christo'her Arugay hitting the latter not on the head but at the right arm which is near the shoulder. +he deceased who is armed with a bolo, retaliated by hacking 9i on the head, causing him to lose his hold on the baseball bat and fell semiDunconscious or unconscious. In such a condition, it is highly im'robable that he was ca'able of inflicting the fatal stab wounds on Arugay. After trial, he was found guilty and sentenced to the 'enalty of eight #K% years and one #0% day of Prision Mayor to fourteen #07% years, eight #K% months and one #0% day of 5eclusion +em'oral. (is coniction was affirmed by the Court of A''eals. Aggrieed, 9i filed a 'etition for reiew, seeking the reersal of his coniction for the crime of homicide. (ssue: *hether or not petitioner should be convicted for the crime of slight phsical in5ur instead of homicide 'eld: %es. +he only in@ury attributable to 9i is the contusion on the ictims right arm that

resulted from 9i striking Arugay with a baseball bat. In iew of the ictims su'erening death from in@uries which cannot be attributed to 9i beyond reasonable doubt, the effects of the contusion caused by 9i are not mortal or at least lie entirely in the realm of s'eculation. *hen there is no eidence of actual inca'acity of the offended 'arty for labor or of the re!uired medical attendance, the offense is only slight 'hysical in@uries. *hat trans'ired during the dawn hours of was an artless, s'ontaneous street fight deoid of any methodical 'lan for consummation. It arose not because of any longDstanding grudge or an a''reciable indication of honor, but because the actors were too !uick to offense and im'erious to reason. Set, howeer senseless this lethal imbroglio is, a @udicious e)amination of the circumstances must be made to aoid lea's into hy'erbole. Careful scrutiny of the eidence reeals that the criminal cul'ability of 9i in the death of Arugay was not established beyond reasonable doubt. &nfortunately, the 'erson who is res'onsible for the death a''arently remains at large. Villareal v. People


0?J

FAC,/: In :ebruary 0<<0, seen freshmen law students of the Ateneo de Manila &niersity

4chool of 9aw signified their intention to @oin the A!uila 9egis Furis :raternity #A!uila :raternity%. +he neo'hytes, including ictim, 9enny $illa, were sub@ected to initiation rites. After the second day of initiation rites has ended, accused nonDresident or alumni fraternity members :idelito i;on #i;on% and Artemio $illareal #$illareal% demanded that the rites be reo'ened. +he head of initiation rites, elson $ictorino #$ictorino%, initially refused. &'on the insistence of i;on and $illareal, howeer, he reo'ened the initiation rites. +he fraternity members, including i;on and $illareal, then sub@ected the neo'hytes to "'addling" and to additional rounds of 'hysical 'ain. 9enny receied seeral 'addle blows, one of which was so strong it sent him s'rawling to the ground. +he neo'hytes heard him com'laining of intense 'ain and difficulty in breathing. After their last session of 'hysical beatings, 9enny could no longer walk. (e had to be carried by the au)iliaries to the car'ort. Again, the initiation for the day was officially ended, and the neo'hytes started eating dinner. +hey then sle't at the car'ort. After an hour of slee', the neo'hytes were suddenly roused by 9ennys shiering and incoherent mumblings. Initially, $illareal and i;on dismissed these rumblings, as they thought he was @ust oeracting. *hen they reali;ed, though, that 9enny was really feeling cold, some of the A!uilans started hel'ing him. +hey remoed his clothes and hel'ed him through a slee'ing bag to kee' him warm. *hen his condition worsened, the A!uilans rushed him to the hos'ital. 9enny was 'ronounced dead on arrial. Conse!uently, a criminal case for homicide was filed against > A!uilans. 6.5. o. 001K $illareal . Peo'le +he instant case refers to accused $illareals Petition for 5eiew on Certiorari under 5ule 7. +he Petition raises two reersible errors allegedly committed by the CA in its ecision dated 0? Fanuary 1??1 in CAD6.5. o. 01? first, denial of due 'rocess2 and, second, coniction absent 'roof beyond reasonable doubt. *hile the Petition was 'ending before this Court, counsel for 'etitioner $illareal filed a otice of eath of Party on 0? August 1?00. According to the otice, 'etitioner $illareal died on 0> March 1?00. Counsel thus asserts that the sub@ect matter of the Petition 'reiously filed by 'etitioner does not surie the de ath of the accused. 6.5. o. 00?0 i;on . Peo'le Petitioner i;on sets forth two main issues first, that he was denied due 'rocess when the CA sustained the trial courts forfeiture of his right to 'resent eidence2 and, second , that he was de'ried of due 'rocess when the CA did not a''ly to him the same "ratio decidendi that sered as basis of ac!uittal of the other accused. 6.5. o. 07<7 Peo'le . Court of A''eals +his Petition for Certiorari under 5ule = seeks the reersal of the CAs ecision, insofar as it ac!uitted 0< #$ictorino et al.% and conicted 7 #+ecson et al.% of the accused A!uilans of the


0?K

lesser crime of slight 'hysical in@uries. According to the 4olicitor 6eneral, the CA erred in holding that there could hae been no cons'iracy to commit ha;ing, as ha;ing or fraternity initiation had not yet been criminali;ed at the time 9enny died. In the alternatie, 'etitioner claims that the ruling of the trial court should hae been u'held, inasmuch as it found that there was cons'iracy to inflict 'hysical in@uries on 9enny. 4ince the in@uries led to the ictims death, 'etitioner 'osits that the accused A!uilans are criminally liable for the resulting crime of homicide, 'ursuant to Article 7 of the 5eised Penal Code. 6.5. os. 0JK?J and 0JK?K? $illa . 8scalona Petitioner $illa assails the CAs dismissal of the criminal case inoling 7 of the < accused, namely, 8scalona, 5amos, 4aruca, and Adriano. 4he argues that the accused failed to assert their right to s'eedy trial within a reasonable 'eriod of time. 4he also 'oints out that the 'rosecution cannot be faulted for the delay, as the original records and the re!uired eidence were not at its dis'osal, but were still in the a''ellate court. (//*/:

6.5. o. 001K $illareal . Peo'le3 whether or not the death of $illareal e)tinguished his criminal liability 6.5. o. 00?0 i;on . Peo'le3 whether or not I;on was de'ried of due 'rocess 6.5. o. 07<7 Peo'le . Court of A''eals3 whether or not the CA erred in conicting accused of the lesser offense of slight 'hysical in@uries instead of homicide 6.5. os. 0JK?J and 0JK?K? #$illa . 8scalona%3 whether or not the CA erred in dismissing the case for iolation of the accuseds right to s'eedy trial '*$): 6.5. o. 001K $illareal . Peo'le

Criminal 9awD how criminal liability is e)tinguished In a otice dated 1= 4e'tember 1?00 and while the Petition was 'ending resolution, this Court took note of counsel for 'etitioners otice of eath of Party. According to Article K<#0% of the 5eised Penal Code, criminal liability for 'ersonal 'enalties is totally e)tinguished by the death of the conict. In contrast, criminal liability for 'ecuniary 'enalties is e)tinguished if the offender dies 'rior to final @udgment. +he term "'ersonal 'enalties" refers to the serice of 'ersonal or im'risonment 'enalties, while the term "'ecuniary'enalties" #las 'ecuniarias% refers to fines and costs, including ciil liability 'redicated on the criminal offense com'lained of #i.e., ciil liability e) delicto%. (oweer, ciil liability based on a source of obligation other than the delict suries the death of the accused and is recoerable through a se'arate ciil action.


0?<

+hus, we hold that the death of 'etitioner $illareal e)tinguished his criminal liability for both 'ersonal and 'ecuniary 'enalties, including his ciil liability directly arising from the delict com'lained of. Conse!uently, his Petition is hereby dismissed, and the criminal case against him deemed closed and terminated. 6.5. o. 00?0 #i;on . Peo'le% Political 9awD +he right of the accused to 'resent eidence is guaranteed by no less than the Constitution itself. Article III, 4ection 07#1% thereof, 'roides that "in all criminal 'rosecutions, the accused shall en@oy the right to be heard by himself and counsel" +his constitutional right includes the right to 'resent eidence in ones defense, as well as the right to be 'resent and defend oneself in 'erson at eery stage of the 'roceedings. +he trial court should not hae deemed the failure of 'etitioner to 'resent eidence on 1 August 0<<> as a waier of his right to 'resent eidence. On the contrary, it should hae considered the e)cuse of counsel @ustified, es'ecially since counsel for another accused 6eneral had made a lastDminute ado'tion of testimonial eidence that freed u' the succeeding trial dates2 and since i;on was not scheduled to testify until two weeks later. At any rate, the trial court 'reDassigned fie hearing dates for the rece'tion of eidence. If it really wanted to im'ose its Order strictly, the most it could hae done was to forfeit one out of the fie days set for i;ons testimonial eidence. 4tri''ing the accused of all his 'reDassigned trial dates constitutes a 'atent denial of the constitutionally guaranteed right to due 'rocess. In criminal cases where the im'osable 'enalty may be death, as in the 'resent case, the court is called u'on to see to it that the accused is 'ersonally made aware of the conse!uences of a waier of the right to 'resent eidence. In fact, it is not enough that the accused is sim'ly warned of the conse!uences of another failure to attend the succeeding hearings. +he court must first e)'lain to the accused 'ersonally in clear terms the e)act nature and conse!uences of a waier. 6.5. os. 0JK?J and 0JK?K? #$illa . 8scalona% Political 9awD right to s'eedy trial is iolated when the 'roceeding is attended with un@ustified 'ost'onements of trial, or when a long 'eriod of time is allowed to ela'se without the case being tried and for no cause or @ustifiable motie. *e do not see grae abuse of discretion in the CAs dismissal of the case against accused 8scalona, 5amos, 4aruca, and Adriano on the basis of the iolation of their right to s'eedy trial. *hile we are 're'ared to concede that some of the foregoing factors that contributed to the delay of the trial of the 'etitioners are @ustifiable, *e nonetheless hold that their right to s'eedy trial has been utterly iolated in this case. +he absence of the records in the trial court wasN due to the fact that the records of the case were eleated to the Court of A''eals, and the 'rosecutions failure to com'ly with the order of the


00?

court a !uo re!uiring it to secure certified true co'ies of the same. *hat is glaring from the records is the fact that as early as 4e'tember 10, 0<<, the court a !uo already issued an Order re!uiring the 'rosecution, through the e'artment of Fustice, to secure the com'lete records of the case from the Court of A''eals. +he 'rosecution did not com'ly with the said Order as in fact, the same directie was re'eated by the court a !uo in an Order dated ecember 1J, 0<<. 4till, there was no com'liance on the 'art of the 'rosecution. It is not stated when such order was com'lied with. It a''ears, howeer, that een until August , 1??1, the said records were still not at the dis'osal of the trial court because the lack of it was made the basis of the said court in granting the motion to dismiss filed by coDaccused Conce'cion. It is likewise noticeable that from ecember 1J, 0<<, until August , 1??1, or for a 'eriod of almost seen years, there was no action at all on the 'art of the court a !uo. 8)ce't for the 'leadings filed by both the 'rosecution and the 'etitioners, the latest of which was on Fanuary 1<, 0<<=, followed by 'etitioner 4arucas motion to set case for trial on August 0J, 0<% where there has been a grae abuse of discretion.


000

+he third instance refers to this Courts @udicial 'ower under 5ule = to determine whether or not there has been a grae abuse of discretion amounting to lack or e)cess of @urisdiction on the 'art of any branch or instrumentality of the goernment. Indeed, we hae ruled in a line of cases that the rule on double @eo'ardy similarly a''lies when the state seeks the im'osition of a higher 'enalty against the accused. *e hae also recogni;ed, howeer, that certiorari may be used to correct an abusie @udgment u'on a clear demonstration that the lower court blatantly abused its authority to a 'oint so grae as to de'rie it of its ery 'ower to dis'ense @ustice. +he 'resent case is one of those instances of grae abuse of discretion. +he a''ellate court relied on our ruling in Peo'le . Penesa in finding that the four accused should be held guilty only of slight 'hysical in@uries. According to the CA, because of "the death of the ictim, there can be no 'recise means to determine the duration of the inca'acity or medical attendance re!uired. +he reliance on Penesa was utterly mis'laced. On the contrary, the CAs ultimate conclusion that +ecson, Ama, Almeda, and Bantug were liable merely for slight 'hysical in@uries grossly contradicts its own findings of fact. According to the court, the four accused "were found to hae inflicted more than the usual 'unishment undertaken during such initiation rites on the 'erson of $illa. It then ado'ted the BI medicoDlegal officers findings that the antecedent cause of 9enny $illas death was the "multi'le traumatic in@uries" he suffered from the initiation rites. Considering that the CA found that the "'hysical 'unishment hea'ed on 9enny $illa was serious in nature, it was 'atently erroneous for the court to limit the criminal liability to slight 'hysical in@uries, which is a light felony. Article 7#0% of the 5eised Penal Code dictates that the 'er'etrator shall be liable for the conse!uences of an act, een if its result is different from that intended. +hus, once a 'erson is found to hae committed an initial felonious act, such as the unlawful infliction of 'hysical in@uries that results in the death of the ictim, courts are re!uired to automatically a''ly the legal framework goerning the destruction of life. +his rule is mandatory, and not sub@ect to discretion. Attributing criminal liability solely to $illareal and i;on as if only their acts, in and of themseles, caused the death of 9enny $illa is contrary to the CAs own findings. :rom 'roof that the death of the ictim was the cumulatie effect of the multi'le in@uries he suffered, the only logical conclusion is that criminal res'onsibility should redound to all those who hae been 'roen to hae directly 'artici'ated in the infliction of 'hysical in@uries on 9enny. +he accumulation of bruising on his body caused him to suffer cardiac arrest. Accordingly, we find that the CA committed grae abuse of discretion amounting to lack or e)ce ss of @urisdiction in finding +ecson, Ama, Almeda, and Bantug criminally liable for slight 'hysical in@uries. As an allowable e)ce'tion to the rule on double @eo'ardy, we therefore gie due course to the Petition. People v. Orita Facts: In the early morning of March 1?, 0, Cristina 4. Abayan, a 0
student at the 4t. Fose'h-s College, arried at her boarding house from a 'arty. All of a sudden,


001

a''ellant held her and 'oked a knife to her neck. A''ellant dragged com'lainant u' the stairs and with the Batangas knife still 'oked to her neck, they entered com'lainant-s room. After remoing his clothes and ordering her to remoe hers, the a''ellant began to ra'e the com'lainant. (oweer as they were in a 'osition where he continued to 'oke the knife to her, a''ellant could not fully 'enetrate her. &'on changing 'ositions, the com'lainant managed to dash into the ne)t room. (oweer, the a''ellant chased her until she @um'ed out of a window and ran to a nearby munici'al building where two 'olicemen were on duty. &'on being told what ha''ened, the 'olicemen rushed to the boarding house, howeer, they failed to a''rehend a''ellant. +he com'lainant was brought to a hos'ital where she was e)amined. +he medical Certificate stated r. Ma. 9uisa Abude findings3 o isible abrasions or marks at the 'erineal area or oer the ula, errythematous #sic% areas noted surrounding aginal orifice, tende r, hymen intact2/ +he trial court conicted the accused of frustrated ra'e. +he accused contends that there is no crime of frustrated rape . (ssue: *hether or not the trial court erred in declaring that the crime of frustrated rape was committed b the accused 'eld: %es. +he decision of the 5egional +rial Court is hereby MOI:I8. +he accused Ceilito

Orita is hereby found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of ra'e and sentenced to reclusion 'er'etua. +here is no debate that ra'e can be attem'ted and consummated. Our concern now is whether or not the crime of ra'e can be frustrated. +he re!uisites of a frustrated felony are3 #0% that the offender has 'erformed all the acts of e)ecution which would 'roduce the felony and #1% that the felony is not 'roduced due to causes inde'endent of the 'er'etrator-s will. In the crime of ra'e, from the moment the offender has carnal -nowledge of his victim he actually attains his 'ur'ose and, from that moment also all the essential elements of the offense hae been accom'lished #consummated%. In the consummation of ra'e, 'erfect 'enetration is not essential. An penetration of the female organ b the male organ is sufficient. *ntr of the labia or lips of the female organ8 without rupture of the hmen or laceration of the vagina is sufficient to warrant conviction .

In the case of People v. *ri6a, *e found the offender guilty of frustrated ra'e there being no conclusie eidence of 'enetration of the genital organ of the offended 'arty. (oweer, it a''ears that this is a "stra7 decision inasmuch as it has not been reiterated in Our subse!uent decisions. Article < of the 5eised Penal Code, which 'roides, in its 'enultimate 'aragra'h, for the 'enalty of death when the ra'e is attem'ted or frustrated and a homicide is committed by reason or on the occasion thereof. *e are of the o'inion that this 'articular 'roision on frustrated ra'e is a dead provision. +here was no conclusie eidence of 'enetration of the genital organ of the ictim, but neither was it ruled out. (oweer, the medical certificate stated that the ula was erythematous #which


00>

means marked by abnormal redness of the skin due to ca'illary congestion, as in inflammation% and tender. (oweer, r. Vamoras #in 'lace of r Abude% testimony is merely corroboratie and is not an indis'ensable element in the 'rosecution of this case. In a 'rosecution for ra'e, the accused may be conicted een on the sole basis of the ictim-s testimony if credible. People v. Campuhan Facts: On 1 A'ril 0<<=, at around 7'.m., Ma. Cora;on Pamintuhan, the mother of fourDyearDold

Crysthel Pamintuhan, went down to the second floor of their house to 're'are Milo chocolate drinks for her two children. At the ground floor, she met Primo who was then filling small 'lastic bags with water to be fro;en into ice in the free;er located at the second floor2 Primo was the hel'er of Cora;ons brother. As Cora;on was busy 're'aring the drinks, she heard one of her daughters cry Ayoko, ayokoQ/ 'rom'ting Cora;on to rush u'stairs. +hereu'on, she saw Primo inside her childrens room kneeling before Chrysthel whose 'a@amas or @ogging 'ants/ and 'anty were already remoed, while his short 'ants were down to his knees2 According to Cora;on, Primo was forcing his 'enis into Chrysthels agina2 4he cursed and bo)ed the accused seeral times2 (e eaded and 'ulled u' his 'ants2 he 'ushed her when she tried to block his 'ath2 Cora;on then run out for hel'. (er brother, cousin and an uncle chased Primo and eentually held him at the back of their com'ound until they decided to turn him oer to the barangay officials. Physical e)amination of the ictim yielded negatie results3 o eident sign of e)tra genital 'hysical in@ury was noted by the medicoDlegal officer2 Chrysthels hymen was intact and her its orifice was only ?.cm in diameter. In Primos defense, he maintained his innocence. (e assailed the charge as a mere scheme of Cora;on who allegedly bore an ill will against him for his refusal to run an errand. (e says Chrysthel was in a 'laying mood and wanted to ride his back when she suddenly 'ulled him down causing both of them fall to the floor. it was in this fallen 'osition when Cora;on chance u'on them. +he trial court conicted the accused of statutory ra'e, sentenced him the 'enalty of death. (ssue: *O the acts of the accused constitute attempted or consummated rape 'eld: Attempted rape. +he court ruled that there are only two stages in ra'e attem'ted and

consummated2 it held that ra'e was consummated from the moment the offender had carnal


007

knowledge of the ictim since by it he attained his ob@ectie. Penis must hae touched the labias or slid into the female organ, not merely stroked the e)ternal surface thereof. In cases where 'enetration was not fully established, the Court had anchored its conclusion that ra'e neertheless was consummated on the ictim-s testimony that she felt 'ain, or the medicoD legal finding of discoloration in the inner li's of the agina, or the labia minora was already ga'ing with redness, or the hymenal tags were no longer isible. one was shown in this case. &nder Art. =, in relation to Art. >>, of the 5eised Penal Code, ra'e is attem'ted when the offender commences the commission of ra'e directly by oert acts, and does not 'erform all the acts of e)ecution which should 'roduce the crime of ra'e by reason of some cause or accident other than his own s'ontaneous desistance. All the elements of attem'ted ra'e D and only of attem'ted ra'e D are 'resent in the instant case2 hence, the accused should be 'unished only for it. People v. Padilla )octrines: •

•

4e)ual intercourse with a woman who is a mental retardate constitutes statutory ra'e, which does not re!uire 'roof that the accused used force or intimidation in haing carnal knowledge of the ictim for coniction. +he law does not im'ose a burden on the ra'e ictim to 'roe resistance. :or reiew in this case is a decision, dated May K, 0<Dyear old retardate, was in the citrus farm owned by a neighbor, Fose 4agun, when accusedDa''ellant accosted her. +he latter, who is married with two children, was then 1= years old and em'loyed by 4agun as a farmhand. Armed with a scythe and a knife, accusedDa''ellant forced Maria Aurora to undress and lie down on the grass. As she lay on there, accusedDa''ellant forced himself on her, saying3 "Eantot tayo" #"9et-s hae se)ual intercourse"%. Maria Aurora resisted accusedDa''ellant-s adances, but she 'roed to be no match for him. AccusedDa''ellant succeeded in raishing her.0Yw'hi0.nZt Maria Aurora told her father, 8ngracio 9. Bautista, what ha''ened to her in the eening. 4he was taken to the 6oernor +eofilo 4ison Memorial (os'ital, where she was e)amined by r. 9uisa :. Cayabyab. Afterwards, the matter was re'orted to the Po;orrubio Police 4tation. 0 On May 1, 0<<, 8ngracio filed a com'laint 1 in the Munici'al Circuit +rial Court, Po;orrubio, Pangasinan. After a 'reliminary inestigation, the court found 'robable cause that the crime had been committed and that accusedDa''ellant was guilty thereof. Accordingly, the case was


00

referred to the Office of the Proincial Prosecutor, &rdaneta City, Pangasinan which on May 1=, 0<< filed an information > for ra'e in the 5egional +rial Court, Branch 9$, at &rdaneta City against accusedDa''ellant, the 'ertinent 'ortion of which reads3 +he undersigned u'on 'reious com'laint sworn to by the father of the offended 'arty accuses VA9S PAI99A S PI9O6O alias "9ABO", of the crime of 5AP8, committed as follows3 +hat on or about the 1Jth day of A'ril, 0<< at Barangay Bobonan 8ast, Munici'ality of Po;orrubio, Proince of Pangasinan and within the @urisdiction of this (onorable Court, the aboeDnamed accused, by means of force and intimidation, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously hae carnal knowledge of the com'lainant, Maria Aurora Bautista, a minor of about 0> years old, against the latter-s will. CO+5A5S to Article >>, 5eised Penal Code. &rdaneta, Pangasinan, May 1=, 0<<. &'on being arraigned, accusedDa''ellant 'leaded not guilty to the charge, whereu'on hearings were held on ecember =, 0<<, Fanuary 1>, Fanuary >0, :ebruary 11, and March 1J, 0<<=. On May K, 0<<=, @udgment was rendered finding accusedDa''ellant Valdy Padilla guilty of ra'e and sentencing him to death3 *(858:O58, the Court finds the accused VA9S PAI99A S PI9O6O 6&I9+S beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of 5AP8 defined and 'enali;ed under 5e'ublic Act o. J=<, the offense haing been committed with the attendant circumstances of use of a deadly wea'on, disregard of the res'ect due to the offended 'arty on account of her age, and abuse of su'erior strength2 and hereby sentences him to suffer the su'reme 'enalty of 8A+(, to be e)ecuted 'ursuant to 5.A. o. K0JJ, otherwise known as the 9ethal In@ection 9aw, and to 'ay the com'lainant MA. A&5O5A BA&+I4+A in the amount of P?,???.?? as damages, and to 'ay the costs. (ence, this a''eal. AccusedDa''ellant raises this lone assignment of error3 +(8 +5IA9 CO&5+ 8558 I AMI++I6 I 8$I8C8 A6AI4+ +(8 ACC&48D APP899A+ +(8 +84+IMOS O: +(8 A99868 $IC+IM 84PI+8 +(8 :AC+ +(A+ +(8 9A++85 I4 ICOMP8+8+ +O +84+I:S &8 +O (85 M8+A9 (AICAP. AccusedDa''ellant-s contention is without merit. :irst. +he basic test of a witness- !ualification is of course whether he can 'erceie and, 'erceiing, can make known his 'erce'tion to others. 7 egatiely 'ut, 5ule 0>?, [10 of the 5eised 5ules of Court 'roides3 +he following 'ersons cannot be witnesses3


00=

#a% +hose whose mental condition, at the time of their 'roduction for e)amination, is such that they are inca'able of intelligently making known their 'erce'tion to others2 #b% Children whose mental maturity is such as to render them inca'able of 'erceiing the facts res'ecting which they are e)amined and relating them truthfully. (ence, a mental retardate is not, by reason of such handica' alone, dis!ualified from testifying in court. (e or she can be a witness, de'ending on his or her ability to relate what he or she knows. If the testimony of a mental retardate is coherent, the same is admissible in court.  +hus, we hae in seeral cases = u'held the coniction of the accused based mainly on statements gien in court by the ictim who was a mental retardate. +rial courts, which hae the o''ortunity to obsere the facial e)'ressions, gestures, and tone of oice of a witness while testifying, are com'etent to determine whether his or her testimony will be gien credence. J In the instant case, the trial court accorded weight to the testimony of Maria Aurora. Indeed, the com'lainant-s truthfulness is eident in her testimony3 Prosecutor 8miliano M. Matro3 ow, on A'ril 1J, 0<<, between 7 and  o-clock in the afternoon, can you recall where you wereG A3

I was at the calamansi orchard.

R3

*ho owns that calamansi orchardG

A3

+iaging.

R3

*hat were you doing there at that timeG

A3

I was looking for my scythe.

R3

*hat ha''ened, did you find your scytheG

A3

I was undressed.

R3

*ho undressed youG

A3

9abo.

R3

o you know the real name of 9aboG

A3

Valdy Padilla.

R3

If Valdy Padilla alias 9abo is now in the courtroom, can you identify himG


00J

A3

+hat 'erson.

#+he witness 'ointed at a 'erson who, when asked his name, answered "Valdy Padilla."% R3

Sou mentioned something about a scythe. *ere you able to find itG

A3

It was in the 'ossession of 9abo.

R3

Sou said that Valdy Padilla alias 9abo undressed you. *hat did you do after thatG

A3

(e 'ulled me.

Fudge Costales3 At this 'oint, the 'ublic is hereby directed to go outside. Close the door. 8en the father and mother of the com'lainant should go outside. R3

After 9abo 'ulled you, what did you do, if anythingG

A3

(e brought out a knife and tried to stab me.

)))

)))

R3

Sou were undressed at that timeG

A3

Ses.

R3

After that, what did you doG

A3

(e told me, "Eantot tayo."

R3

id he hae se)ual intercourse with youG

A3

Ses.

R3

(ow did he do that with youG

A3

(e made me lie down.

)))

Fudge Costales3 (ow about the knifeG A3

I bled.


00K

R3

*here did you bleedG

A3

(ere. #+he witness 'ointed at her agina%.

R3

*hat did you feel while 9abo was haing se)ual intercourse with youG

A3

It hurt. It was 'ainful.

R3

(ow long did 9abo had #sic% se)ual intercourse with youG

A3

:or a short time only.

R3

After that, what did he doG

A3

othing more.

)))

)))

R3

*ill you describe the organ of 9aboG

A3

It was big. #+he witness demonstrated a length of about 7 to  inches%

)))

)))

R3

id you scream when he inserted his 'enisG

A3

Ses. K

)))

)))

+he com'lainant-s testimony is corroborated by the finding of r. 9uisa :. Cayabyab, who e)amined Maria Aurora in the eening of A'ril 1J, 0<<. r. Cayabyab found fresh lacerations in her hymen, most 'robably caused by the entrance of a hardened 'enis. < +he releant 'ortions of the medical certificate, 0? dated A'ril 1K, 0<<, which r. Cayabyab issued after e)amining Maria Aurora read3 Perineum

3 no sign of e)ternal in@ury

(ymen3 with fresh lacerations at > and < o-clock 'ositions $agina 3 admits 0 finger Ceri) 3 close &terus 3 small 4'ermato;oa 3 negatie


00<

4econd. uring the trial, the 'rosecution 'resented eidence tending to show that Maria Aurora is a mental retardate. 00 4ignificantly, accusedDa''ellant also admitted this 'oint during his direct e)amination. 01 It is settled that se)ual intercourse with a wo man who is a mental retardate constitutes statutory ra'e, which does not re!uire 'roof that the accused used force or intimidation in haing carnal knowledge of the ictim for coniction. 0> (oweer, this fact was not alleged in the information 07 in this case and, therefore, cannot be the basis for coniction. At any rate, there is ade!uate eidence to show that the accusedDa''ellant used force and intimidation in committing the crime of ra'e in this case. +he defense makes much of Maria Aurora-s admission that she did not 'ut u' a determined resistance against accusedDa''ellant. :or instance, she answered at one 'oint that she did not fight back when accusedDa''ellant laid her down on the grass. 0 (oweer, the law does not im'ose a burden on the ra'e ictim to 'roe resistance. 0= +he fact that the ictim did not resist the accused by struggling or shouting for hel' does not negate the use of force and intimidation. 0J +he use of a knife and the threat of harm may be sufficient to intimidate the ictim to obedience. 0K Maria Aurora, a minor, cannot be e)'ected to react under such circumstances like a mature woman. Because of her immaturity, she can be easily intimidated, subdued, and terrified by a strong man like accusedDa''ellant Padilla. 0< +here can be no doubt that Maria Aurora was forced by accusedDa''ellant to hae se)ual intercourse with him, and that she eentually submitted to him out of fear from the following answers she gae to the trial court3 R3

*hy did you not fight 9aboG

A3

I was afraid, he might maul me.

)))

)))

R3

*here was the knife or the scythe you were mentioning at that timeG

A3

It was in his 'ossession, sir.

R3

(e was holding itG

A3

Ses.

R3

*hat handG

A3

5ight hand.

R3

*as it a knife or a scytheG

A3

4cythe. o, he had no scythe in his 'ossession.

)))


01?

R3

*hen he was haing se)ual intercourse with youG

A3

Ses.

R3 (oweer, he had a knife at that time, only he laid it on the ground when he had se)ual intercourse with you. A3

Ses.

R3

And because he had a scythe, you were afraid that he might kill you if you resistG

A3

Ses.

+here are minor inconsistencies in the testimony of Maria Aurora, such as her confusion whether it was a knife or a scythe which accusedDa''ellant 'laced on the grass aboe her head after he had forced her to lie down. (oweer, as we hae held in a number of cases, such inconse!uential la'ses can be e)'ected of a young girl who was ra'ed, in iew of the harrowing e)'erience she is called u'on to recall. 10 4uch minor inconsistencies, far from detracting from the eracity of her testimony, in fact tend to bolster it. +hird. +o rebut the eidence 'resented against him, accusedDa''ellant claimed that, at the time of the ra'e, he was in their hut 're'aring su''er with two other farmhands. 1> One of the farmhands, 4antiago 4agun, corroborated accusedDa''ellant-s claim. 17 +his claim cannot 'reail oer the 'ositie identification of accusedDa''ellant. 1 In the instant case, Maria Aurora 'ointed out accusedDa''ellant in o'en court as the 'erson who had molested her. 1= :urthermore, for the defense of alibi to be gien weight, it must be shown that it was im'ossible for the accused to hae been 'resent at the 'lace where the crime was 'er'etrated at the time of its commission. 1J But in this case, the hut where accusedDa''ellant claimed he was in with the two other farmhands is only a short distance from the scene of the ra'e. 1K (ence, the trial court correctly re@ected his alibi. +he trial court also correctly found that the ra'e was committed with the use of a deadly wea'on and, therefore, the im'osable 'enalty is reclusion 'er'etua to death. 1< (oweer, it erred in a''reciating the aggraating circumstances of disregard of the res'ect due to the ictim by reason of his or her age and abuse of su'erior strength. Although disregard of the res'ect due to the ictim by reason of his or her age can be taken into account where the ictim is of old age as well as of tender age, >? the same can be considered only in cases of crimes against 'ersons and honor. >0 At the time of the ra'e on A'ril 1J, 0<<, ra'e was classified as a crime against chastity. 5.A. o. K>> classifying it as a crime against 'ersons took effect only on October 11, 0<1 or can the aggraating circumstance of abuse of su'erior strength be a''reciated as the trial court did, since the consideration of the same re!uires eidence of the relatie 'hysical


010

conditions of the assailant and the ictim, which the 'rosecution failed to 'resent. >> As the 'enalty for ra'e when committed with the use of a deadly wea'on is reclusion 'er'etua to death, the 'enalty of reclusion 'er'etua should be im'osed in the absence of any aggraating circumstances. >7 It is also to be noted that the trial court ordered accusedDa''ellant to 'ay the com'lainant only the ciil liability arising from the offense in the amount of P?,???,??. +his is e!uialent to actual or com'ensatory damages in ciil law. (oweer, in addition to such amount the offended 'arty is entitled to moral damages, which is automatically granted in ra'e cases without need of any 'roof. Currentl8 moral damages for rape is fi1ed P
take care of Isi's house which was under construction ad@acent to the latters residence. +he ictim was a 01Dyear old girl who used to fre!uent the residence of Isi'. On the late eening of 1 Fune 0<<, the ictim was re'orted missing by her mother. +he following morning, the A''ellant boarded a 'assenger @ee'ney and disa''eared. +he ictims body was found, lifeless, at around J3>? am that same day. 4he was found in the se'tic tank wearing her blouse and no underwear. +he auto'sy showed that the ictim was ra'ed and was strangled to death. &'on reDe)amining the crime scene, 'olicemen found a 'air of dirty white short 'ants, a brown belt and a yellow hair ribbon which was identified by the ictims mother to belong to her daughter. Also, they found a 'air of blue sli''ers which Isi' identified as that of the a''ellant. Also found in the yard, three armslength away from the se'tic tank were an underwear, a leather wallet, a 'air of dirty long 'ants and a 'liers 'ositiely identified by Isi' as a''ellants belongings. +he a''ellant was soon arrested and e)ecuted an e)traD@udicial confession wherein he narrated how the crime was committed. +he trial ensued and the lower court conicted him of the crime of 5a'e and was sentenced to death. +he case was forwarded to the 4u'reme Court for automatic reiew. 'eld: 5a'e2 8idence2 6uiding Princi'les in 5eiew of 5a'e Cases.6uided by the three

'rinci'les in the reiew of ra'e cases, to wit3 0% An accusation for ra'e can be made with facility2 it is difficult to 'roe but more difficult for the 'erson accused, though innocent, to dis'roe2 1% In iew of the intrinsic nature of the crime of ra'e, where only two 'ersons are usually inoled, the testimony of the com'lainant is scrutini;ed with e)treme caution2 and >% +he eidence of the


011

'rosecution stands or falls on its own merits and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the defense. +he foregoing circumstantial eidence clearly establishes the felony of ra'e with homicide defined and 'enali;ed under 4ection >> of the 5eised Penal Code, as amended by 4ection 00, 5.A. J=<. 4ame2 5a'e2 4tatutes2 5e'ublic Act o. K>>2 &nder the AntiD5a'e 9aw of 0<>%, ra'e has since been reclassified as a crime against 'ersons under Articles 1==DA and 1==DB, and thus, may be 'rosecuted een without a com'laint filed by the offended 'arty.At the time of the commission of this heinous act, ra'e was still considered a crime against chastity, although under the AntiD5a'e 9aw of 0<>%, ra'e has since been reclassified as a crime against 'ersons under Articles 1==DA and 1==DB, and thus, may be 'rosecuted een without a com'laint filed by the offended 'arty. 4ame2 4ame2 4ame2 4ame2 &nder 5e'ublic Act o. K>>, ra'e may be committed een by a woman and the ictim may een be a man.+he graamen of the offense of ra'e, 'rior to 5.A. K>>, is se)ual congress with a woman by force and without consent. #&nder the new law, ra'e may be committed een by a woman and the ictim may een be a man%. (f the woman is under ; ears of age8 proof of force and consent becomes immaterial not only because force is not an element of statutory ra'e, but the absence of a free consent is presumed when the woman is below such age . Coniction will therefore lie, 'roided se)ual intercourse is 'roen. But if the woman is 01 years of age or oer at the time she was iolated, as in this case, not only the first element of se)ual intercourse must be 'roen but also the other element that the 'er'etrators eil acts with the offended 'arty was done through force, iolence, intimidation or threat needs to be established. Both elements are 'resent in this case. 4ame2 4ame2 +he mere touching by the males organ or instrument of se) of the labia of the 'udendum of the womans 'riate 'arts is sufficient to consummate ra'e.In 'roing se)ual intercourse, it is not full or dee' 'enetration of the ictims agina2 rather the slightest 'enetration of the male organ into the female se) organ is enough to consummate the se)ual intercourse. +he mere touching by the males organ or instrument of se) of the labia of the 'udendum of the womans 'riate 'arts is sufficient to consummate ra'e. 4ame2 4ame2 *here the ictim, at the time of her 'enile inasion, was unconscious, it could safely be concluded that she had not gien free and oluntary consent to her defilement, whether before or during the se)ual act.:rom the wounds, contusions and abrasions suffered by the ictim, force was indeed em'loyed u'on her to satisfy carnal lust. Moreoer, from a''ellants own account, he 'ushed the ictim causing the latter to hit her head on the table and fell unconscious. It was at that instance that he raished her and satisfied his salacious and 'rurient desires. Considering that the ictim, at the time of her 'enile inasion, was unconscious, it could safely be concluded that she had not gien free and oluntary consent to her defilement, whether before or during the se)ual act. 4ame2 4ame2 amages2 If the crime of ra'e is committed or effectiely !ualified by any of the circumstances under which the death 'enalty is authori;ed by 'resent amended law, the ciil indemnity for the ictim shall be not less than seentyDfie thousand 'esos #PJ,???.??%. Pursuant to current case law, a ictim of sim'le ra'e is entitled to a ciil indemnity of fifty


01>

thousand 'esos #P?,???.??% but if the crime of ra'e is committed or effectiely !ualified by any of the circumstances under which the death 'enalty is authori;ed by 'resent amended law, the ciil indemnity for the ictim shall be not less than seentyDfie thousand 'esos #PJ,???.??%. In addition to such indemnity, she can also recoer moral damages 'ursuant to Article 110< of the Ciil Code in such amount as the court deems @ust, without the necessity for 'leading or 'roof of the basis thereof. Ciil indemnity is different from the award of moral and e)em'lary damages. +he re!uirement of 'roof of mental and 'hysical suffering 'roided in Article 110J of the Ciil Code is dis'ensed with because it is recogni;ed that the ictims in@ury is inherently concomitant with and necessarily resulting from the odious crime of ra'e to warrant 'er se the award of moral damages./ +hus, it was held that a coniction for ra'e carries with it the award of moral damages to the ictim without need for 'leading or 'roof of the basis thereof. *(858:O58, the coniction of a''ellant is hereby A::I5M8 e)ce't for the award of ciil indemnity for the heinous ra'e which is IC58A48 to PJ,???.??, P9&4 P?,???.?? moral damages. People v. Fabro Facts: On A'ril 17, 0<<1, the Court of A''eals 0 affirmed the coniction of a''ellant MA5IO

:AB5O S A5R&IVA for the ra'e of 'riate com'lainant, 58B8CCA 486&ACIA. (e now seeks his ac!uittal on the ground that the 'rosecution failed to 'roe his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. In the Information, the 'rosecution detailed the commission of the ra'e by a''ellant, as follows3 +hat on or about the 07th day of May, 0 On her way, she 'assed an IhawDIhaw restaurant where she saw a''ellant. *ithout uttering a word, he started to trail her. 4he asked him to sto' following her, but her words fell on deaf ears. 7 :inding the Alicia store already closed, 'riate com'lainant headed back home to 9o'e;-s house. A''ellant suggested they go to his cousin to buy bandDaid. 4he ignored him. 4uddenly, he grabbed her left hand and dragged her for about eight #K% to ten #0?% meters to a dark, deserted area. (e kissed her on the li's.  4he struggled, =


017

somehow managing to bite his hand. 4he tried to esca'e, but he was able to grab and 'ull her back. (e wra''ed his hands around her neck, as if to strangle her. It was then that she lost consciousness. 4he could not remember how long she 'assed out. J It took a gunshot of unknown origin to rouse 'riate com'lainant back to consciousness. 4he found herself lying on the ground with a''ellant by her side, ;i''ing u' his 'ants. K (er back and 'riate 'arts hurt, and she discoered sticky matter on her se)ual organ. 4he also reali;ed that her 'ants were no longer on her. 4he silently located and 'ut them back on. < A''ellant fled when a good samaritan, one Feffrey Cabrales, arried. 0? Priate res'ondent, accom'anied by Cabrales, reached 9o'e;-s residence at around ten o-clock that same night. 00 Immediately and tearfully, 01 she re'orted to 9o'e; her iolation by a''ellant. 0> +hat same night, 9o'e; brought her to the 'olice station, where she filed her com'laint. +hey 'roceeded to the 8astern Pangasinan istrict (os'ital #8P(% where she underwent a 'hysical and internal e)amination conducted by r. 9eo 6erardo 0 which yielded the following results3 M8ICA9 C85+I:ICA+8 May 0=, 0K>  0= 5ecord umber +O *(OM I+ MAS COC853 According to the hos'ital 58B8CCA 486&ACIA of Brgy. +oketec +ayug, Pangasinan was e)aminedUtreated in this hos'ital on May 0, 0
9inear Abrasion,  cm. Anterior As'ect of #0% 8lbow. 4'eculumUI.8. :indings3 $aginal orifice admits one finger with resistance. ulli'arous introitus. Contussions at the lateral as'ect #one at each side% of the labia minora. o fresh hymenal lacerations. o aginal lacerations. $aginal smear for 'resence of s'ermato;oa re!uested. #see attached result%.

58MA5E43 'atient would need medical attendance andUor inca'acitation for . . . . days barring com'lications. #sgd% 98O 685A5O BA&+I4+A, M.., Attending 'hysician 9ic. o. =0?77 0=


01

+he aginal smear showed 'riate com'lainant was negatie for s'ermato;oa #8)h. 1%. +he following day, she returned to the 'olice station and gae her formal statement and surrendered the denim 'ants and orange tDshirt she wore during the attack. 0J +he 10DyearDold a''ellant offered a different ersion of what trans'ired on that fateful night of May 07, 0

01=

ito ay ma'a'atunayan niyo rin kaya-t nagmamalikDtuhod 'o ako sa inyo na sana 'o ay 'atawarin niyo na 'o ako sa aking nagawang kasalanan. Euyang  Manang bigyan niyo 'a 'o ako ng isa 'ang 'agkakataon u'ang kami-y magbagong buhay. Alam ko 'o Euyang may 'amilya ka rin at mga anak at naranasan niyo na rin 'o kong 'aano ang hira' at sakit ng mawalay sa kanila. Matiis niyo 'o kaya Euyang ang ganito lalo na nga-t nasa maselang kalagayan ang asawa mo G (igit mala'it na 'ong manganak, matiis mo kayang wala ka sa tabi niyaG asisiyahan 'o ba kayong mawasak ang isang 'amilya lalo na sa oras na kailangangDkailangang ka nila kaya-t luluhod 'o ako sa inyong hara'an kung iyon ang 'araan u'ang ma'atunayan ang aking 'agsisisi at 'agbabago. asa inyo ang buh ay ko. Pati na rin ang aking kalayaan ay nakasalalay 'o sa inyo. Eaya-t Euyang  Manang sa ikatatahimik, ikabubuo at ikabubuti ng isang 'amilyang hawak mo, nagsusumamo 'o ako sa inyo na sana 'o ihulog mo na rin 'o sa amin ang inyong awa at habag alangDalang sa ikakalaya at sa ikakatiwasay nito. Eaya-t maramingDmaraming salamat sa inyong magDasawa alangDalang sa magiging anak ko at 'amilya. (uwag niyo na rin 'o sanang i'agkait ang isinasamba ko sa inyo lalungDlalo na ngayon higit nila akong kailangan dahil mala'it na 'ong manganak ang asawa ko. AlangDalang 'o sa kanila luluhod at gaga'ang 'o ako sa hara' ninyo kung iyon ang ibig niyo, makamit ko lamang ang 'ag'atawad niyo alangDalang sa 'amilya ko. 6agawin ko ang lahat i'a'angako ko 'o sa inyo dahil alam ko rin 'ong na'amahal na sa inyo ang asawa ko. Eumusta na rin 'o yong dalawang bata si Marc at Eim. 4ana naman malayo na sila ngayon sa mga sakit. 4a inyo 'o ang aking buhay at kalayaang nakasalalay sa aking 'amilya. agsisisi na 'o ako ngayon at naririto isinasamba at hinihingi ang 'ag'a'atawad niyo ng dahil sa inyo nagbago ako. Eaya-t maramingDmaraming salamat 'o sa inyo Euyang  Manang. 9ubos na 6umagalang at humihingi ng tawad Mario A. :abro (e e)'lained that he wrote the letter to his former em'loyers because he was being charged with a crime he did not commit. 1> (e also denied any romantic relationshi' between him and 'riate com'lainant. Allegedly, they were mere friends. 17 After trial, the 5+C of +ayug, Pangasinan, Branch 1, 1 conicted a''ellant for the crime of ra'e, thus3 In resume, the Court hereby finds accused Mario :abro y Ar!ui;a, 6&I9+S, beyond reasonable doubt, and hereby sentences accused to suffer the 'enalty of 5eclusion +em'oral in its ma)imum 'eriod, from 0J years, 7 months  0 day to 1? years, but considering the Indeterminate 4entence 9aw, hereby im'oses the 'enalty of Prision Mayor  0? years, 0 day to 1? years 5eclusion +em'oral as ma)imum. :inally, accused is hereby ordered to 'ay the com'lainant 5ebecca 4eguancia the sum of P1?,???.?? as moral damages with cost de oficio. Accused being detained for failure to 'ost his bail bond at the 'roincial @ail in 9ingayen, Pangasinan from the time of arrest on August 0J, 0

01J

entitled to a 'reentie im'risonment of 0 year, 7 months and 11 days to be credited to him and deductible from his 'rinci'al 'enalty. 4O O5858. On A'ril 17, 0<<1, the Court of A''eals affirmed a''ellant-s coniction, but modified the trial court-s @udgment by im'osing instead the 'enalty of reclusion 'er'etua. 'eld: AFF(&"*). 8lements of ra'e under Art. >>#0% of the 5eised Penal Code.+o

establish ra'e under Article >> #0% of the 5eised Penal Code, two elemen ts must be shown3 that the accused had carnal knowledge of the offended 'arty2 and that coitus was done through the use of force or intimidation. +his the 'rosecution was able to do in the case at bench. 4ame2 4ame2 It is but to be e)'ected that if the se)ual assault was committed against the ictim while the latter was in a state of unconsciousness, she would not be able to testify on the actual act of se)ual intercourse.A''ellant, howeer, argues that the fact of se)ual intercourse was insufficiently established by the 'rosecution. (e 'ounds on 'riate com'lainants failure to gie direct testimony on the matter, as well as the result of her 'hysical e)amination. *e are not 'ersuaded. As we held in the case of Peo'le s. Pala'al, 007 4C5A JK> #0

01K

Facts: 9ea $illanuea, 07, cried of re'etitie incestuous ra'e. :or two years she had been

continuously, countlessly abused by her own father who with unmitigated 'erersity indoctrinated her into eroticism and libidinal gratifications. "Pinag'a'arausan niya ako," she bewailed.0 4he suffered in anguish and isolation. (er reelations were horrid if not sickening. 4he turned to her mother who in her timidity and utter hel'lessness could only mutter, "I'inauubaya #ko% na sa iyos."1 But delierance must finally come and it did. Barely three #>% days after her last incestuous encounter with he r father her mother died. 9ea sei;ed the o''ortunity for relief. 4he ran to her maternal grandmother for solace. It was when she was under the care of her lola that the latter finally found out that 9ea was re'eatedly abused by her father. 4he was brought to a 'hysician who e)amined her and found the lacerations on her 'riate 'arts. +hey were too reealing to be ignored. Accordingly her father was charged, at least with two #1% counts of ra'e. Confronted with the charges 4olomon $illanuea at first denied. (e claimed that at the 'articular hours mentioned by 9ea he was not home. But his alibi was totally re@ected by the trial court which conicted him instead as charged. (e is now before us with a different 'retension. As if e)cul'ating, he now says his daughter 9ea consented to their fornications. *e are a''alled. 9ea-s maiden defloration was in their house along agu'an 4treet, +ondo, Manila, around nine o-clock in the eening of 0< 4e'tember 0<?% minutes. (e told her that what he was doing was for her own "good." After his "success," he threatened her again and ordered her to go back to slee'. +hree #>% days later, or on 0J Fune 0<<1, 9ea-s mother died. On 1 Fuly 0<<1 she ran off to her grandmother. "(indi ko na matiis ang ginagawa niya sa akin."> +hat same day she was accom'anied by her granduncle to the ational Bureau of Inestigation where she was e)amined by r. 5u'erto 4ombillon, Fr., who found her "hymen, originally thick, wide, with su'erficial oldDhealed laceration at =3>? o-clock 'osition . . . edges of which #were% rounded and nonD coo'table . . . agina walls, moderately la) . . . rugosities shallow."7


01<

Accordingly, 4olomon $illanuea was charged with two #1% se'arate crimes of ra'e, one which occurred "sometime in 4e'tember 0< the 5+C of Manila, disregarded the alibi of 4olomon $illanuea, found him guilty of ra'e on two #1% counts, sentenced him in each to reclusion 'er'etua, and ordered him to indemnify his daughter 9ea in the amount of P?,???.?? as moral damages in both cases. AccusedDa''ellant is now before us insisting on his innocence. :irst, he har's on 9ea-s failure to offer resistance considering that he was not armed with any wea'on nor did he em'loy 'hysical iolence. (e would thus doubt the allegation of 9ea that she re'orted the incident to her grand'arents because she could no longer take what he was doing to her. :or, if this were true, he said, she should not hae waited for two #1% years, and if she did not like what he was doing to her she should hae immediately gone to her grand'arents after the first or een the second incident. 4econd, accusedDa''ellant !uibbles oer the testimony of 9ea. (e claims that her story that he was on to' of her and haing se) with her for 1? to >? minutes is difficult to beliee since "tNhis is too much for a 01Dyear old girl to bear."= (e likewise submits that her testimony that her mother knew what he was su''osedly doing to her and yet did not do anything is "incredible and against human nature and not in accord with common knowledge and e)'erience of mankind."J 'eld: +he arguments are disgusting at the ery least. +he trial court found the testimony of 9ea

"categorical, 'ositie and conincing."K (ence we accord full faith and credence to her narration that she was raished by her own father. *e are coninced that the act com'lained of indeed occurred and were 'er'etrated by accusedDa''ellant as testified to by the ictim and confirmed by the court a !uo. :actual findings of the trial court are accorded the highest res'ect unless it is shown that certain facts of alue hae been 'lainly oerlooked which if considered could affect the result of the case.< But accusedDa''ellant in the case at bench has not 'resented any substantial eidence to disturb the conclusions of the court a !uo. :or sure $ea would not have publicl disclosed that she had been raped b her own father and then undergo trial where she had to bare her traumatic and harrowing e1perience and be sub5ected to harassment8 embarrassment and humiliation8 if not public ridicule8 unless she was reall raped and her motive was solel to see- 5ustice . 4he was barely 01, innocent,

ine)'erienced, naie, guileless when first abused. It would be highly im'robable for her against whom no 'roof of se)ual 'erersity or loose morality had been shown to fabricate charges, much more against her own father. (er testimony alone, which is credible, is sufficient to sustain the


0>?

coniction of her raisher.00 In fact it is entitled to greater weight since her accusing words are directed against a close relatie. ,hat $ea consented to the se1ual congress , re'eatedly at that, as she did not offer resistance despite the fact that he was not armed nor did he use phsical violence8 can onl be conceived b a diseased mind a se1 deviant who deserves no place in civilized societ . (is

threats and intimidation that gri''ed 9ea in fear must be iewed in the light of her 'erce'tion and @udgment at the time of the ra'e and not by any hard and fast rule. Phsical resistance need not be established in rape when threats and intimidation are emploed and the victim submits herself to the embrace of her rapist because of fear . *hat is more, accusedDa''ellant is her own father with whom she stayed in the same house and who certainly e1ercised moral ascendanc not only oer her but likewise oer her mother and brother.

+hus 9ea-s failure to immediately re'ort her re'eated debauchment did not by itself diminish her credibility. It is not uncommon for oung girls to conceal for sometime assaults on their virtue not onl because of shame but largel because of the threats on their lives . It has been often said that different 'eo'le react differently to a gien situation or ty'e of situation, and there is no standard form of human behaioral res'onse when one is confronted with a strange, startling or frightful e)'erience. It is not unlikely that 9ea could be intimidated into silence by the slightest threat to her life. A young girl like 9ea cannot be e)'ected to hae the courage and intelligence to immediately re'ort the countless se)ual attacks committed against her es'ecially when e!ually countless death threats hang oer her head. +o 9ea-s sim'le unso'histicated mind, accusedDa''ellant was not merely fribbling threats. AccusedDa''ellant belittles his daughter-s claim that he was on to' of her for 1? to >? minutes. +his, according to him, is difficult to beliee since "tNhis is too much for a 01Dyear old girl to bear." *e do not see his difficulty nor are we moed by his sudden "concern" for his daughter. *hat we find easy to beliee, on the contrary, is that a se)ual 'sycho'ath like him who is ca'able of unleashing his biological urges on his own flesh will do eerything to satisfy his enereal delight. +hat 9ea-s mother knew that accusedDa''ellant was re'eatedly raishing 9ea and yet did not do anything, is not at all incredible. :or one, 9ea-s mother a''eared to be e!ually fearful of him who wielded unabashed dominance oer his household. Any o''osition or resistance would seem futile. And while mothers may hae the natural im'ulse to 'rotect their young, not all may hae sufficient fortitude to follow their instincts. In fine, we find accusedDa''ellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of ra'e on two #1% counts. +urning to the 'enalties, the trial court sentenced accusedDa''ellant to reclusion 'er'etua in each of the two #1% counts and ordered him to indemnify his ictim in both cases P?,???.?? for moral damages. Interestingly, the 4olicitor 6eneral inokes Peo'le . 9ucas 0K and submits that the 'enalty should be modified, i.e., accusedDa''ellant should be sentenced to thirtyDfour #>7% years, four #7% months and one #0% day of reclusion 'er'etua in each of the two #1% cases, and argues that since accusedDa''ellant was found guilty of ra'e on two #1% counts he should be ordered to


0>0

'ay com'lainant P?,???.?? as moral damages and P1,=??.?? as e)e m'lary damages in each of the two #1% cases or a grand total of P0?,???.??. 4uffice it to say that on < Fanuary 0<< the Court en banc reconsidered Peo'le . 9ucas0< and modified the decision of 1 May 0<<7 by "898+I6 therefrom the dis!uisitions on whether reclusion 'er'etua is a diisible 'enalty and 48++I6 A4I8 its diision into three 'eriods." In iew thereof we reert to the ruling that since reclusion 'er'etua is an indiisible 'enalty it has no minimum, medium or ma)imum 'eriod. It is im'osed in its entirety regardless of any mitigating or aggraating circumstances that may hae attended the commission of the crime. Anent the ciil indemnity, we find the argument of the 4olicitor 6eneral to be im'ressed with merit. Accordingly the indemnity should be P?,???.?? in each of the two #1% cases or a total of P0??,???.??.1? An award of P1,???.?? in each case as e)em'lary damages to deter other se) 'ererts or twoDlegged beasts from se)ually assaulting or molesting ha'less and innocent girls, es'ecially their own kins, is likewise a''ro'riate.10 *(858:O58, the a''ealed decision finding accusedDa''ellant 4O9OMO $I99A&8$A y O8 guilty of ra'e on two #1% counts and sentencing him to reclusion 'er'etua in each count is A::I5M8. In addition, he is ordered to 'ay 9ea $illanuea P?,???.?? as indemnity and P1,???.?? as e)em'lary damages for each count of ra'e or a total of P0?,???.??. People v. Canada

+his is ra'e D where the 'ain endures, the ordeal lingers, and the stigma clings incessantly with anguish and humiliation. And when committed against a barrio lass of tender years, the lechery becomes com'ounded with a''arent heartlessness that must be condemned, the 'er'etrator damned and 'rosecuted to the fullest e)tent. :or this man-s insatiable lust and thirst for the flesh deny this innocent ictim foreer the @oy of discoering the conundrum of her femininity and the 'urity of her womanhood. 4antos Caada was found guilty by the trial court of ra'ing 01Dyear old 9oberi;a Palaming, i.e., haing carnal knowledge of her against her will, with lewd designs, by force and intimidation, to her damage and 're@udice, for which he was sentenced to a 'rison term of reclusion 'er'etua, to indemnify his ictim in the amount of P?,???.??, and to 'ay the costs.0 +he eidence for the 'rosecution established that on 1= ecember 0<

0>1

irginity and then unleashed the enom of his desire. (e then got off from his !uarry, released her hands and uncoered her mouth. ow freed, com'lainant bo)ed her des'oiler before he could run away. 9oberi;a narrated the incident to 9arry and +essie $alen;uela who in turn re'orted the matter to the barangay ca'tain on >0 ecember 0< +he sworn statement was in !uestion and answer form. In her naiete a 01Dyear old girl will, naturally, only res'ond to !uestions 'ro'ounded to her and nothing more. 4econd. In her sworn statement com'lainant mentioned that she bo)ed the accused on the arms and back when he inserted his 'enis into her agina. +he defense found this unbelieable considering that no resistance was allegedly eer mentioned when com'lainant testified in court. +his is misleading. +he records disclose that com'lainant struggled eery inch of the way to 'resere her irtue and hold her attacker at bay. +hus D R. 4o it could be easy for you to make counterforce insofar as your two feet are #sic% concernedG A.

I kicked him. *hen he remoed my hand I bo)ed his back.

R.

4o you kicked him and right after that it was followed by a blow with his handG


0>>

A.

Ses, sir.

R.

Sou bo)ed him on his backG . . . you saidG

A.

Arm and back.

R.

4o you fight #sic% out to defend your honor by kicking him and by bo)ing himG

A.

Ses sir.

R.

Sou are ery sure of that of course, what you did D kicking and bo)ing himG

A.

Ses sir.7

+hird. +he accused would 'ersuade us that com'lainant was likewise inconsistent in naming her com'anions in going to the dance that eening of 1= ecember 0<
*hile there what were you doing in that 'laceG

A.

*e were obsering or watching the dance.

R.

Sou said "we", who were your com'anions thenG

A.

8mma $alen;uela. Mary $illanuea and aisy 9aurio.

On crossDe)amination the !uestion 'ro'ounded was D R.

*ho was your com'anion then in going to the dancing hallG

A.

Mary Ann $alen;uela, 9ea 9egas'i.=

A scrutiny of the foregoing testimony reeals no inconsistency on the 'art of com'lainant. 9oberi;a-s com'anions in going to the dance hall, on one hand, and her com'anions while watching the dance, on the other, may, and in all 'robability, be of different sets. As if in des'eration in e)cul'ating himself, the accused adances the idea that com'lainant must hae mistaken him for somebody else. +his is ridiculous, es'ecially after it has been established that she harbored no ill feeling towards the accused as to induce her to charge him with so grae a crime as ra'e. :ull credence is accorded the testimony of a ra'e ictim who has shown no ill motie to testify against the accused.J +he com'lainant clearly recogni;ed the accused as her des'oiler. +he crime scene was not totally in darkness as there were lighted lam's about >? meters away. 4ignificantly, the accused was 'ositiely identified in court by the com'lainant. 4he was only 01


0>7

when defiled, still unaffected by mundane wiles and affairs of life. (ence "#s%he could not be e)'ected to fabricate such a com'licated tale as se)ual defilement unless she e)'erienced the same.K *e normally lend credence to testimonies of young girls es'ecially where the established facts indubitably 'oint to their haing been se)ually assaulted.< 9oberi;a testified in a candid and straightforward manner. (er story was 'lain and unembellished, not woen out of sheer imagination. 4he described her ordeal in iid details. A woman will not e1pose herself to the humiliation of a rape trial8 with its attendant publicit and the morbid curiosit it will arouse8 unless she has been trul wronged and see-s atonement for her abuse . 0? *hen a

woman says she has been ra'ed, she says in effect all that is necessary to show that ra'e was committed and if her testimony meets the test of credibility, the accused may be conicted o n the basis thereof. 00 o unmarried woman would tell a story of defloration, allow the e)amination of her 'riate 'arts, and therefore 'ermit herself to be the sub@ect of a 'ublic trial unless she was truly raished and wants @ustice to be done. 01 +he absence of s'ermato;oa does not negate conclusiely the e)istence of ra'e. +he absence can be e)'lained in seeral ways. :irstly, the s'erm may hae been washed away. 4econdly, the ra'ist may hae failed to e@aculate. +hirdly, the ma)imum lifes'an of s'ermato;oa is only J1 hours. 0> +he com'lainant here was only e)amined fie #% days after the ra'e. +hat there are no signs of e)ternal in@uries does not belie ra'e. +he medical e)amination disclosed lacerations in the hymen of the ictim. One may ask D are these lacerations not the best 'hysical eidence of the child-s forcible deflorationG Besides, it must be noted that the dastardly act was committed with com'lainant-s hands tied at her back and her mouth gagged. +he accused was armed with a gun. 8)'ectedly, the 01Dyear old ictim would be oercome and gri''ed in fear. For rape to e1ist it is not necessar that the force or intimidation emploed be so great or of such character as could not be resisted . It is only necessary that the force or intimidation be

sufficient to consummate the 'ur'ose which the accused had in mind. Intimidation must be iewed in the light of the ictim-s 'erce'tion and @udgment at the time of the ra'e and not by any hard and fast rule. It is therefore enough that it 'roduces fear D fear that if the ictim does not yield to the bestial demands of the accused, something would ha''en to her at the moment or thereafter, as when she is threatened with death if she re'orts the incident. 07 Intimidation would also e)'lain why there are no traces of struggle which would indicate that the ictim fought off her attacker. 0 +he defense of alibi raised by the accused is also unaailing. ot only is it weak, it is also totally unsubstantiated. :irst. +he allegation remains as a unilateral declaration on the 'art of the accused2 it is a bare denial. (e was neer able to su''ort his claim. +he alibi was sought to be corroborated by the testimony of his father who is not a disinterested witness. In order to strengthen his claim the accused should hae 'resented unbiased witnesses, and his father is not. 4econd. +he distance of the accused-s house from the scene of the crime is only two #1% kilometers. Culled from the testimony of the accused-s father, the distance can be traersed in


0>

only thirty #>?% minutes. In this regard, the accused miserably failed to establish a strong and conincing eidence so as to 'reclude his 'resence at the crime scene. Courts hae always looked u'on the defense of alibi with sus'icion and hae always receied it with caution not only because it is inherently weak and unreliable but also because it is easily fabricated. :or alibi to sere as basis for ac!uittal, it must be established with clear and conincing eidence. +he re!uisites of time and 'lace must be strictly met. A''ellant must conincingly demonstrate that it was 'hysically im'ossible for him to hae been at the scene of the crime at the time of its commission. 0= Material to establishing alibi as a alid defense, it must be shown that it was 'hysically im'ossible for accusedDa''ellant to ha e been 'resent at the 'lace of the crime at the time it was committed. 0J As it is oftDre'eated, alibi is the weakest of all defenses for it is easy to fabricate and difficult to dis'roe. *here accused was 'ositiely identified by the ictim of the ra'e herself who harbored no ill motie against the accused, the defense of alibi must fail. 0K *(858:O58, the decision a''ealed from conicting accusedDa''ellant 4A+O4 CA]AA of 5AP8 and im'osing u'on him a 'rison term of reclusion 'er'etua, and to indemnify 9OB85IVA PA9AMI6 in the amount of P?,???.??, and 'ay the costs is A::I5M8. People v. Caballero )octrine: CO48+ O: +(8 O::88 PA5+S, O+ P5O$8.  *hen the offended

'arty awoke, the crime of ra'e committed by the a''ellant was already consummated, haing had carnal knowledge with the offended 'arty while she was unconscious for being aslee'. +he offended 'artys consent to the act was subse!uent thereto and it was gien on the belief that the man lying with her was her own husband. It is eident that the offended 'arty would not hae consented to the act, had she known that the man with her was not her husband, as she in fact e)'ressed her unwillingness to said act as soon as she discoered that the man whom she thought to be her husband was the a''ellant. +he a''ealed @udgment sentences the a''ellant for the crime of ra'e to the 'enalty of from eight years and one day of 'rision mayor, as minimum, to fourteen years, eight months and one da y of reclusion tem'oral, as ma)imum. About the , Isabel Magbanua celebrated her birthday in her house within the (acienda 4ocorro in the munici'ality of Bacolod, Occidental egros. (er niece, Consorcia 6on;aga, and the latter-s husband, :rancisco $ecinan, were 'resent to hel' her attend to the 'arty. *hen the 'arty was oer at about 0 o-clock in the morning, and the guests were already retiring, the a''ellant who was one of them asked 'ermission of $ecinan to slee' in the house, stating that it was already too late for him to return to his. As the house had only one room, eerybody sle't therein, Consorcia, her aunt and two girls on one mat, and $ecinan and the a''ellant on another. +he two girls were between Consorcia and her aunt, and the a''ellant on $ecinan-s side towards the wall, so that Consorcia and the a''ellant were on the o''osite ends of the room. *hen all were already aslee', Consorcia awoke and noticed that a man was on to' of her, haing carnal intercourse with her. +hinking that this was her husband, Consorcia did


0>=

nothing to o''ose the act until it was consummated. (aing noticed, howeer, that the man trembled, a thing which her husband neer did, she thought that he might be another and she touched his body. (aing obsered that the shirtsleees of the man on to' of her were long while those of her husband was short, and coninced that the man who had carnal intercourse with her was another, she called her husband. As the latter would not wake u', she arose, struck a match and caught hold of the man with her, who 'roed to be the a''ellant. *hen she had succeeded in waking u' her husband, she informed him of what had ha''ened and her husband assaulted with his fists the a''ellant who was asking to e)cused for what he had done. *hen Consorcia-s aunt awoke, she also insulted the a''ellant and later went to re'ort the outrage to the 'erson in charge of the hacienda, named Manuel Cuison. *hen Manuel Cuison arried at the house, he asked the a''ellant what had ha''ened but the latter refused to answer him, whereu'on he took the a''ellant to the munici'al building and 'laced him at the dis'osal of the authorities. +he a''ellant, testifying in his faor, denied the facts stated by the witnesses for the 'rosecution and alleged in his defense that on the night in !uestion he and Consorcia-s husband had been 'laying monte and as he had won in the game and latter refused to continuing 'laying, he was manhandled, Consorcia-s husband assaulting him with his fists. +his defense of the a''ellant has not been su''orted by any eidence and his own attorney in this instance does not consider it as haing been established. It a''ears from the eidence that when Consorcia, the offended 'arty, awoke, the a''ellant had already introduced his organ into her genitals and in fact he was already haing se)ual intercourse with her. *e mention this fact on account of a certain doubt arising from the offended 'arty-s testimony during the direct e)amination relatie to this detail, but in the attem't of the attorney for the defense to clarify this 'oint during his crossDe)amination, the offended 'arty categorically affirmed that she had been unaware when the a''ellant introduced his organ into hers. :urthermore, it so a''ears affirmatiely in the affidait #8)hibit 0% made by the offended 'arty before the @ustice of the 'eace of Bacolod, which is attached to the record as eidence for the defense. According to said document, when the offended 'arty awoke, the crime of ra'e committed by the a''ellant was already consummated, haing had carnal knowledge with the offended 'arty while she was unconscious for being aslee'. +he offered 'arty-s consent to the act was subse!uent thereto and it was gien on the belief that the man lying with her was her own husband. It is eident that the offended 'arty would not hae consented to the act, had she known that the man with her was not her husband, as she in fact e)'ressed her unwillingness to said act as soon as she diorced that the man who she thought to be her husband was the a''ellant. In iew of these considerations, the a''ealed @udgment is affirmed. People v. Conde

Patricia Faramillo was allegedly ra'ed by accusedDa''ellant 5i;aldy Conde y Corte;0 in the early morning of >0 October 0<

0>J

Court #5+C% of Ealookan City on 1 oember 0<=?7, and assigned to Branch 017 of the said court. +he accusatory 'ortion of the com'laint reads as follows3 +hat on or about the >0st day of October 0< +rial on the merits ensued after the a''ellant entered a 'lea of innocence u'on his arraignment.7 On 0J Fune 0<<1, the trial court rendered a decision finding the a''ellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of ra'e and sentencing him to suffer an im'risonment 'enalty of reclusion 'er'etua2 to indemnify the ictim, Patricia Faramillo, in in the amount of P1?,???.??2 and to 'ay the costs.= +he eidence for the 'rosecution u'on which the @udgment of coniction is based is summari;ed by the trial court as follows3 At about 03?? o-clock in the early morning of October >0, 0<K year old housewife was slee'ing on a bed at the ground floor of her house located at 01< 4an iego 4t., 00th Aenue, Aenue, Caloocan City. As she was slee'ing, Patricia Faramillo felt something hard 'enetrating her 'riate organ. 4he suddenly woke u' and found a man on to' of her. 4he shouted at the man, "4ino kaG" kaG " +he man whom she recogni;ed but neer saw before this incident, stood u' and hurriedly 'ut on his shorts and tried to flee from the house. Patricia P atricia then 'ut on her 'anty, which she wore when she sle't the night before and which 'anty she found beside her on the bed, in order to run after the man. Fust as the man was leaing the house by the front door, he was met by Marilyn O'ea, the sister of Patricia, the two daughters of Patricia named 4hirley and 8ufemia Faramillo and 4herwin Ba@e, a male friend of 4hirley and 8ufemia. +he accused, in going out of the door managed to touch the thigh of 4hirley. At this 'oint, 4herwin Ba@e confronted the man and the two fought each other. 4hirley, 8ufemia 8ufemia and Marilyn shouted for hel'. 4eeral neighbors res'onded and assisted in a''rehending the man who identified himself as 5i;aldy Conde. +he neighbors as well as a s her two daughters and 4herwin Ba@e brought the accused to the house of o f Barangay Councilman Ben 4ilerio who was liing nearby. 9ater on, Councilman 4ilerio brought the accused to the Police 4tation accom'anied by Patricia and her two daughters as well as 4herwin Ba@e. On their way to the Police 4tation, the accused threatened to ra'e Patricia again and the latter-s two daughter2 once he was released. &'on arrial at the Caloocan City Police P olice 4tation, the case was inestigated by Cor'oral Alberto aid. Patricia e)ecuted a sworn statement on this case at about 137? A.M. of the same day October >0, 0<0, 0<0 October 0<

0>K

r. Bienenido Muo;, the MedicoD9egal Officer of the ational Bureau of Inestigation #BI% who 'hysically e)amined the 'riate com'lainant, made the following findings and conclusions3 68I+A9 8AMIA+ 8AMI A+IO3 IO3 Pubic hair, fully grown, abundant. 9abia ma@ora and labia minora, both ga'ing. :ourchette, la). $estibule, $estibule, 'inkish. (ymen, reduced to carunculae myrtiformis. $aginal $aginal orifice, admits ad mits a tube, >. cm. in diameter. $aginal $aginal walls, la). 5ugosities, obliterated. COC9&4IO43 0. o eid eident ent sig signn of e)t e)tra ragen genit ital al 'hy 'hysi sical cal in@ in@ur urie iess note notedd on the the body body of the the sub sub@e @ect ct at at the the time of e)amination. 1. $agina ginall orif orific icee wide wide #>. #>. cm. cm. in dia diame mete ter% r% as as to allo allow w com' com'le lete te 'en 'enet etra rati tion on by an aerageDsi;ed, adult male organ in full erection without 'roducing new hymenal [email protected]? (e further testified that it is 'ossible for a woman to be ra'ed while aslee' and that if she has e)'erienced childbirth seeral times, she may be ra'ed een without being awakened.00 +he a''ellant, the lone witness for the defense, d efense, denied the charge of ra'e. (e claimed that the night before the incident in !uestion he had a drinking session with his brother and cousin at his home at :ourth Aenue, Aenue, Ealookan City. (e became too drunk that his h is brother had to hail a 'assenger @ee'ney for him to re'ort to his em'loyer, Ma@or 8dilberto 4antos, Chief of the Ealookan City Police 4tation. uring the ride, he lost consciousness and could no longer recall what trans'ired thereafter.01 thereafter.01 (e only regained consciousness when he was being mauled by seeral 'ersons ' ersons in front of the house of the 'riate com'lainant. +he latter accosted and asked him what he was doing in front of her house. (e a'ologi;ed, but instead the 'riate com'lainant struck a lighted cigarette on his face. (e was eentually brought to the 'olice station. +here, he learned that he was being accused of ra'ing the 'riate com'lainant. (e then re!uested that he be allowed to seek the hel' of his em'loyer but to no aail.0> +he a''ellant admitted that he had no idea why the 'riate com'lainant whom he neer met before would contrie the charge of ra'e. (e surmised that his close association association with his em'loyer could be the source of eny of the inestigating officer, PUC'l. Alberto Alberto aid, who ha''ened to be a neighbor of the 'riate com'lainant.07 +he trial court re@ected the ersion of the a''ellant noting that he had admitted to haing been arrested while he was outside the residence of the ictim in the early morning of >0 October 0<

0><

In this a''eal, the a''ellant im'utes u'on the trial court the following errors3 0.

I :I :II I6 6 +(A +(A+ + +(85 +(858 8 *A *A4 5AP 5AP8 8 I I +(8 +(8 I4 I4+ +A+ CA48 CA4822

1. I 6I$I 6I$I6 6 C58 C588 8C8 C8 +O +(8 +(8 P5O P5O48 48C& C&+I +IO O 8$I 8$I8 8C8 C8 PA5+IC&9 IC&9A5 A59 9S +(8 +84+IMOI84 O: P5I$A+8 COMP9AIA+ PA+5ICIA OP8]A 8 FA5AMI99O A 4(I598S FA5AMI99O2 >. I :I :II I6 6 +(A +(A+ + +(8 +(8 8$I 8$I8 8C C8 8 :O5 :O5 +(8 +(8 P5O P5O48 48C& C&+I +IO O (A (A 84+AB9I4(8 84+AB9I4(8 B8SO 58A4OAB98 O&B+ +(8 6&I9+ 6&I9+ O: APP899A+ :O5 +(8 C5IM8 O: 5AP8.0= +he a''ellant asserts that the medicoDlegal findings negate the alleged ra'e in that nothing therein shows that there were manifestations of recent se)ual intercourse or any indication that the 'riate com'lainant suffered e)tragenital 'hysical in@uries. Considering that she has been se'arated from her husband since 0

07?

Court will not interfere with the @udgment of the trial court in 'assing on the credibility of o''osing witnesses unless there a''ears in the record some facts or circumstances of weight and influence which hae been oerlooked, which if considered would affect a ffect the result of the case. +he reason therefor is founded on 'ractical and em'irical considerations. +he trial @udge is in a better 'osition to decide the !uestion of credibility, credibility, since he has 'ersonally heard the witnesses and obsered their de'ortment and manner mann er of testifying.0J Our meticulous and dis'assionate reiew of the eidence leads us to the conclusion that, e)ce't as to the amount of indemnity awarded awa rded to the 'riate com'lainant, the trial court committed no error of fact or of law in its challenged decision. +he ra'e was consummated een before the 'riate com'lainant was awakened. According to her, she was awakened at the time when something hard ha rd D the a''ellant-s 'enis D had 'enetrated her 'riate organ. +he entry or 'enetration was thus accom'lished acco m'lished while she was still aslee'. 4he may be considered to be unconscious then, for slee' is the "natural usu. regular sus'ension of consciousness during which the 'owers of the body bo dy are restored," 0K or "a natural or artificially induced state of sus'ension of sensory and motor actiity."0< actiity."0< &nder Article >> of the 5eised Penal Code, ra'e is committed by haing carnal knowledge of a woman who is, inter alia, unconscious. +he said Article 'roides in 'art as follows3 Art. Art. >>. >>. *hen *hen and and how how ra'e ra'e is commi committ tted ed.. 5a' 5a'ee is is com commi mitt tted ed by hai haing ng carn carnal al knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances3 )))

)))

)))

1.

*hen *hen the the wom woman an is de'ri de'ried ed of reas reason on or othe otherw rwis isee unc uncon onsc scio ious us22 and and . . .

+his Court has held that carnal knowledge with a woman who is aslee' constitutes ra'e.1? *e find undesering of any consideration, for being 'urely s'eculatie, the a''ellant-s contention of im'robability or im'ossibility that the 'riate com'lainant was unable to wake u' before the 'enetration of a male organ into her 'riate organ since she could not hae been sound aslee' for she was e)'ecting her children to arrie home and that she has had no se)ual contact since 0

070

based on the erroneous theory that wheneer a witness discloses in his testimony in court facts facts which he failed to state in his affidait taken ante litem motam, then an inconsistency e)ists between the testimony and the affidait. +here can be an inconsistency if what the witness has disclosed in his affidait is contrary to that he disclosed in his testimony in court, b ut not when what he has stated in o'en court are but details or additional facts not mentioned men tioned in the affidait. Being taken e)D'arte, affidaits are almost always incom'lete and often inacc urate, sometimes from 'artial suggestion or for want of suggestions and in!uiries, without the aid of which the witness may be unable to recall the connected collateral circumstances necessary for the correction of the first suggestion of his memory and for his accurate recollection of all that belongs to the sub@ect. +heir infirmity as a s'ecies of eidence is a matter of @udicial e)'erience. +hey are generally considered to be inferior to the testimony gien in o'en court.10 Besides, the witnesses were neer confronted by the defense counsel on the alleged inconsistencies. 4ection 0>, 5ule 0>1 of the 5ules of Court 'roides for the 'rocedure of im'eaching witnesses by eidence of inconsistent statements. It reads3 4ec. 4ec. 0>. 0>. (ow (ow witn witnes esss im' im'ea each ched ed by by ei eide denc ncee of inco incons nsis iste tent nt sta state tem ments ents.. D Bef Befor oree a witness can be im'eached by b y eidence that he has made at other times statements inconsistent with his 'resent testimony, the statements must be related to him, with the circumstances of the times and 'laces and the 'ersons 'resent, and he must be asked whether he made such statements, and if so, allowed to e)'lain them. If the statements be in writing they must be shown to the witness before any !uestion is 'ut to him concerning them. :inally, een assuming that what the a''ellant a' 'ellant had 'ointed out are indeed inconsistencies, they are on triial or minor matters. It is settled that such inconsistencies do not im'air the essential integrity of the 'rosecution-s eidence as a whole or detract from the witnesses- testimony2 on the contrary, they they een tend to strengthen rather than weaken the credibility of the 'rosecution witnesses because they erase the sus'icion of a rehearsed testimony.11 testimony.11 +he a''ellant-s attack on the testimony of the 'rosecution witnesses regarding the threat he made while on their way to the 'olice station is entirely irreleant. In any eent, his @ustification why he could not hae made such threat fails to 'ersuade. *e thus find futile all the attem'ts of the a''ellant to raise dou bts on the testimonies of the 'riate com'lainant and her daughter 4hirley. (e has not een 'roided any im'ro'er motie why the said witnesses would falsely im'ute u'on him the commission of ra'e. All that he could surmise is that PUC'l. Alberto Alberto aid, the 'olice inestigator who conducted the inestigation in this case, is a neighbor of the 'riate com'lainant. Set, Set, when asked on direct e)amination what that has to do with the filing of the charge of ra'e, the a''ellant merely answered that he did not know. +hus3 R

#A++S. PACI4%

4o if aid is a neighbor of the com'lainant, what is the material connection of his being a neighbor to this fabricated charge according to you because you are denying den ying this chargeG


071

*I+844

#A%

I do not know, sir.1> +he absence of any an y im'ro'er motie on the 'art of the 'riate com'lainant is further shown by other circumstances in this case. 4he did not no t know the a''ellant before the incident. After she woke u' and came to know of the se)ual assault, she immediately 'ushed the a''ellant and tried to run after him. 4he then re'orted the incident to the 'olice authorities2 au thorities2 e)ecuted a sworn statement2 submitted herself to 'hysical e)amination by a MedicoD9egal Officer of the BI2 and subscribed and swore to a com'laint for ra'e, which would necessarily result in her e)'osure to the ordeal of a 'ublic trial. +he s'ontaneity of these acts clearly demonstrate her sincere desire to bring the a''ellant to @ustice. +he a''ellant-s defense of denial, which is inherently weak, cannot 'reail oer the clear and 'ositie testimony of the 'riate com'lainant.17 *e thus thus affirm the @udgment of the trial court, sub@ect to the modification of the indemnity. +he award of P1?,???.?? as ciil c iil indemnity to the 'riate com'lainant is insufficient and is not in accord with the current 'olicy of the Court. It should be increased to P?,???.?? P? ,???.?? in the light of the attendant circumstances in this case. *(858:O58, the instant a''eal is I4MI448 and the challenged ch allenged decision of Branch 017 of the 5egional +rial Court of Ealookan City in Criminal Case o. ?D>=?7 finding acc usedD a''ellant 5IVA9S CO8 y CO5+84 guilty beyond reasonable doubt of ra'e is hereby A::I5M8, with modification on the award of ciil indemnity to the 'riate com'lainant, Patricia O'ea de Faramillo, which is hereby increased from P1?,???.?? to P?,???.??. People v. Andres

A''ellant 5omy Andres was charged before the 5egional +rial Court of Bangui, Ilocos orte with the crime of ra'e in four #7% se'arate com'laints filed by 5uwerose A. Cor'u;. +hese were docketed as Criminal Cases o. JJ=D0<, JJJD0<, JJKD0< and JJ and the last on May 0?, 0, the trial court rendered its ecision= ac!uitting the a''ellant in Criminal Cases o. JJJD0<, JJKD0< and JJ

07>

(oweer, in Criminal Case o. JJ=D0<, the Court finds him 6&I9+S 6&I9+S beyond reasonable doubt of ra'e as defined under 'aragra'h #>% of Article >> of the 5eised Penal Code, as amended, and hereby im'oses on him the 'enalty of reclusion 'er'etua, with all the accessory 'enalties 'roided by law, and further sentences him to 'ay moral damages to 5uwerose Cor'u; in the amount of :I:+S +(O&4A P84O4 #P?,???.??%, Phili''ine currency, and to 'ay the costs. (e shall be credited in the serice of his sentence the full time during which he had undergone 'reentie im'risonment if he agreed oluntarily in writing to abide by the same disci'linary disci'linary rules im'osed u'on conicted 'risoners, otherwise, he shall be credited the serice thereof with only fourDfifths of the time during which he had undergone 'reentie ' reentie im'risonment.J In this a''eal, we shall only reiew the trial court-s ruling in Criminal Case o. JJ=D0< where he was conicted. +he lone assignment of error made by accusedDa''ellant in his Brief states3 +he trial court erred in finding the accusedDa''ellant accusedDa''e llant 5omy Andres guilty beyond a shadow of doubt of the crime of ra'e des'ite the im'lied consent of 5uwerose A. Cor'u; to the se)ual act.K +he 'rosecution-s case rests mainly on the testimony of the com'lainant. 4he narrated during the trial that sometime in :ebruary 0

077

+he trial court conicted the a''ellant for statutory ra'e under the third 'aragra'h of Article >> of the 5eised Penal Code which 'roides3 Art. >>. *hen and how ra'e is committed. D 5a'e is committed by haing carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances3 0.

By using force or intimidation2

1.

*hen the woman is de'ried of reason or otherwise unconscious2 and

>.

*hen the woman is under twele years of age or is demented.

)))

)))

)))

&nder the third 'aragra'h, two elements must be established to hold the accused guilty of ra'e, namely3 #0% that the accused had carnal knowledge of a woman and #1% that the woman is below twele years of age. 0> In the case at bar, it is undis'uted that the com'lainant was only eleen years old in :ebruary 0. Breast D sha'e, firm.

fairly deelo'ed, conical in

i''le D

small, 'inkish in color.


07

D

Pelic 8)amination3

Pubic hair

D

absent.

9abia ma@ora D length.

coa'tated at its entire

9abia minora D length.

coa'tated at its entire

$etibulae mucosa

D

:ourchet

la).

D

$aginal rugusities $agina D

D

'inkish.

'rominent.

readily admits 1 fingers.

(ymenD with old laceration between 7   o-clock inoling full thickness of hymen, with recent laceration at <3?? o-clock inoling 'artial thickness of hymen with erythematous border. 4'ermato;oa smear

D

negatie.

+he old laceration in the hymen, the la)ity of the fourchet and the admission by the agina of two 'robing fingers without resistance are all eidence of 'en etration by the male organ into the com'lainant-s genital tract.0J Com'lainant 'ositiely identified the a''ellant as the cul'rit. Com'lainant-s testimony, as corroborated by the medicoDlegal re'ort, must 'reail oer a''ellant-s 'lain denial of the charges against him. Com'lainant was only 0> years old when she took the witness- stand. *e hae often re'eated that it is ery unlikely for such young girl, se)ually ine)'erienced as she is, to fabricate a story of defloration, allow the e)amination of her 'riate 'arts and 'ermit herself to be the sub@ect of a 'ublic trial if it is not true that she has been ra'ed. Certainly, no decent girl would e)'ose herself to humiliation and 'ublic scandal unless she is motiated by a strong desire to seek @ustice. 0K A''ellant aers that the trial court erred in finding him guilty of ra'e des'ite the im'lied consent of the com'lainant to the se)ual act. 0< (e argues that com'lainant-s failure to resist his adances shows that she consented to the act, thus 'recluding ra'e.


07=

A''ellant-s argument deseres scant consideration. A''ellant was conicted under the third 'aragra'h of Article >>< of the 5eised Penal Code which is known in legal 'arlance as statutory ra'e. In this s'ecie of ra'e, consent is immaterial. +he mere fact of haing se)ual relations with a girl below twele years old makes a man guilty of ra'e. 1? $oluntariness on the 'art f the girl is not a defense since the law 'resumes that a child below twele years old cannot gie an intelligent consent to the se)ual act. I $I8* *(858O:, the ecision a''ealed from is A::I5M8 in toto. People v. $agrosa

Angelyn dela Cru;, an eleenDyearDold lass and a grade fie 'u'il, assisted by her mother, Araceli $. dela Cru;, filed with the Munici'al Circuit +rial Court of CuyoDAgutayaDMagsaysay in Palawan, a com'laint for ra'e on two counts 0 against her adiser and teacher, onator 9agrosa, Fr. A 'reliminary inestigation was conducted by the court which found cause to hold the accused for trial and forwarded the records of the case to the Office of the Proincial Palawan. On = May 0<<0, the Office of the Proincial Prosecutor filed se'arate informations for 5a'e against the accused with the 5egional +rial Court of Palawan which docke ted them as Criminal Cases os. <>7 and <>7=. +hey were subse!uently raffled off to Branch 1 of the said court with seat at Puerto Princesa City. +he accusatory 'ortion of the information in Criminal Case o. <>7 reads3 +hat on or about the 1Kth day of oember, 0<7= is similarly worded, > e)ce't as to the date and 'lace of the commission of the offense, which are 1 Fanuary 0<<0 and the health corner of the Balading 8lementary 4chool. +he accused entered a 'lea of not guilty in each case during his arraignment on 0? Fune 0<<0. 7 At the trial on the merits, the 'rosecution 'resented as witnesses the 'riate com'lainant2 her mother, Araceli2 r. Ale@andro Caia2 and Mrs. Ofelia Monto@o :ernande;. +he defense


07J

'resented the accused2 his son, onato 9agrosa III2 his wife, 8li;a2 and 5oy $illagarcia as its witnesses. +he eidence for the 'rosecution, which is 'resented in detail in the decision, is summari;ed as follows3 In schoolDyear 0<

07K

In the meanwhile, Mrs. Ofelia :ernande;, (ead +eacher of the Balading 8lementary 4chool, h ad been receiing re'eated re'orts about the attitude of the accused towards Angelyn. As a result, Mrs. :ernande; called the teachers to a meeting to make in!uiries. (er coDteachers, Mr. $illagarcia and Ms. 9inda Omeda, reealed to her that they saw the accused on two different occasions intimately conersing with Angelyn. +he latter-s classmates likewise re'orted to Mrs. :ernande; that their teacher, accused onato 9agrosa, F., g ae s'ecial attention and faors to Angelyn. +o erify these re'orts, Mrs. :ernande; gae a summatie test in 4cience2 Angelyn obtained the lowest grade in this test. *hen Mrs. :ernande; was asked by one of her 'u'il why the com'lainant got the lowest score in her class but obtained the highest score in the sub@ects handled by the accused, she !uestioned her 'u'il, Marita Belmonte, on why she got high grades in the other sub@ects. Marita diulged to her that in connection with the e)aminations in Math and 8nglish, she saw the accused writing the answers on a small sheet of 'a'er and giing the said answers to Angelyn who also 'assed them to her #Marita%. < On 1< March 0<<0, Mrs. :ernande; adised Angelyn-s mother, Araceli, to watch closely her daughter. 0? Araceli confronted Angelyn about the re'orts that the accused had been giing unusual attention to her. Angelyn initially denied these re'orts. Araceli ke't on asking her s'ecially because the accused had been coming to her house during the months of :ebruary and March, 0<<0. :inally, in the eening of >? March 0<<0, Angelyn confided to her mother that she was se)ually abused by the accused on 1K oember 0< +he accused denied haing ra'ed Angelyn on 1K oember 0<3>? '.m. and instructed them to water the 'lants and to go home thereafter. At about >37 '.m., he 'roceeded to the room of Mrs. :ernande; and stayed there until 730 '.m. +hen, together with Mr. $illagarcia and Amado +imbancaya, he went to his house. After his com'anions left at 7.37 '.m., he attended to his household chores. (e did not return to his office from the time he went to the office of Mrs. :ernande; until the succeeding school day. (e also denied haing gien money and "codigos" or 're'ared answer to Angelyn. 07


07<

:inally, he claimed that the cases against him were filed through the instigation of Mrs. Ofelia :ernande; who hated him because of his unfaorable comments and criticisms against the official conduct of her husband, the Barangay Ca'tain of Balading. +he :ernande;es wanted him to remoed as a teacher of the Balading 8lementary 4chool. 0 On 10 May 0<<1, the court 'romulgated its @oint decision 0= finding the accused guilty in Criminal Case o. <>7 but ac!uitting him in Criminal Case o. <>7=. +he decretal 'ortion of the decision reads3 *(858:O58, 'remises considered, a @oint @udgment is hereby rendered3 A. C5IMIA9 CA48 O. <>7  :inding the accused OA+O 9A65O4A, F5. guilty beyond reasonable doubt as 'rinci'al of the crime of statutory ra'e committed against Angelyn dela Cru;, a female child only 00 years of age, and there being no modifying circumstances a''reciated, and not being entitled to the benefits of the Indeterminate 4entence 9aw, he is hereby sentenced to reclusion 'er'etua2 to 'ay the offended 'arty, Angelyn dela Cru;, moral damages of P?,???.??, and the costs. B. C5IMIA9 CA48 O. <>7=  On grounds of reasonable doubt, engendered by a finding that the eidence of commission of the offense charged in Criminal Case o. <>7= has not been im'ressed with that degree of credence sufficient to 'roe with moral certainty the guilt of the accused, he is hereby ac!uitted of the offense charged. 4O O5858. 0J :ro the aboe aderse decision in Criminal case o. <>7, the accused a''ealed to us. (e seeks its reersal on the basis of his lone assignment of error3 +(8 +5IA9 CO&5+ AC+8 *I+( 65A$8 AB&48 O: I4C58+IO AMO&+I6 +O 9ACE O: F&5I4IC+IO I O+ ACR&I++I6 ACC&48 84PI+8 COMP9AIA+-4 MAI:84+9S O&B+:&9 ACCO&+ O: +(8 A99868 5AP8 O: 1K O$8MB85 0<7= because "the trial court saw it fit to disbeliee Angelyn-s account" of the incident therein, such a disbelief "certainly argues against her credibility in general as well as s'ecifically concerns her account of the alleged ra'e of 1K oember 0<

0?

+he a''ellee urges us to re@ect this a''eal and to affirm in toto the challenged decision because the arguments in su''ort of the lone assignment of error are weak and untenable. 1> *e find the a''eal to be bereft of merit. At the outset, it must be em'hasi;ed that since Angelyn was under 01 years of age, carnal knowledge alone of her is ra'e. It is not re!uired that the assailant used force or intimidation, or that she is de'ried of reason or is otherwise unconscious. 17 +he resolution of this a''eal hinges on the credibility of Angelyn. It is a settled rule that this Court will not interfere with the @udgment of the trial court in determining the credibility of witnesses, unless there a''ears in the record some fact or circumstance of weight and influence which has been oerlooked or the significance of which has been misinter'reted. 1 +he reason for this is that the trial court is in a better 'osition to decide the !uestion, haing heard the witnesses themseles and obsered their de'ortment and manner of testifying during the trial. 1= It has the direct o''ortunity to obsere witnesses on the stand and detect if they are telling the truth or lying through their teeth. 1J +here are certain matters that aid the trial court in assessing the credibility of a witness which are not aailable to the a''ellate court such as, the em'hasis, gesture, and the inflection of the oice of the witness. 1K In the instant case, the trial court had the distinct o''ortunity to make such obserations and to aail of such aids while Angelyn was on the witness stand. *e find no reason to dis'ute the trial court-s @udgment on the credibility of Angelyn. Our own reading of her testimony discloses a 'ure and sim'le barrio lass who, des'ite her traumatic e)'erience, weathered the lengthy and rigorous crossDe)amination in a unfamiliar, if not unfriendly, courtroom atmos'here. 4he re mained unshaken and her res'onsie and concise answers only enhanced the truthfulness of her story of defloration. +his was not the only ordeal she underwent after the assault on her irtue and the desecration of her chastity2 earlier, she allowed her 'riate organ to be thoroughly e)amined by a doctor if only to hae medical 'roof that she was indeed ra'ed. +ime and again, this Court had said, that no unmarried woman would tell a story of defloration, allow the e)amination of her 'riate 'art, and thereafter 'ermit herself to be the sub@ect of a 'ublic trial unless she was really raished and she wants @ustice to be done. 1< +his is s'ecially true of a female below twele years of age, like Angelyn, who is still unaffected by mundane wiles. Angelyn-s delay in re'orting the crime does not cast doubt on her credibility. At her tender age, she could not be e)'ected to react like a mature 'erson. 4he was in a !uandary because her own assailant was her teacher and adiser who not only had ascendancy and control oer her success or failure in school but also threatened to kill her if she would re'ort what he did to her. :ear, more than reason, dominated her. It has been held that delay in re'orting a ra'e incident due to death threats cannot be taken against the ictim. >? It is not uncommon for young girls to conceal for sometime the assaults on their irtue because of the ra'ists- threat on their lies. >0 +he claimed transmogrification of onato III into onato Fr. is a 'lay on the imagination. As e)'lained by Angelyn, although she had re!uested onato III to accom'any her the second time the accused directed her to go to his house, she discoered when she o'ened the door of the


00

house that it was the accused who had followed her. It was not im'ossible for him to hae followed the ictim without her noticing and it was established beyond doubt that he indeed ra'ed her inside the room of his house. +he accused-s allegation that Angelyn showed u' inside her classroom that same morning of 1K oember 0<1 4he did not immediately return to her classroom because she was not yet ready to face her classmates. +hus, her conduct conformed to the natural reaction o f a bewildered ictim of a se)ual assault. or can the accused-s ac!uittal in Criminal Case o. <>7= be a ground for his ac!uittal in Criminal Case o. <>7. 4uch ac!uittal was based on reasonable doubt. +he circumstances in Criminal Case o. <>7= mentioned by the trial court in its decision are not attendant in Criminal Case o. <>7 where the accused had the unham'ered o''ortunity to satisfy his bestial lust on 1K oember 0<> nor initiate a com'laint for ra'e, or sub@ect a daughter to a 'hysical e)amination and the humiliation of a 'ublic trial unless she was motiated by an honest desire to hae the cul'rit 'unished, >7 then with more reason that she would not do so merely u'on the instigation of another. +here is no showing at all that Araceli was under the oer'owering influence of Mrs. :ernande;. Moreoer, there is no eidence that Mrs. :ernande; harbored any illDmotie against the accused which could hae moed her to use Araceli to destroy him. (e and Mrs. :ernande; were obiously in good terms. (e een held his birthday 'arty on 1 Fanuary 0<<0 in her office. > Mrs. Ofelia :ernande; also testified that she did not hae any grudge against the accused and that she and his wife are the best of friends. >= :inally, the accused could not attribute to Angelyn and her mother any ulterior or im'ro'er motie for charging him with ra'e. 4ince no such motie of Angelyn and her mother was shown, their testimonies are entitled to full faith and credit. >J +he accused took full adantage of his 'osition as teacher and class adiser of Angelyn. &sing his ascendancy oer her, he made her a ictim and a ca'tie of his lust. *hat he did was highly condemnable. (e flouted the 'ublic trust character of his office which demanded from him serice with utmost res'onsibility and integrity2 >K and made a mocker y of the solemn duties of one e)ercising s'ecial 'arental authority >< to educate and instruct his ward by right 'rece't and good e)am'le and to 'roide her with moral and s'iritual guidance. 7? (e 'aid no heed to the 'rece't that as a teacher he was to be 'aragon of u'rightness, morality, and integrity. +he educational system is not the 'lace for beasts like him.


01

*(858:O58, finding the challenged decision in Criminal Case o. <>7 of Branch 1 of the 5egional +rial Court of Palawan to be in accord with the law and fully su''orted by the facts, this Court hereby A::I5M4 it in toto. People v. *chegara

Amidst the endless debates on whether or not the reim'osition of the death 'enalty is indeed a deterrent as far as the commission of heinous crimes is concerned and while the attendant details 'ertaining to the e)ecution of a death sentence remain as yet another burning issue, we are tasked with 'roiding a clearDcut resolution of whether or not the herein accusedDa''ellant deseres to forfeit his 'lace in human society for the infliction of the 'rimitie and bestial act of incestuous lust on his own blood. Before us for automatic reiew is the @udgment of coniction, dated 4e'tember J, 0<<7, for the crime of 5a'e, rendered after marathon hearing by the 5egional +rial Court of Rue;on City, Branch 0?7, the dis'ositie 'ortion of which reads3 *(858:O58, @udgment is hereby rendered finding accused 98O 8C(86A5AS S PI9O guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of 5AP8 as charged in the com'laint, aggraated by the fact that the same was commited by the accused who is the fatherUste'father of the com'lainant, he is hereby sentenced to suffer the 'enalty of 8A+(, as 'roided for under 5A. o. J=<, to 'ay the com'lainant 5odessa 8chegaray the sum of P?,???.?? as damages, 'lus all the accessory 'enalties 'roided by law, without subsidiary im'risonment in case of insolency, and to 'ay the costs. 0 *e note, howeer, that the charge had been formulated in this manner3 COMP9AI+ +he undersigned accuses 98O 8C(86A5AS S PI9O of the crime of 5AP8, committed as follows3 +hat on or about the month of A'ril 0<<7, in Rue;on City, Phili''ines, the aboeDnamed accused, by means of force and intimidation did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously hae carnal knowledge of the undersigned com'lainant, his daughter, a minor, 0? years of age, all against her will and without her consent, to her damage and 're@udice. CO+5A5S +O 9A* 1 &'on being arraigned on August 0, 0<<7, the accusedDa''ellant, assisted by his counsel de oficio, entered the 'lea of "not guilty." +hese are the 'ertinent facts of the case as summari;ed by the 4olicitorD6eneral in his brief3 +his is a case of ra'e by the father of his tenDyear old daughter.


0>

Com'lainant 5O844A 8C(86A5AS is a tenDyear old girl and a fifthDgrader, born on 4e'tember 00, 0. 5odessa is the eldest of fie siblings. 4he has three brothers aged =,  and 1, res'ectiely, and a >Dmonth old baby sister. (er 'arents are 5osalie and 9eo 8chegaray, the latter being the accusedDa''ellant himself. +he ictim lies with her family in a small house located at o. 0<< :ernande; 4t., Barangay 4an Antonio, 4an :rancisco el Monte, Rue;on City #''. D<, Aug. <, 0<<7, +4%. 4ometime in the afternoon of A'ril 0<<7, while 5odessa was looking after her three brothers in their house as her mother attended a gambling session in another 'lace, she heard her father, the accusedDa''ellant in this case, order her brothers to go out of the house #''. 0?D00, ibid%. As soon as her brothers left, accusedDa''ellant 9eo 8chegaray a''roached 5odessa and suddenly dragged her inside the room #'. 01, ibid%. Before she could !uestion the a''ellant, the latter immediately, remoed her 'anty and made her lie on the floor #'. 0>, ibid%. +hereafter, a''ellant likewise remoed his underwear and immediately 'laced himself on to' of 5odessa. 4ubse!uently, a''ellant forcefully inserted his 'enis into 5odessa-s organ causing her to suffer intense 'ain #''. 07D0, ibid%. *hile a''ellant was 'um'ing on her, he een uttered. "Masara' ba, masara' baG" and to which 5odessa answered3 "+ama na Pa'a, masakit" #'. 0=, ibid%. 5odessa-s 'lea 'roed futile as a''ellant continued with his act. After satisfying his bestial instinct, a''ellant threatened to kill her mother if she would diulge what had ha''ened. 4cared that her mother would be killed by a''ellant, 5odessa ke't to herself the ordeal she suffered. 4he was ery afraid of a''ellant because the latter, most of the time, was high on drugs #''. 0JD0K, ibid.%. +he same se)ual assault ha''ened u' to the fifth time and this usually took 'lace when her mother was out of the house #'. 0<, ibid.%. (oweer, after the fifth time, 5odessa decided to inform her grandmother, Asuncion 5iera, who in turn told 5osalie, 5adessa-s mother. 5odessa and her mother 'roceeded to the Barangay Ca'tain where 5odessa confided the se)ual assaults she suffered. +hereafter, 5odessa was brought to the 'recinct where she e)ecuted an affidait #'. 10, ibid.%. :rom there, she was accom'anied to the Phili''ine ational Police Crime 9aboratory for medical e)amination #'. 11, ibid.%. 5odessa testified that the said se)ual assaults ha''ened only during the time when her mother was 'regnant. 5odessa added that at first, her mother was on her side. (oweer, when a''ellant was detained, her mother ke't on telling her. "Eawawa naman ang +atay mo, nakakulong" #''. > the com'lainant was described as 'hysically on a nonDirgin state, as eidenced by the 'resence of laceration of the hymen of said com'lainant #+4, Aug. 11, 0<<, ''. KD<%. 7 On the other hand, the accusedDa''ellant-s brief 'resents a different story3 . . . the defense 'resented its first witness, 5osalie 8chegaray. 4he asserted that the 5AP8 charge against the accused was only the figment of her mothers dirty mind. +hat her daughter-s com'laint was forced u'on her by her grandma and the answers in the sworn statement of 5odessa were coached. +hat the accusation of 5AP8 was motiated by 5odessa-s grandmother-s greed oer the lot situated at the Madrigal 8stateD(A Pro@ect, Barangay 4an Antonio, 4an


07

:rancisco del Monte, Rue;on City, which her grandmother-s 'aramour, Conrado Alfonso gae to the accused in order to 'ersuade the latter to admit that 5odessa e)ecuted an affidait of desistance after it turned out that her com'laint of attem'ted homicide was substituted with the crime of 5AP8 at the instance of her mother. +hat when her mother came to know about the affidait of desistance, she 'laced her granddaughter under the custody of the Barangay Ca'tain. +hat her mother was neer a real mother to her. 4he stated that her com'laint against accused was for attem'ted homicide as her husband 'oured alcohol on her body and attem'ted to burn her. 4he identified the certification issued by the (A and +ag o. KJD?><> #8)h. 1%. +hat the Certification based on the Masterlist #8)h. >% indicates that the 'ro'erty is coDowned by accused and Conrado Alfonso. +hat 5odessa is her daughter sired by Conrado Alfonso, the latter being the 'aramour of her mother. +hat Conrado Alfonso waied his right and 'artici'ation oer the lot in faor of the accused in consideration of the latter-s acce'ting the fact that he is the father of 5odessa to simulate the loe triangle and to conceal the nauseating se) orgies from Conrado Alfonso-s real wife. Accused testified in his behalf and stated that the grandmother of the com'lainant has a ery strong motie in im'licating him to the crime of 5AP8 since she was interested to become the sole owner of a 'ro'erty awarded to her lieDin 'artner by the Madrigal 8stateD(A Pro@ect. +hat he could not hae committed the im'uted crime because he considers 5odessa as his own daughter. +hat he is a 'ainterDcontractor and on the date of the alleged c ommission of the crime, he was 'ainting the house of one iina Ang of Barangay $italis, Paraa!ue, Metro Manila #8)h. 7%. +he trael time between his work 'lace to his residence is three #>% hours considering the condition of traffic. +hat the 'ainting contract is eidenced b y a document denominated "Contract of 4erices" duly accom'lished #see submarkings of 8)h. 7%. (e asserted that he has a big se)ual organ which when used to a girl 00 years old like 5odessa, the said female organ will be "mawawarak." +hat it is abnormal to re'ort the im'uted commission of the crime to the grandmother of the ictim. Accused further stated that her #sic% motherDinDlaw trum'edDu' a charge of drug 'ushing earlier and he 'leaded guilty to a lesser offense of using drugs. +he decretal 'ortion of the @udgment of coniction ordering the accused to be confined at the Bicutan 5ehabilitation Center irked the grandmother of 5odessa because it was her wish that accused should be meted the death 'enalty. Accused remain steadfast in his testimony 'erorating the strong motie of 5odessa-s grandmother in im'licating him in this heinous crime because of her greed to become the sole owner of that 'iece of 'ro'erty at the ational (ousing AuthorityDMadrigal Pro@ect, situated at 4an :rancisco del Monte, Rue;on City, notwithstanding rigid crossDe)amination. (e asserted that the im'uted offense is far from his mind considering that he treated 5odessa as his own daughter. (e categorically testified that he was in his 'ainting @ob site on the date and time of the alleged commission of the crime. Mrs. Pun;alan was 'resented as third defense witness. 4he said that she is the laundry woman and 'art time baby sitter of the family of accused. +hat at one time, she saw 5odessa reading se) books and the Bulgar news'a'er. +hat while hanging washed clothes on the acant lot, she saw 5odessa masturbating by tinkering her 'riate 'arts. +he masturbation took sometime.


0

+his se)ual fling of 5odessa were corroborated by 4ilestra 8chegaray, the fourth and last witness for the defense. 4he stated that she tried hard to correct the flirting tendency of 5odessa and that she scolded her when she saw 5odessa iewing an Drated ta'e. 5odessa according to her was fond of going with friends of illDre'ute. +hat #sic% she corroborated the testimony of Mrs. Pun;alan by stating that she herself saw 5odessa masturbating inside the room of her house.  In finding the accusedDa''ellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of ra'e, the lower court dismissed the defense of alibi and lent credence to the straightforward testimony of the tenD year old ictim to whom no ill motie to testify falsely against accusedDa''ellant can be attributed. +he lower court likewise regarded as inconse!uential the defense of the accusedD a''ellant that the e)traordinary si;e of his 'enis could not hae insinuated itself into the ictim-s agina and that the accused is not the real father of the said ictim. +he accusedDa''ellant now reiterates his 'osition in his attem't to seek a reersal of the lower court-s erdict through the following assignment of errors3 0. +(8 9O*85 CO&5+ :AI98 +O APP58CIA+8 +(8 4II4+85 MO+I$8 O: P5I$A+8 COMP9AIA+-4 65AMO+(85G +(A+ P58CIPI+A+8 +(8 :I9I6 O: +(8 C(A568 O: 5AP8, (8C8 I+ 8558 I (O9I6 ACC&48 6&I9+S A4 C(A568. 1. +(8 CO&5+ B89O* O$859OOE8 +(8 :AC+ +(A+ +(8 (8A98 9AC85A+IO4 A+ > A J O-C9OCE CO&9 O+ (A$8 B88 &8 +O +(8 P&MPI6 O: +(8 P8I4 O: ACC&48 +O +(8 $A6IA O: P5I$A+8 COMP9AIA+, (8C8 I+ 8558 I (O9I6 +(A+ ACC&48 COMMI++8 +(8 C5IM8 C(A568, O+*I+(4+AI6 $8(8M8+ 8IA9. >. +(8 CO&5+ A R&O *(IM4ICA99S I6O58 +(8 8:848 O: A9IBI +(A+ ACC&48 *A4 I PA5A]AR&8 O +(8 A+8 A +IM8 O: +(8 IMP&+8 C5IM8 (8C8, I+ 8558 I (O9I6 +(A+ A9IBI I4 O+ 4&4+AIAB98 I +(8 CA48 A+ BA5. = Considering that a ra'e charge, in the light of the reim'osition of the death 'enalty, re!uires a thorough and @udicious e)amination of the circumstances relating thereto, this Court remains guided b the following principles in ealuating eidence in cases of this nature3 #a% An accusation for ra'e can be made with facility2 it is difficult to 'roe but more difficult for the accused though innocent to dis'roe2 #b% In iew of the intrinsic nature of the crime of ra'e where only two 'ersons are inoled, the testimony of the com'lainant must be scrutini;ed with e)treme caution2 and #c% +he eidence for the 'rosecution must stand and fall on its own merits, and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the eidence for the defense. J Anent the first assigned error, no amount of 'ersuasion can conince this Court to tilt the scales of @ustice in faor of the accusedDa''ellant notwithstanding that he cries foul insisting that the ra'e charge was merely concocted and strongly motiated by greed oer a certain lot situated at the (ADMadrigal 8state (ousing Pro@ect, Barangay 4an Antonio, 4an :rancisco del Monte,


0=

Rue;on City. +he accusedDa''ellant theori;es that 'rosecution witness Asuncion 5iera, the maternal grandmother of the ictim 5odessa, concocted the charge of ra'e so that, in the eent that the accusedDa''ellant shall be meted out a death sentence, title to the lot will be consolidated in her faor. Indeed, the lot in !uestion is coDowned by the accusedDa''ellant and Conrado Alfonso, the lieDin 'artner of Asuncion 5iera, according to the records of the ational (ousing Authority #8)h. ">"%. +he accusedDa''ellant would want us to beliee that the ra'e charge was fabricated by Asuncion 5iera in order to eliminate the accusedDa''ellant from being a coD owner. 4o, the lieDin 'artners would hae the 'ro'erty for their own. K *e beliee, as did the 4olicitorD6eneral, that no grandmother would be so callous as to instigate her ?4ear old granddaughter to file a rape case against her own father simpl on account of her alleged interest over the disputed lot .

It is a wellDentrenched @uris'rudential rule that the testimon of a rape victim is credible where she has no motive to testif against the accused . *e find no flaws material enough to discredit the testimony of the tenDyear old 5odessa which the trial court found conincing enough and unrebutted by the defense. +he trial court not sur'risingly noted that 5odessa-s narration in detail of her father-s monstrous acts had made her cry. 00 Once again, we rule that3 . . . +he testimony of the ictim who was only 01 years old at the time of the ra'e as to the circumstances of the ra'e must be gien weight, for testimony of young and immature ra'e ictims are credible #Peo'le . 6uibao, 10J 4C5A =7 0<<>N%. o woman es'ecially one of tender age, 'ractically only a girl, would concoct a story of defloration, allow an e)amination of her 'riate 'arts and thereafter e)'ose herself to a 'ublic trial, if she were not motiated solely by the desire to hae the cul'rit a''rehended and 'unished #Peo'le . 6uibao, su'ra%. 01 +he accusedDa''ellant 'oints out certain inconsistencies in the testimonies of the 'rosecution witnesses in his attem't to bolster his claim that the ra'e accusation against him is malicious and baseless. :irstly, 5odessa-s testimony that the accusedDa''ellant was already naked when he dragged her inside the room is inconsistent with her subse!uent testimony that the said accusedD a''ellant was still wearing short 'ants when she was dragged inside the room. 4econdly, 5odessa-s sworn statement before the 'olice inestigator which indicated that, while the accused was e)ecuting 'um'ing acts, he uttered the words "Masara' baG", differ from her testimony in court wherein she related that, when the accused took out his 'enis from her agina, the accused said "Masara', ta'os na." +hirdly, the ictim-s grandmother, Asuncion 5iera, recounted in her sworn statement that it was the accused who went to see her to a''rise her of the ra'e committed on her granddaughter. (oweer, in her testimony in court , Asuncion 5iera claimed that she was the one who inited the accusedDa''ellant to see her in her house so as to tell her a secret. 0> +hese alleged discre'ancies merely 'ertain to minor details which in no way 'ose serious doubt as to the credibility of the 'rosecution witnesses. *hether or not the accu sed was naked when he dragged 5odessa inside the room where he se)ually assaulted her bears no significant effect on 5odessa-s testimony that she was actually ra'ed by the accusedDa''ellant. Moreoer, a conflicting account of whateer words were uttered by the accusedDa''ellant after he forcefully inserted his 'enis into 5odessa-s 'riate organ against her will cannot im'air the ' rosecution-s


0J

eidence as a whole. A determination of which ersion earmarks the truth as to how the ictim-s grandmother learned about the ra'e is inconse!uential to the @udgment of coniction. As we hae 'ronounced in the case of Peo'le . Faymalin3 07 +his Court has stated time and again that minor inconsistencies in the narration of the witness do not detract from its essential credibility as long as it is on the whole coherent and intrinsically belieable. Inaccuracies may in fact suggest that the witness is telling the truth and has not been rehearsed as it is not to he e)'ected that he will be able to remember eery single detail of an incident with 'erfect or total recall. After due deliberation, this Court finds that the trial @udge-s assessment of the credibility of the 'rosecution witnesses deseres our utmost res'ect in the absence of arbitrariness. *ith res'ect to the second assigned error, the records of the instant case are bereft of clear and concrete 'roof of the accusedDa''ellant-s claim as to the si;e of his 'enis and that if that be the fact, it could not hae merely caused shallow healed lacerations at >3?? and J3?? o-clock. 0 In his testimony, the accusedDa''ellant stated that he could not hae ra'ed 5odessa because of the si;e of his 'enis which could hae ru'tured her agina had he actually done so. 0= +his Court gies no 'robatie alue on the accusedDa''ellant-s selfDsering statement in the light of our ruling in the case of Peo'le . Melio, su'ra, 0J that3 +he aginal wall and the hymenal membrane are elastic organs ca'able of arying degrees of distensibility. +he degree of distensibility of the female re'roductie organ is normally limited only by the character and si;e of the 'elic inlet, other factors being minor. +he female re'rodructie canal being ca'able of allowing 'assage of a regular fetus, there ought to be no difficulty allowing the entry of ob@ects of much lesser si;e, including the male re'roductie organ, which een in its largest dimensions, would still be considerably smaller than the fullD term fetus. )))

)))

)))

In the case at bench, the 'resence of healed lacerations in arious 'arts of he aginal wall, though not as e)tensie as a''ellant might hae e)'ected them to be, indicate traumatic in@ury to the area within the 'eriod when the incidents were su''osed to hae occurred. #At ''. 0>D07, em'hasis su''lied% In ra'e cases, a broken hymen is not an essential element thereof. 0K A mere knocking at the doors of the 'udenda, so to s'eak, by the accused-s 'enis suffices to constitute the crime of ra'e as full entry into the ictim-s agina is not re!uired to sustain a coniction. 0< In the case, r. :reyra, the medicoDlegal e)aminer, categorically testified that the healed lacerations of 5odessa on her agina were consistent with the date of the commission of the ra'e as narrated by the ictim to hae taken 'lace in A'ril, 0<<7. 1? 9astly, the third assigned error deseres scant consideration. +he accusedDa''ellant erroneously argues that the Contract of 4erices #8)hibit 7% offered as eidence in su''ort of the accusedD


0K

a''ellant-s defense of alibi need not be corroborated because there is no law e)'ressly re!uiring so. 10 In iew of our finding that the 'rosecution witnesses hae no motie to falsely testify against the accusedDa''ellant, the defense of alibi, in this case, uncorroborated by other witnesses, should be com'letely disregarded. 11 More im'ortantly, the defense of alibi which is inherently weak becomes een weaker in the face of 'ositie identification of the accusedD a''ellant as 'er'etrator of the crime of ra'e by his ictim, 5odessa. 1> +he Contract of 4erices whereby the accusedDa''ellant obligated himself to do some 'ainting @ob at the house of one iina Ang in Paraa!ue, Metro Manila, within 1 days from A'ril 7, 0<<7, is not 'roof of the whereabouts of the accusedDa''ellant at the time of the commission of the offense. +he accusedDa''ellant in this case is charged with 4tatutory 5a'e on the basis of the com'laint, dated Fuly 07, 0<<7. +he graamen of the said offense, as stated in 'aragra'h >, Article >> of the 5eised Penal Code, is the carnal knowledge of a woman below twele years old. 17 5odessa 'ositiely identified his father accusedDa''ellant, as the cul'rit of 4tatutory 5a'e. (er account of how the accusedDa''ellant succeeded in consummating his grieous and odious se)ual assault on her is free from any substantial selfDcontradiction. It is highly inconceiable that it is rehearsed and fabricated u'on instructions from 5odessa-s maternal grandmother Asuncion 5iera as asserted by the accusedDa''ellant. +he words of Chief Fustice 8nri!ue M. :ernando, s'eaking for the Court, more than two decades ago, are releant and worth reiterating, thus3 . . . it is manifest in the decisions of this Court that where the offended 'arties are young and immature girls like the ictim in this case, #Cited cases omitted% there is marked rece'tiity on its, 'art to tend credence to their ersion of what trans'ired. It is not to be wondered at. +he state, as 'arens 'atria, is under the obligation to minimi;e the risk of harm to those, who, because of their minority, are as yet unable to take care of themseles fully. +hose of tender years desere its utmost 'rotection. Moreoer, the in@ury in cases of ra'e is not inflicted on the unfortunate ictim alone. +he consternation it causes her family must also be taken into account It may reflect a failure to abide by the announced concern in the fundamental law for such institution +here is all the more reason then for the rigorous a''lication of the 'enal law with its seere 'enalty for this offense, wheneer warranted. It has been a'tly remarked that with the adance in ciili;ation, the disru'tion in 'ublic 'eace and order it re'resents defies e)'lanation, much more so in iew of what currently a''ears to be a tendency for se)ual 'ermissieness. *here the 'ros'ects of relationshi' based on consent are hardly minimal, selfDrestraint should een be more marked. 1 &nder 4ection 00 of 5e'ublic Act o. J=< often referred to as the eath Penalty 9aw, Art. >> of the 5eised Penal Code was amended, to wit3 +he death 'enalty shall also be im'osed if the crime of ra'e is committed with any of the following attendant circumstances3 0. *hen the ictim is under eigthteen #0K% years of age and the offender is a 'arent, ascendant, ste'D'arent, guardian, relatie by consanguinity or affinity within the third ciil degree, or the commonDlaw s'ouse of the 'arent of the ictim.


0<

)))

)))

)))

#8m'hasis su''lied% A''arently, as a last glim'se of ho'e, the accusedDa''ellant !uestions the 'enalty im'osed b y the trial court by declaring that he is neither a father, ste'father or grandfather of 5odessa although he was a confirmed loer of 5odessa-s mother. 1= On direct e)amination, he admitted that before the charge of ra'e was riled against him, he had treated 5odessa as his real daughter and had 'roided for her food, clothing, shelter and education. 1J +he Court notes that 5odessa uses the surname of the accusedDa''ellant, not 5iera #her mother-s maiden name% nor Alfonso #her grandmother-s lieDin 'artner%. Moreoer, 5odessa-s mother stated during the crossDe)amination that she, the accusedDa''ellant, and her fie children, including 5odessa, had been residing in one house only. 1K At any rate, een if he were not the father, ste'father or grandfather of 5odessa, this disclaimer cannot sae him from the abyss where 'er'etrators of heinous crimes ought to be, as mandated by law. Considering that the accusedDa''ellant is a confirmed loer of 5odessa-s mother, 1< he falls s!uarely within the afore!uoted 'ortion of the eath Penalty 9aw under the term "commonDlaw s'ouse of the 'arent of the ictim." +he fact that the tenDyear old 5odessa referred to the accusedDa''ellant as "Pa'a" is reason enough to conclude that accusedDa''ellant is either the father or ste'father of 5odessa. +hus, the act of se)ual assault 'er'etrated by the accused on his young ictim has become all the more re'ulsie and 'ererse. +he ictim-s tender age and the accusedDa''ellant-s moral ascendancy and influence oer her are factors which forced 5odessa to succumb to the accused-s selfish and bestial craing. +he law has made it ineitable under the circumstances of this case that the accusedDa''ellant face the su'reme 'enalty of death. *(858:O58, we A::I5M the decision of the 5egional +rial Court. People v. Atuel

+he accusedDa''ellant, caught in flagrante in the act of ra'e, insists he did not do it and instead, boldly attributes it to another 'erson, but fails to conince this Court. AccusedDa''ellant 8rnesto Atuel was charged with the crime of ra'e under Article >> of the 5eised Penal Code, before the 5egional +rial Court of aao City, 00th Fudicial 5egion, Branch 00, 0 in a Criminal Com'laint subscribed by the mother of the com'lainant and a''roed by City Prosecutor Antonio $.A. +an, which com'laint reads as follows3 1 +he undersigned, mother of the com'lainantD:89ICI+A4 4ASO, who is a mental 'atient, after haing been duly sworn to #sic% in accordance with law, accuses the aboeDnamed accused of the crime of 5AP8, under with Article >>, 'aragra'h 0 of the 5eised Penal Code, committed as follows3 +hat on or about August 1>, 0<<0, in the City of aao, Phili''ines, and within the @urisdiction of this (onorable Court, the aboeDmentioned accused, by means of force and intimidation,


0=?

wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously hae #sic% carnal knowledge with the com'lainantD:elicitas 4ayon, who is a mental 'atient, against her will. CO+5A5S +O 9A*. aao City, Phili''ines, August 1K, 0<<0. Arraigned on 4e'tember 0>, 0<<0, the accused, assisted by counsel, entered a 'lea of "not guilty". +rial on the merits ensued. In a fieD'age ecision dated March 1<, 0<<1, the trial court found a''ellant guilty as charged. +he fallo reads as follows3 > *(858:O58, finding accused 8rnesto Atuel, alias 9oloy Bolhog, guilty beyond reasonable doubt of ra'e, under os. 0 and 1, of Article >> of the 5eised Penal Code, as charged, he is hereby sentenced to suffer reclusion 'er'etua2 to indemnify :elicitas 4ayon, the com'lainant, in the amount of P7?,???.??2 and to 'ay the costs." +he :acts $ersion of the Prosecution 4eero "Berot" 8chae;, a 'orter, had been neighbors with the accused, a steedore, since 0 o-clock in the morning of August 1>, 0<<0, 8chae; was awakened by a woman-s cries for hel' and entreaties3 "on-t, ong, don-t, ongQ"  6oing toward the 'lace where he heard the shouts, he saw the accused haing carnal intercourse with a woman lying on to' of a table. +he 'lace, about 1? to 1 meters from 8chae;-s shanty, was deserted at that time, as fishing boats had not yet landed, but the scene was illumined by a halfDmoon.


0=0

8chae; immediately ran to the 4ta. Ana Police Patrol 4tation, also known as the Central Patrol 4tation, and re'orted the incident. PO0 Pros'ero Ondong 4r., re!uested the esk Officer to contract a mobile 'atrol car for assistance and then accom'anied 8chae; to the 'lace indicated by the latter. = A''roaching the 'lace, they saw the accused still haing se)ual intercourse with the woman. +he accused, wearing a black @acket and nude below the waist, was standing in front of the woman and furiously 'um'ing into her with 'ushDandD'ull motions of his buttocks. J +he woman, whose body was reclining inside an unfinished cared banca 'laced on to' of the table which was about J1 centimeters in height, K had her skirt raised u' to her stomach and was com'letely bare below the waist2 her thighs were s'layed, her feet dangling downwards. < 4he was crying "AgayQ +abangQ" 0? Officer Ondong arrested the accused, who claimed that the woman was his wife. 00 +he woman fell to the ground, touched her knee s and e)claimed to Ondong, "6iDra'e ko, 4ir" 01 Ondong brought the accused, together with the woman, to the 4ta. Ana Patrol 4tation. (e tried to interiew her, but she gae inconsistent answers. 0> Ondong knew the a''ellant, who had been 'reiously a''rehended, there haing been seeral warrants 'ending for his arrest. 07 At around 73?? in the morning, the com'lainant was brought by a 'oliceman to the aao Medical Center. At that time, she was wearing a crum'led dress, her hair long, disheeled and loose. *hen interiewed by r. Ma. 9ourdes Monteerde, com'lainant gae her na me as :ely elgado, 0 and said that she went to Magsaysay Park at 1 o-clock that morning to look for a 'rayer book. 4he was obsered to laugh for no reason at all. In accordance with the hos'ital-s administratie order, she was referred to the aao City (ealth Office. 0= Com'lainant admitted that, at the time of the incident, she was undergoing treatment for seere headaches. 4he testified that at about > o-clock in the morning of August 1>, 0<<0, while at Magsaysay Park, she was a''roached by a man whom she did not know who forcibly brought her to a 'lace near the beach where he bo)ed, sla''ed and maltreated her, and thereby rendered her unconscious. 4he regained consciousness at the 'olice station. 0J On August 1K, 0<<0, fie days after the incident, com'lainant was e)amined by r. anilo P. 9edesma, MedicoD9egal Officer of the aao City (ealth Office. 0K r. 9edesma noticed com'lainant was "slightly incoherent". 4he com'lained to him that she had been ra'ed. r. 9edesma could not categorically say that the hymenal laceration were caused by a male organ for they could hae also been caused by a finger or the result of masturbation. 0< r. Melody Seto, a doctor assigned at the 'sychiatry de'artment of the aao Medical Center, confirmed the insanity of com'lainant, who was suffering from ina''ro'riate mental status, that is, her answers to !uestions were not congruent with her feelings. Based on the recorded e)amination conducted by r. 8nri!ue;  another 'sychiatrist who e)amined the com'lainant on August 0=, 0< years old and had her residence at ew Bataan, Proince of aao #formerly aao del orte%. (oweer, at the time of the incident, she was then


0=1

undergoing 'sychiatric treatment and checkDu' as an out'atient at the 'sychiatric section of the said center of schi;o'hreniform disorder 10. 4he was allegedly also being treated by herbolarios. Although her mental condition im'roed, her 'sychosis was not fully cured. 11 $ersion of the efense +he defense 'resented two witnesses, i;., 9ydia Atuel, elder sister of the accused, and the accused himself. 9ydia, a selfDconfessed former 'rostitute, testified that it was a certain Caloy 5eynoso, a friend and neighbor of long standing, whom she met in the eening of August 11, 0<<0 with the com'lainant, who was the one who co'ulated with the com'lainant. According to 9ydia, at 'ast 0 o-clock in the morning of August 1>, 0<<0, she went to the beach for she thought she felt labor 'ains. +here she saw 'eo'le, one on to' of the other. +hen she heard Caloy saying to the other 'ersons with him to kee' !uite because someone was looking at them. According to 9ydia, the charge of ra'e against her brother was fabricated by 4eero 8chae; who had an a) to grind against a''ellant, who in turn had taken a gang'lank owned by the former. 1> +estifying on his own behalf, accused alleged that, at about 1 o-clock in the morning of August 1>, 0<<0, he was sering as a member of the "ronda" team together with his neighbors, Armando +adlas and Boyet Mos!ueda. +he area coered by their "ronda" was from the second wharf in 4ta. Ana u' to Car'enter 4treet. +hereafter, he went looking for Caloy 5eynoso who, according to his sister 9ydia, was at the cottage of 8chae;. *hen he went to the beach to look for him, he saw Caloy together with a woman and 8chae;. 4uddenly, someone behind him shouted. It turned out to be a 'oliceman who ordered him to raise his hands2 he was then frisked and arrested. 17 +he Issues On a''eal, accusedDa''ellant assigned the following errors3 1 I +he trial court graely erred in not finding the testimonies of the 'rosecution witnesses substantially insufficient to warrant a coniction. II +he trial court graely erred in finding the accusedDa''ellant guilty as charged des'ite utter failure of the 'rosecution to establish his guilt by 'roof beyond reasonable doubt. +he Court-s 5uling :irst Issue3

Credibility of *itnesses

A''ellant contends that the 'rosecution-s eidence "does not measure u' the !uantum of 'roof re!uired by law", aside from being "highly dubious in nature, infirmed #sic% and marred by


0=>

im'robabilities", and conflicting. According to a''ellant, the testimonies of 4eero 8chae; and the ictim are in conflict, for the ictim herself testified that she was rendered unconscious by the blows and 'hysical maltreatment inflicted by the ra'ist, and therefore she could not hae uttered the cries for hel' allegedly heard by 8chae;. A''ellant-s contention is deoid of merit. 5a'e as a harrowing e)'erience is usually not remembered in detail. 5ather, the ictim of such an atrocity would no rmally be inclined to forget the e)ecrable eent and swee' it into the dustbin of her unwanted e)'eriences and memories. :or such an offense is not something which enhances one-s life e)'erience and therefore worth recalling or reliing, but rather, something which causes dee' 'sychological wounds an d casts a stigma u'on the ictim for the rest of her life, no matter that it was neer her fault that she met such a fate. A ra'ist should not e)'ect the ha'less ob@ect of his lechery to hae the memory of an ele'hant and the cold 'recision of a mathematician. 1= In the case at bar, the rule re!uiring that minor inconsistencies in testimonies be disregarded should a''ly with een greater force, considering that com'lainant at the time was suffering from insanity as confirmed by the medical re'ort of August 1K, 0<<0. Com'lainant was mentally ill at the time of the incident, and conse!uently could not be e)'ected to remember in 'recise detail all that actually ha''ened to her. (er seere traumatic e)'erience was too much for her unstable mental faculties. In fact, she was incoherent and iolent on the days following the incident. 1J (er testimony as to what had ha''ened certainly cannot constitute gos'el truth, es'ecially since at the time she gae her testimony she was still undergoing treatment from 'sychiatrists and herbolarios, and, therefore, not 'ossessed of com'letely normal mental faculties. *e hae said that a ra'e ictim is not and cannot be e)'ected to kee' an accurate account of her traumatic e)'erience. 1K And the credibility of a ra'e ictim is not destroyed by some inconsistencies in her testimony. 1< On the contrary, it is a recogni;ed a)iom in ra'e cases that inconsistencies in the ictim-s testimony do not detract from the ital fact that, in truth, she had been abused. +estimonial discre'ancies could hae been caused by the natural fickleness of the memory, which ariances tend to strengthen rather than weaken credibility as they erase an y sus'icion of rehearsed testimony. >? Moreoer, it is doctrinal that the ealuation by the trial court of the testimony of a witness is accorded the highest res'ect because it is the trial court that has the direct o''ortunity to obsere the witness-s demeanor on the stand and determine if she is telling the truth or not. 4uch assessment is binding on this Court e)ce't when the same was reached arbitrarily or when the trial court oerlooked, misunderstood or misa''lied some facts or circumstances of weight and substance which could hae affected the result of the case. But none of such e)ce'tions a''ly to this case. >0 At any rate, what is im'ortant is whether the se)ual congress was indeed consummated. +he fact was 'roen not by the testimony of com'lainant but by that of 4eero 8chae;. +he trial court correctly relied on the testimonies of 8chae;, a long time ac!uaintance and neighbor of a''ellant who witnessed the incident, as well as that of Police Officer Ondong, who res'onded to 8chae;-s re'ort. 8chae;-s testimony is straightforward, credible and sufficient to conict a''ellant, as can be gleaned from the e)cer't of testimony gien below3 >1 P5O48C&+O5


0=7

R ow, last August 1>, 0<<0, at around >3?? o-clock #sic% in the morning, can you tell us where were youG A

I was slee'ing in my cottage at the wharf.

R

+his cottage of yours is located at the 4ta. Ana wharfG

A

Ses, sir.

R ow, while you were slee'ing at >3?? o-clock #sic% dawn of August 1>, 0<<0, was there any unusual incident that took 'laceG A++S VAMO5A Sour honor, 'lease, he was slee'ing, so, he could not hae known any unusual incident because he was slee'ing according to him. CO&5+ *itness may answer. #*I+844% A I was awakened by sounds and I heard someone saying, "on-t, ong, don-t ong", asking for hel'. CO&5+ Is "ong" an abbreiation of the word "Manong"G )))

)))

)))

I+85P58+85 Ses, Sour (onor, it-s a contraction of the word "Manong". CO&5+ Ses, it-s a contraction of the word "Manong" which means older brother. Continue. P5O48C&+O5 R

*hen you heard somebody calling "ong", what did you doG

A I ran to the 'olice station because the oice was asking for hel' and I could not go there and so . . . #inter'retation of the answer of the witness not finished%


0=

CO&5+ R

(ow far is the 'olice station from where you heard the call for hel'G

A

If I am not mistaken it will reach #sic% to 1?? meters.

R Sou are referring to the 4ta. Ana Patrol 4tation in front of the Magsaysay Park at 4ta. Ana, aao CityG A

Ses, sir.

R

*hat oice did you hear, a male oice or a female oiceG

A

A female oice.

CO&5+ Continue. P5O48C&+O5 R

And did you arrie at the 4ta. Ana Patrol 4tationG

A

Ses, sir.

R

*hat did you do when you reached the 4ta. Ana Patrol 4tationG

A

I re'orted to the 'olice.

R

After you made the re'ort to the 'olice, what was the res'onse of the 'oliceG

A

+he 'oliceman went to that 'lace where the oice asking for hel' was heard.

R

(ow many 'olicemen went with youG

A

One 'oliceman.

R

And that 'oliceman went to the 'lace where you heard the oiceG

A

Ses, sir.

R

*hen you arried, what did you seeG

A

*hen we arried there #were% a man and a woman haing se)ual intercourse.


0==

P5O48C&+O5 R

*hat was the 'osition of the man when he had intercourse with the womanG

A +he man was standing while the woman-s legs were dangling on the table with her head backward in a lying 'osition. R

On what ob@ect was the woman lyingG

A

On to' of the table.

+o discredit 8chae;, the defense attributed illDmotie, alleging that he harbored a grudge aga inst a''ellant because of a 'erious !uarrel inoling a 'iece of wood used as a gang'lank. >> +he alleged !uarrel, howeer, was too flimsy a reason, and the ob@ect of the !uarrel too insignificant an item, for 8chae; to hae falsely charged the a''ellant with so serious a crime. Also, it was not een 8chae; but Officer Ondong who testified as to com'lainant-s utterance to the effect that she had been ra'ed. +he accused also claims that 8chae;-s action of first seeking assistance from the authorities instead of immediately e)tending hel' to and thus 'reenting further iolation of the ictim was contrary to human nature and the natural course of things. >7 *e disagree. 6oing for 'olice assistance instead of rushing in to sto' a crime is not an abnormal reaction and may een be deemed the more 'rudent moe. A''ellant, caught in flagrante delicto, could hae immediately fled and esca'ed arrest. On the other hand, he could also hae fought it out with 8chae;, who might hae been on the losing end. :urther, it was not 'ossible to determine beforehand if a''ellant was armed or not. It was, therefore, the better course of action for 4eero to first seek the hel' of the authorities. 9ikewise, behaioral 'sychology teaches us that different 'eo'le react to similar situations dissimilarly. > In any case, it is unrebutted that a''ellant was caught haing se)ual intercourse with :elicitas 4ayon, who was 'roen beyond the shadow of a doubt to be a mental 'atient, and whose 'hysical e)amination yielded findings of hymenal lacerations. Also, a''ellant was caught with his 'ants down, literally, and in the most com'romising 'osition isDaDis the ictim, by no less than a 'olice officer. Accused himself admitted he had no !uarrel or 'ersonal differences with Officer Ondong. +hus, the trial court correctly refused to gie credence to the a''ellant-s accusation that Ondong buttDstroked him with his Armalite rifle on his stomach and back, as there was no cogent reason for Ondong to "thirdDdegree" the accused. *hile the defense tried to discredit the 'rosecution witnesses, Ondong-s testimony was fortress they could not breach. +he 'olice officer arrested a''ellant while in the ery act of co mmitting the crime, and his testimony is certainly entitled to full faith and credit. :or it is well settled that credence is accorded the testimonies of 'rosecution witnesses who a re law enforcers, it being 'resumed that they hae regularly 'erformed their duty, absent any conincing 'roof to the contrary. >= 9ikewise, when there is no showing that a witness for the 'rosecution was actuated by im'ro'er moties, the 'resum'tion is that he was not so actuated and his testimony is entitled


0=J

to full faith and credit. >J +he testimony of Officer Ondong is too e)'licit in its gra'hic de'iction of the se)ual assault and of the reaction of the com'lainant after the a''rehension that, in com'arison, a''ellant-s denials a''ear lame and unworthy of belief. +his is obious and unmistakable from the following e)cer't of testimony3 >K P5O48C&+O5 84PA5A6OVA R

4'ecifically, on August 1>, 0<<0, at >3>? in the morning, can you tell us where you wereG

A

I was on duty at that time.

R

*hile on duty, did anything took #sic% 'lace while you were on dutyG

A *ell#,% one 4eero 8chae; a''eared in our office and re'orted that somebody was asking for hel'. R And when #sic% after receiing this re'ort from Mr. 8chae; that somebody was asking for hel', what did you doG A I re!uested the desk officer to call the mobile 'atrol to assist Mr. 8chae; together with me #sic%. R

And where did you 'roceed after thatG

A *ell, we 'roceeded to Magsaysay Park wherein 4eero 8chae; re'orted the call for hel'. )))

)))

)))

R

And what did you find out laterG

*I+844 A

I saw a man wearing a black @acket #swaying% with a 'ush and 'ull motion.

CO&5+ R

*hat was he doing, if anyG

A (e was half#D%naked. (is hands was #sic% on the brace on the makeshift of the brace he was holding. (is buttocks is #sic% moing 'ush and 'ull. P5O48C&+O5 84PA5A6OVA R *hen you say, "'ush and 'ull", can you describe s'ecifically, in the more understandable language when you said he was making a 'ush and 'ullG


0=K

A

Can I demonstrate.

R

o, when you said 'ush and 'ull, what do you mean by making a 'ush and 'ull 'osition.

CO&5+ R

*hat was he doing actuallyG

A

(e was swinging, the body was swinging, the buttocks was #sic% swinging.

P5O4. 84PA5A6OVA R

*as he not committing a se)ual intercourseG

A

Ses, sir, he was committing a se)ual intercourse.

R And when you said he was haing a se)ual intercourse, was another 'erson around whom he was conducting a se)ual intercourseG A

Ses, sir, there was a woman in front of him.

R

Can you tell us, describe to us the woman at that timeG

A +he woman was lying in the cared wooden #sic%, her feet was dangling and her body was fitted to the cared wood, her skirt was rolled. CO&5+ R

*hat is that cared woodG

A

I described it as unfinished "banca", it was cut this si;e.

)))

)))

)))

P5O4. 84PA5A6OVA R

Before you brought the man and the woman to the Police 4tation, what ha''enedG

A *hen I called him the sus'ect, he told me "asawa ko ni" #she is my wife%. +hen he add another words #sic% "unsa mani 'olice brutality ni" #what is this, 'olice brutalityG%, he told me that. R

(ow about the woman were their #sic% comments made by the womanG


0=<

A I saw the woman fall to the ground touching her knees and he #sic% uttered "gi ra'e ko, sir" #I was ra'ed, sir%. R

id you find out later the name of that womanG

A I found out later on that real name thru her mother and his brother that she was :elicitas 4ayon. R

(ow about the man who allegedly ra'ed her, do you know his nameG

A

(e is known to our station as 8rnesto Atuel."

4econd Issue3 5a'e Proen Beyond 5easonable oubt &nder Art. >> of the 5eised Penal Code, ra'e is committed by haing carnal knowledge with a woman under any of the following circumstances3 0.


1.


>. *hen the woman is under twele years of age, een though neither of the circumstances mentioned in the two ne)t 'receding 'aragra'hs shall be 'resent. In this case, there is no !uestion that the ictim was mentally disturbed or insane at the time the se)ual assault was committed. (er inconsistent answers to the !ueries made by Officer Ondong2 her incongruent reactions as obsered by r. Monteerde2 her tendency to laugh for no reason at all2 and her desire to look for a 'rayerbook in the wee hours of the morning at the Magsaysay Park2 all these s'eak of a 'erson not in full control of her senses and mental faculties. 4he was, therefore, correctly held by the trial court as being de'ried of reason. In the ra'e of a woman de'ried or reason or otherwise unconscious, the ictim has no will. 4e)ual intercourse with an insane, deranged, or mentally deficient, feebleminded, or idiotic woman is ra'e, 'ure and sim'le. +he de'riation of reason contem'lated by law need not be com'lete2 mental abnormality or deficiency is sufficient. >< A''ellant, therefore, was correctly conicted of the crime of ra'e, for haing had se)ual intercourse with com'lainant, who suffered from mental disorder. It was not een necessary to 'roe the element of force or intimidation in order to secure a''ellant-s coniction, but nonetheless, the trial court also established the fact that a''ellant u tili;ed force in the se)ual assault, and that the se)ual intercourse was effected against the ictim-s will as she was shown to hae shouted for hel'. 4he also alleged 'hysical maltreatment, which though not 'roen by 'hysical eidence was not dis'uted or rebutted by the a''ellant. In consonance with recent @uris'rudence to the effect that the ra'e of a woman de'ried of reason or haing some mental defect deseres as heaier 'enalty in the form of increased ciil liability, 7? the ciil indemnity awarded should be, as it is hereby, increased to P?,???.??.


0J?

*(858:O58, in iew of the foregoing, the a''eal is 8I8 for lack of merit, and the assailed ecision is A::I5M8, but the award of ciil indemnify is hereby increased to P?,???.??. People v. /ilvano D P)F )(2*/, People v. #unez 2ist: Accused emetrio une; had carnal knowledge of his 07 yr. old daughter Faneth une;in

their own house one eening. :or sheer carelessness of the 'rosecutors in this case in ensuring that the information contains all the essential allegations, a man who deseres no less than the su'reme 'enalty of death for iolating his own flesh and blood gets off with the sentence of reclusion 'er'etua. Com'lainant Faneth ue; was born on August >?, 0> of the 5eised Penal Code in relation to 5e'ublic Act J=<, at the instance of Faneth 8ba y ue;, whose affidait is hereto attached to form 'art of this information, committed as follows3 that on or about Fanuary 0J, 0<<=, in the City of aao, Phili''ines, and within the @urisdiction of this (onorable Court, the aboeDmentioned accused, by means of force, wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously had carnal knowledge of his daughter Faneth 8. ue;, against her will.


0J0

CO+5A5S +O 9A*. aao City, Phili''ines, Fanuary 11, 0<<. #sgd% 9O9I+O O. 8$A689IO Prosecutor I *hen arraigned on Fanuary >?, 0<<=, the accused entered a 'lea of not guilty. 0 +hereafter, trial on the merits ensued. +he 'rosecution 'resented r. 9edesma, 1 PO1 5aul +on;o, > who arrested the accused, and 4ocial *elfare Assistant Milagros Basmayor 7 who interiewed com'lainant. On the second hearing day, oember 07, 0<<=, defense counsel manifested that the accused was willing to 'lead guilty. After finding that the accused was making his 'lea oluntarily, the court entered his 'lea of guilt.  +he 'rosecution then 'resented its remaining two witnesses, Meliana . (eradona, = Faneth ue;-s teacher, and the ictim herself, Faneth ue;. J :ollowing the testimony of Faneth, and the offer of its e)hibits as eidence, the 'rosecution rested its case. At the hearing for the 'resentation of eidence for the defense, the accused, through his counsel, manifested that he would no longer 'resent any eidence, not een his own testimony, but would merely submit the case for decision based on the eidence, submitted by the 'rosecution. K On Fanuary 1>, 0<

0J1

the amount of P>?,???.??, by way of moral damages for all the ignominy and sufferings she incurred out of accused demonic act of se)ually abusing his own daughter. :inally, in accordance with the automatic reiew of the 4u'reme Court of this @udgment, it a''earing accused was charged of a ca'ital offense, considered heinous crime, the Branch Clerk of Court of this court, is ordered to at once after 'romulgation of this @udgment to accused, eleate the entire records of this case with the Clerk of Court of the 4u'reme Court, Manila, for reiew, ealuation and final a''ro'riate action. 4O O5858. 0? In his A''ellant-s Brief, accused raised a lone assignment of error  +(8 +5IA9 CO&5+ 65A$89S 8558 I ACC8P+I6 ACC&48DAPP899A+-4 IMP5O$I8+ P98A O: 6&I9+S +O A CAPI+A9 O::848 A I :AI9I6 +O CO&C+ A 48A5C(I6 IR&I5S +O :&99S 8+85MI8 *(8+(85 +(8 ACC&48 :&99S &854+OO +(8 CO48R&8C84 O: (I4 P98A. 00 +he records reeal that in making the 'lea of guilt, the accused was 'roceeding under the mistaken assum'tion that a 'lea of guilt would mitigate his liability. 5ather than correcting this misconce'tion, the trial court contributed to the mistaken belief of the accused. +he records will show the infirmity attending such 'lea  :I4CA9 8$A689IO3 :or the Prosecution, we are ready. A++S. +83 5es'ectfully a''earing for the accused. CO&5+3 (ow many more witnessesG :I4CA9 8$A689IO3 +wo witnesses and we shall rest our case. A++S. +83 +he accused is not yet around your honor. :I4CA9 8$A689IO3


0J>

Considering the graity of this case in case of coniction for death in iew of the !ualifying circumstance of the relationshi' as father and daughter. CO&5+3 If he 'leads guilty of the offense, . . A++S. +83 I hae conferred with the accused and he is asking for time. CO&5+3 +here is no more time. A++S. +83 +he accused is willing to 'lead guilty. CO&5+3 If he 'leads guilty, it could be mitigating. It is still life im'risonment. And so, whether it is life im'risonment, we still hae the 'rosecution to 'resent its eidence. If he 'leads guilty to mitigating circumstance, the 'enalty will de'end on the eidence of the 'rosecution. A++S. +83 :or humanitarian reason, we may be allowed that accused could not be sentenced to deathG CO&5+3 +he court cannot determine the sentence. If accused will 'lead guilty, the court will re!uire the 'rosecution to 'resent their eidence to determine the 'enalty. A++S. +83 I hae conferred with the accused, accused confided to this re'resentation that he will enter or want to withdraw his earlier 'lea of not guilty and instead enter a 'lea of guilty after this re'resentation e)'lained to accused with regards with his reDarraignment. CO&5+3 5eDarraigned the accused u'on manifestation of counsel. #Accused 'leaded guilty to the information%.


0J7

R  I will ask you this !uestion. In your 'lea of guilty, did you understand that you are 'leading guilty to a ca'ital offenseG A

Ses.

R  Sour counsel, Atty. +e e)'lained to you the im'lication of your 'lea of guiltyG A

Ses.

R  And I e)'lain to you that when you 'lead guilty to a ca'ital offense, it is either life or death 'enaltyG A

Ses.

R  I am also e)'laining to you that conse!uences, you still continue your 'lea of guilty of the ca'ital offenseG A

Ses.

R  id the court gets #sic% from you that your admission of your 'lea of guilty is your own will as stated by you, as e)'lained by the court as well as your counselG A

Ses.

R  Sour 'lea of guilty is your own 'ersonal and oluntary 'lea without any e)isting force and intimidation from anybodyG A

Ses, it is my own will.

CO&5+3 4ince the 'lea of guilty of the accused as oluntarily entered with the assistance of his co unsel de oficio as well as e)'lanation gien by this court to him, entering the 'lea of guilty of the accused, withdrawing his 'reious 'lea of not guilty, the court will re!uire the 'rosecution to 'resent their eidence as re!uired by the court. A++S. +83 May we moed #sic% that the mitigating circumstance of 'lea of guilty of accused be acce'ted in faor of the accused. CO&5+3 Make that of record. 01 #em'hasis, Ours%


0J

8idently, both the trial court and counsel for the accused led the accused to beliee that his 'lea of guilt would be a mitigating circumstance in his faor. +his was clearly misleading because #0% a 'lea of guilty may only be considered as mitigating when seasonably inter@ected, that is, before the 'rosecution 'resents its eidence2 0> and #1% the 'enalty of death is indiisible and is not affected by either aggraating or mitigating circumstances. Clearly, too, the accused was not categorically adised that his 'lea of guilt would not under any circumstance affect or reduce his sentence, making his reDarraignment flawed. 07 (oweer, een if the 'lea of guilt of the accused was im'roidently made, it does not work to effectiely acate the finding of guilt made by the trial court. *e note that at the onset, the accused had entered a 'lea of not guilty but had merely changed this 'lea to one of guilt midway during the 'resentation of eidence for the 'rosecution. It is a settled rule that a decision based on an irregular 'lea may neertheless be u'held where the @udgment is su''orted by other ade!uate eidence on record. 0 And such other eidence su''orts the finding of guilt in the instant case.0Yw'hi0.nZt :irst, *e hae the direct and straightforward testimony of Faneth recounting the iolation of body and s'irit she suffered from her ery own father. (er account of the harrowing incident is as follows  R  ow, on Fanuary 0J, 0<<=, where were youG A

At home.

R  4ometime in the eening of Fanuary 0J, 0<<=, can you tell the court what ha''enedG A

Ses.

R  +ell the court what ha''ened. A

I was molested by my father.

R  Can you describe to the (on. Court, how your father molested youG A

Ses, sir.

R  Please do so. A  On that night, Fanuary 0J, 0<<=, my father told us to slee' at 0?3?? '.m. R  *hat ha''ened ne)tG A

I mean, it was about J3?? to K3?? '.m., that he told us to slee'.

R  *hat ha''ened ne)tG


0J=

A  *hen I woke u' at about 0?3?? '.m., on the same night, I hae no more short 'ants including my 'anty. R  Sou said, you noticed that you are undress. *hat else did you notice to your bodyG A

(e 'uddled my ni''le. #sic%

R  Are you referring to your fatherG A

Ses, sir.

R  *hat else did you noticedG A

(e inserted his finger in my agina.

R  *hat else did your father doG A

(e sucked my ni''le.

R  Aside from sucking your ni''le, what else your father doG A

I already 'ushed him aside.

R  After 'ushing him, what ha''ened ne)tG A

(e went back to where he was slee'ing.

R  (ow about you, where did you goG A

I 'ut on again my 'anty and short.

R  id you slee' againG A

Ses, sir.

R  *hat ha''ened when you slee' againG A

*hen I woke u' again, he was already on to' of me.

R  *ho was actually on to' of youG A

My father.

R  *hy did you say that it was actually your father who is on to' of youG A  Because there was no other 'erson in the house, e)ce't my father.


0JJ

R  *hen your father was on to' of you, what did you feel in your body, if anyG A

(e inserted his 'enis to my agina.

R  *hat made you say that he inserted his 'enis to your aginaG A  Because there was a hard thing that 'enetrate my agina and I 'ushed him aside and there was a sticky thing on my thigh and agina. R  *hat is this sticky thing are you referringG A

It was a white sticky thing.

R  Sou said that the 'enis of your father was inserted in your agina. *hat is the e)tent of the 'enis that inserted to your aginaG A

Only a short 'ortion of his 'enis.

R  *hen you know it was your father, who was doing that act to you that eening, what did you doG A

I was afraid. I was not able to slee'. I sat on the side of the room and neer again slee'.

R  *hen you mean on to' of you, what did you doG A

I 'ushed him.

R  *hat was the reaction of your father when you 'ushed himG A

(e again slee'.

R  Because of the incident, did you re'ort the matter to the 'olice authoritiesG A  +he following morning, and I confided this to my classmate. R  *ho else did you confide withG A

My teacher.

R  Are you referring to Mrs. (eradonaG A

Ses.

R  ow, because of the incident, do you recall if you hae submitted for a medical e)aminationG


0JK

A

Ses.

R  4howing to you this medical certificate, is this the same medical certificate which was your medical certificate issued by r. 9edesmaG A

Ses.

R  *ere you interiewed by r. 9edesma in connection with this incidentG A

Ses. 0=

*e are inclined to gie much weight to her testimony since it is a re'utable 'rece't that testimonies of ra'e ictims who are young or of tender age are credible. +he reelation of an innocent child whose chastity was abused deseres full credit. Courts usually lend credence to the testimony of a young girl es'ecially where the facts 'oint to her haing been a ictim of se)ual assault. 0J Indeed, "no woman, es'ecially of tender age, would concoct a story of defloration, allow an e)amination of her 'riate 'arts, and thereafter 'erert herself by being sub@ected to a 'ublic trial if she was not motiated solely by the desire to hae the cul'rit a''rehended and 'unished. 0K More telling, a daughter es'ecially of tender age, would not accuse her own father of such a heinous crime as ra'e had she really not been aggrieed. 0< Faneth-s credibility is strengthened by the fact that no motie was shown for her to testify falsely against the accused, who, incidentally and unfortunately, is her own father. 1? +hat she lost no time and immediately re'orted the ra'e the following day to her teacher further bolsters her credibility. 10 Indeed, Faneth-s testimony alone, which is credible, is sufficient to sustain the coniction of her raisher. 11 +he charge of ra'e was ade!uately established not only by Faneth-s straightforward testimony but likewise by that of r. anilo 9edesma who testified as follows  R  As the attending 'hysician in this case, do you confirm all the entries in this 'articular medical re'ort octorG A

Ses, sir.

R  Initing your attention to the genital e)amination entry in your re'ort r. which you said among other things, that there was su'erficial laceration at =3?? o-clock 'osition, will you e)'lain the meaning of that findingsG A  *hen I e)amine the genitals of the 'atient, I saw that the hymen had laceration su'erficial, and healing laceration at =3?? 'osition, corres'onding to the face of the watch. Meaning to say, if we com'are the hymen to the face of the watch, the laceration is =3?? o-clock. R  As an e)aminer, what would hae cause such lacerationG


0J<

A  As a general role, the hymen is laceration for the first time during the first se)ual intercourse. #sic% R  In your conclusion, you said that there was a healing genital laceration, what do you mean by thatG A

Meaning to say, when I saw the 'atient, the laceration was already more than 17 hours.

R  Sou are referring to the laceration mentioned in your genital e)aminationG A

Ses, sir. 1>

Against these 'ieces of eidence, the accused had nothing to offer. (e did not een testify in his own behalf and merely submitted his case on the basis of the 'rosecution-s eidence. +he studied silence of the accused on the eidence for the ra'e amounts to an admission of the se)ual congress. 17 In light of the foregoing as well as the clear, conincing and com'etent 'hysical and testimonial eidence, this Court is coninced that accused has been 'roen guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of ra'e. Although the matter of the 'ro'er im'osition of the 'enalty is not assigned as an error by the accused, neertheless, it is a wellDestablished rule in criminal 'rocedure that an a''eal in a criminal 'roceeding throws the whole case o'en for reiew and it becomes the duty of the a''ellate court to correct an error as may be found in the a''ealed @udgment, whether it is made the sub@ect of assignment of errors or not. 1 &nder 4ection 00 of 5e'ublic Act o. J=<, the death 'enalty shall be im'osed if the crime of ra'e is committed with any of the following circumstances3 0. *hen the ictim is under eighteen #0K% years of age and the offender is a 'arent, ascendant, ste'D'arent, guardian, relatie by consanguinity or affinity within the third degree, or the commonDlaw s'ouse of the 'arent or ictim. 1

*hen the ictim is under the custody of the 'olice or military authorities.

>. *hen ra'e is committed in full iew of the husband, 'arent, any of the children or other relaties within the third degree of consanguinity. 7.

*hen the ictim is a religious or a child below seen #J% years old.

. *hen the offender knows that he is afflicted with the Ac!uired Immune eficiency 4yndrome #AI4% disease. =. *hen committed by any member of the Armed :orces of the Phili''ines or the Phili''ine ational Police or any law enforcement agency.


0K?

J. *hen by reason or on occasion of the ra'e, the ictim has suffered 'ermanent 'hysical mutilation. A''lying the aforesaid law, the trial court im'osed the 'enalty of death u'on the accused, taking into account the minority of Faneth as she was only fourteen #07% years old at the time of the incident, as well as the relationshi' of father and daughter between the accused and the com'lainant. +he 'enalty of death cannot be automatically im'osed on the accused merely because of the trial court-s a''reciation of both the fact of minority and relationshi', no matter how clearly established. Furis'rudence dictates that these twin facts be alleged in the Information or Com'laint before the death 'enalty can 'ro'erly be im'osed. Indeed, this Court has consistently held that the seen attendant circumstances under 4ection 00 of 5A J=< are in the nature of !ualifying circumstances which, unlike generic aggraating circumstances that may be 'roed een if not alleged, cannot be 'roed as such unless alleged in the Information. 1= Although it was established that Faneth was a minor at that time of ra'e, fourteen #07% years old and a grade si) student, to be e)act, this !ualifying circumstance was not alleged in the Information. In the recent case of Peo'le . Calayca, 1J the accused was also found to hae ra'ed his 0Dyear old daughter. As in the instant case, only the fact of relationshi' between the 'arties was alleged in the Information, namely that the ictim was the daughter of the accused. +he fact of minority of the ictim was not. :inding the crime charged as sim'le ra'e, this Court ruled as follows  A reading of the Information for ra'e filed against the a''ellant in the 'resent case reeals that he is merely charged with the crime of sim'le ra'e which warrants the im'osition of the 'enalty of reclusion 'er'etua. +his is so because the fact of the minority of the ictim is not stated in the Information. *hat was alleged therein was only the relationshi' of the offender as the 'arent of the ictim. Again, as we hae em'hasi;ed in Peo'le . 5amos, the elements of minority of the ictim and her relationshi' to the offender must concur. As such, the charge of ra'e in the Information is not in its !ualified from so as fall under the s'ecial ! ualifying circumstances stated in 4ection 00 of 5.A. J=<. . . . . #em'hasis co'ied% +hus, there being no allegation of minority in the Information under which accused was arraigned and tried in the case at bench, he cannot be conicted of !ualified ra'e. 4trict a''lication of the rule re!uiring the allegation of the !ualifying circumstances mentioned in 4ection 00 of 5.A. J=< was further enunciated in Peo'le . ima'ilis. 1K *hile the Information there alleged that the ictim was the ste'daughter of the accused, it was not acce'ted as a 'ro'er allegation of the !ualifying circumstance that the accused was the "common law s'ouse of the 'arent of the ictim" and the death 'enalty im'osed by the trial court was once again reduced to reclusion 'er'etua.


0K0

+aking into account the growing number of cases where !ualified ra'e under 4ection 00 of 5.A. J=<, although 'roen during trial, could still not be 'ro'erly 'enali;ed because of defects in the Information, *e urge the 'rosecuting fiscals who are charged with the res'onsibility of 're'aring Informations to state with 'articularity the attendant circumstances 'roided for under 4ection 00 of 5.A. J=<. More s'ecifically, in !ualified ra'e, both the fact of minority of the ictim and the actual relationshi' between the 'arties, as worded in 5.A. J=<, must be alleged in the Information. Otherwise, *e shall continue to fail both the law and the ictims whom the law hae sought to 'rotect. *e note that the affidait of com'lainant Faneth 8bay ue; was attached to and made 'art of the Information in this case. In this connection, we are constrained to lay down the rule that documentary eidence, such as the affidaits of the witnesses, should not be attached to and made integral 'arts of an information. As we hae 'reiously held, a criminal indictment should neer be formulated in a melange of accusatory allegations and eidentiary details resulting in unusual 'roli)ity. 1< In the light of the flaw in the Information in the case at bench, the 'enalty of death im'osed by the trial court in Criminal Case o. >=, >JKD<= is reduced to reclusion 'er'etua. 5eclusion 'er'etua is a single indiisible 'enalty which, under Article => of the 5eised Penal Code, must he a''lied regardless of any mitigating or aggraating circumstances that may hae attended the commission of the crime, +hus, while relationshi' is aggraating in crimes against chastity such as ra'e, >? this circumstance will not affect the im'osable 'enalty >0 since reclusion 'er'etua is a single indiisible 'enalty. >1 Conersely, neither may the mitigating circumstances of 'lea of guilt affect such single indiisible 'enalty. :inally, *e note that while the trial court awarded P>?,???.?? to Faneth in the form of moral damages, it failed to im'ose any ciil indemnity for the ra'e committed. 4uch ciil indemnity is mandatory u'on the finding of the fact of ra'e and is distinct from and should not be denominated as moral damages which are based on different @ural foundations and assessed by the court in the e)ercise of its sound discretion. >> *hile the amount for ciil indemnity has been raised in Peo'le . $ictor >7 from P?,???.?? to PJ,???.?? if the ra'e is committed or is !ualified by any of the circumstances which under the law would @ustify the im'osition of the death 'enalty, *e are constrained to set the ciil indemnity award to P?,???.?? since in this case, the ra'e charged and 'roed is not !ualified. > Moral damages may, neertheless, still be awarded in faor of Faneth since it has also been resoled that in crimes of ra'e, such form of damages may be additionally awarded to the ictim without need for 'leading or 'roof of the basis thereof. >= It is assumed that the offended 'arty has suffered moral in@uries entitling her to the award of such damages. >J 8)em'lary damages may also be ad@udicated against the accused when a crime is attended by an aggraating circumstance. >K (ere, such aggraating circumstance @ustifying an award of e)em'lary damages is the relationshi' between the accused and his ictim. >< *e follow the award of P1,???.?? for e)em'lary damages set by this Court in Peo'le . Calayca. 7?


0K1

*(858:O58, the a''ealed @udgment of coniction of the accused emetrio ue; y ubduban rendered by the 5egional +rial Court, Branch <, of aao City in Criminal Case o. >=, >JKD<= is MOI:I8. +he accused is hereby found guilty of sim'le ra'e and is hereby sentenced to suffer the 'enalty of reclusion 'er'etua and to 'ay the com'lainant, Faneth 8. ue;, the sum of P?,???.?? by way of indemnity and P?,???.?? as moral damages and P1,???.?? as e)em'lary damages. People v. Calaca

A daughter was again allegedly ra'ed by her own father, herein a''ellant Artemio Calayca, who is now facing a death sentence after haing been found guilty of said crime in a ecision 0 dated Fune 0>, 0<<, rendered by the 5egional +rial Court #Branch 17% of Cagayan de Oro City in Criminal Case o. <D01<. (ence, this automatic reiew. A ra'e charge was initiated by eddy Calayca through a sworn com'laint 1 with su''orting affidaits and documents > filed with the Munici'al Circuit +rial Court of Balingasag, Misamis Oriental on Fanuary <, 0<<. MC+C Fudge Alfredo Cain found sufficient ground to 'rosecute the a''ellant for the crime of ra'e. +his was the same finding of the Office of the Proincial Prosecutor of Misamis Oriental u'on e)amination of the records of the 'reliminary inestigation forwarded to it. Conse!uently, on March 10, 0<<, the corres'onding Information 7 was filed with the 5egional +rial Court reading as follows3 I:O5MA+IO +he undersigned Assistant Proincial Prosecutor II, u'on sworn com'laint of the offended 'arty, eddy Calayca, accuses A5+8MIO CA9ASCA of the crime of 5AP8, committed as follows3 +hat on or about the 1> of the 5eised Penal Code, as amended by 5e'ublic Act o. J=<. Cagayan de Oro City, Phili''ines, March =, 0<<. #46.% 5OB85+O 4. CA4I]O Asst. Proincial Prosecutor II


0K>

*hen arraigned under the aboeD!uoted Information, the a''ellant entered a 'lea of "ot guilty" to the crime charged. +rial on the merits ensued thereafter. +he eidence for the 'rosecution was anchored mainly on the testimony of 0=Dyear old eddy Calayca who, on May 1, 0<<, narrated that at about 03?? o-clock in the morning of Fanuary 1<, 0<<7, she was sound aslee' inside their house at Barangay 4olo, Balingasag, Misamis Oriental when she was awakened by the weight of her father, herein a''ellant Artemio Calayca, who was already on to' of her, naked and armed with a bolo. (e forcibly undressed her, inserted his 'enis into her agina and made a 'ush and 'ull motion. :eeling the 'ain in her agina, she resisted his onslaught by kicking and bo)ing him, telling him with bitter tears, "I wish you would die. Sou are a father without good morals."  But she was hel'less to resist his lustful desire as he threatened h er with a knife saying, "I will kill you if you will not agree." = After the se)ual assault, she 'icked u' her clothes, dressed u' and was left wee'ing. 4he was then 0 years old when this incident ha''ened. J eddy Calayca first thought of immediately filing a case against a''ellant but was 'reented by his threat to kill her. 4he, howeer, re'orted her awful e)'erience with the a''ellant to her relaties in Mambayaan. 4he informed them that een before the Fanuary 1<, 0<<7 incident, a''ellant had se)ually abused her many times. (er relaties, who were also afraid of a''ellant, merely adised her to sue him. 4he immediately went home in 4olo because she feared her father. *hen she reached home, her eldest sister Betty 9ani Calayca also arried from Manila. Informed of the ra'e incident, 9ani and eddy decided to leae the a''ellant. +he two then traeled to on Carlos, Bukidnon and worked as serants of the mayor, thinking their father could no longer find them there. (oweer, a''ellant was able to locate them. *hile in the house of the mayor, a''ellant harassed them, so Betty 9ani had him arrested by the 'olice. K *hile a''ellant was in @ail, eddy re'orted to the 'olice authorities that he ra'ed her. +he 'olice then took her sworn statement < on the ra'e incident. +hereafter, eddy filed her com'laint for ra'e against the a''ellant. Betty 9ani Calayca was 11 years old when she testified on May 0K, 0<<. 4he narrated that she was the eldest and eddy was the second among the si) #=% children of a''ellant. +heir mother died when she was < and eddy was J. At 00, she left Balingasag for Manila where she stayed for 0? years. *hile in Manila, her aunt wrote that eddy was se)ually abused by the a''ellant and that she should come home. *hen she arried home in 4olo, she sle't in the house of her father so she could obsere him. +hat night, the a''ellant came to her and touched her body, but she !uickly managed to get out of the house and stayed outdoors until morning. 4he then coninced eddy to run away from home so they could aoid a''ellant. +hey went to Bukidnon to work, but their whereabouts was discoered by a''ellant, who then started to harass them. &ndaunted by the a''ellant-s threat, the two sisters re'orted to the authorities what eddy suffered in the hands of a''ellant. +hus, his arrest. +he last witness for the 'rosecution was r. Angelita A. 8no'ia, a 'hysician at the Balingasag Medicare (os'ital, Misamis Oriental. 4he declared that on Fanuary >, 0<< she conducted a 'elic e)amination 0? on the 'riate com'lainant, who informed her that she was ra'ed by her


0K7

own father een when she was only seen #J% years old, and the last time was in Fanuary, 0<<7. r. 8no'ia noted that there were healed lacerations in the h ymen of eddy at >, 7, =, J and < o-clock 'ositions. 4he likewise found that there was a thickening of the hymen which was indicatie of fre!uent se)ual intercourse. 00 A''ellant Artemio Calayca, on the other hand, did not deny the im'utation of her daughter eddy Calayca that he ra'ed her in the early morning of Fanuary 1<, 0<<7. All that he testified to was that he was a widower in 0<. +hey took his saings from the 'roceeds of the sale of his 'ig in the amount of P,???.??. (e then looked for his two daughters and found them at Bocboc, on Carlos, Bukidnon. *hen he asked them why they took his money, his two daughters did not say a word, forcing him to sla' them. 01 +he defense did not 'resent any other witness nor any documentary eidence. A @udgment conicting the a''ellant of the crime charged and im'osing u'o n him the 'enalty of death was rendered by the trial court in a ecision dated Fune 0>, 0<<, the decretal 'ortion of which states3 *(858:O58, 'remises considered, @udgment is hereby rendered finding accused A5+8MIO CA9ASCA guilty beyond reasonable doubt as 'rinci'al of the offense of ra'e defined and 'enali;ed by Article >> of the 5eised Penal Code as amended by 4ection 00 of 5e'ublic Act J=<. Conse!uently, he is hereby sentenced to suffer the e)treme 'enalty of death, the 'riate offended 'arty being below 0K years of age #as she was 0 years of age at the time of the incident% and the accused being her 'arent, the same to be e)ecuted by electrocution as the facilities for gas 'oisoning is not yet 'roided by the Bureau of Prisons. In addition, accused is hereby ordered to 'ay the 'riate offended 'arty, eddy Calayca, the sum of P?,???.??. In iew of the 'enalty im'osed, let the whole record of the case be forwarded to the (onorable 4u'reme Court, Manila for automatic reiew. In addition, let the liing body of the accused be committed to the ew Bilibid Prison, Muntinlu'a, Metro Manila. 4O O5858. A''ellant now assails the @udgment of coniction claiming that  I +(8 +5IA9 CO&5+ 65A$89S 8558 I 6I$I6 C588C8 +O +(8 +84+IMOS O: +(8 P5I$A+8 COMP9AIA+ 84PI+8 I+4 69A5I6 ICO4I4+8CI84. II


0K

+(8 +5IA9 CO&5+ 65A$89S 8558 I CO$IC+I6 +(8 ACC&48 O: +(8 C5IM8 O: 5AP8 84PI+8 +(8 I4&::ICI8CS O: +(8 P5O48C&+IO 8$I8C8 +O P5O$8 (I4 6&I9+ B8SO 58A4OAB98 O&B+. 0> A''ellant hammers on the alleged inconsistencies in 'riate co m'lainant-s testimony regarding the fre!uency of the commission of ra'e by a''ellant against her and the kind of wea'on he used in forcing her to succumb to his bestial lust. More s'ecifically, a''ellant 'ointed out that 'riate com'lainant, at one instance, testified that he ra'ed her for the first time on Fanuary 1<, 0<<7, 07 and yet, she later declared that she was ra'ed by him seeral times een before that date. A''ellant further claims that 'riate com'lainant likewise testified that he threatened her with a bolo when she tried to resist his bestial act on Fanuary 1<, 0<<7, 0 but afterward she stated that it was a knife which a''ellant used to threaten her. 0= +hese contradictory declarations by 'riate com'lainant, a''e llant argues, "only cast doubts on her claim that she was ra'ed by her father on Fanuary 1<, 0<<7. 0J A''ellant-s contention fails to 'ersuade us. *e hae ruled in numerous cases that an errorless recollection of a harrowing incident cannot be e)'ected of a witness es'ecially when she is recounting details of an e)'erience so humiliating and so 'ainful as ra'e. 0K Minor errors in the testimony of a ra'e ictim tend to buttress, rather than weaken, her credibility since that would indicate that her testimony was not contried. 0< +he alleged conflicting statements of 'riate com'lainant is more imagined than real. Priate com'lainant has made it clear in her testimony that een before the ra'e incident on Fanuary 1<, 0<<7, a''ellant had ra'ed her seeral times. +hus, she testified3 R  id you inform them #'riate com'lainant-s relaties% that your father will kill you if you will inform themG A

Ses.

R  *hat was their reactionG A  *hen I told them that my father ra'ed me seeral times, they feel bad. CO&5+ Before Fanuary 1<, 0<<7 your father used to hae se)ual intercourse with youG A

Ses, sir.

A++S. :89ICIA *hat was the comment of your relaties when you told them that you were ra'ed by your father seeral timesG


0K=

A  +hey commended that my father is a 'ig. 1? em'hasis su''liedN But whether the ra'e committed on Fanuary 1<, 0<<7 was the first or @ust one in the series of ra'es is, to our mind, immaterial in the 'rosecution of a''ellant for the ra'e he committed on said date, although this 'articular telling circumstance of habitual se)ual abuse conincingly shows the a''ellant-s 'erersity to commit the crime of ra'e. Also, the seeming confusion by 'riate com'lainant on the kind of wea'on used by a''ellant to threaten her does not belie the fact of the commission of ra'e by him against her on Fanuary 1<, 0<<7. Moreoer, when the trial court clarified with 'riate com'lainant what e)actly was the wea'on used by a''ellant, she made a definite declaration that it was a knife, not a bolo, thereby remoing any confusion as to this matter, to wit3 :I4CA9 E(O R  After you saw the knife that your father was holding, what did you feelG A

I was afraid.

CO&5+ R  *e will clarify, was it a bolo or a knifeG A

A knife.

R  ot a boloG A

o, sir.

:I4CA9 E(O R  (ow long is that knifeG A

About this long #witness demonstrated, counsels agreed to a = to K inches in length%.

R  *ith that length, does that include the handleG A  Ses, including the handle. 10 em'hasis su''liedN +he inaccuracy in 'riate com'lainant-s descri'tion of the wea'on used is insignificant and understandable. +o a young and naie girl, there is not much difference between a bolo and a knife since both wea'ons are shar' and deadly. *hat is im'ortant to consider is that the wea'on was effectiely used by a''ellant to intimidate 'riate com'lainant into submission to his dastardly act.


0KJ

otwithstanding these minor flaws in the testimony of 'riate com'lainant, the latter remained consistent and firm in her denunciation of a''ellant, her ery own father, as the 'erson who se)ually abused her on Fanuary 1<, 0<<7. +he records bear this out as she testified as follows3 Priate com'lainant on direct e)amination3 R  In what s'ecific 'lace at 4olo, 4an Fuan, Balingasag, Misamis Oriental where you were situated on Fanuary 1<, 0<<7G A

Inside the house.

R  At about 03?? at dawn, more or less, were you still in your houseG A

I was aslee' inside our house.

R  *hen you were aslee' inside the house, was there any unusual incidentG A

Ses, sir.

R  *ill you 'lease tell the (onorable Court, what it was all aboutG A  My father 'laced himself on to' of me and made a 'ush and 'ull motion. R  *as he dressed or nakedG A

(e was naked.

R  (ow about you at that timeG A

(e undressed me.

R  *hat did you do, when your father made se)ual intercourse with youG A++S. :89ICIA o basis, Sour (onor. :I4CA9 E(O I will reform the !uestion, Sour (onor. R  Sou said that your father undressed you and he 'laced himself on to' of you and made a 'ush and 'ull motion, was there anything that ha''ened to you. A

Ses, there was.


0KK

R  And, you 'lease tell the Court what it was all aboutG A

It was 'ainful.

R  *hy is it that you felt a 'ainG A

Because he made a 'ush and 'ull motion.

R  *hat 'articular 'art of your body was 'ainfulG A

My agina.

R  *hy what ha''ened to your aginaG A

It was inserted.

R  *hat was insertedG A

A 'enis.

R  +he 'enis of whom that inserted your aginaG A

Of my father.

R  Is your father around in CourtG A

Ses, sir.

R  *ill you 'lease 'oint on himG A  Ses, sir, he is there. #witness 'ointing to a man, and u'on asked of his name res'onded that he is A5+8MIO CA9ASCA%. R  *hat did you do when your father inserted his 'enis into your aginaG A

I was lying down.

R  id you agree that your father will hae a se)ual intercourse with youG A  I did not agree but I @ust followed him because he had a bolo with him R  *hat did he do with the boloG A

(e would hacked me if I will not agree.

)))

)))

)))


0K<

CO&5+ R  (ow old hae you been at that timeG A

0 years old. 11

+he ictim-s brief but candid and straightforward narration of how she was ra'ed by a''ellant bears the earmarks of a credible witness. 1> Indeed, the testimony of r. 8no'ia, the e)amining 'hysician, corroborated 'riate com'lainant-s claim that she was se)ually abused. r. 8no'io-s declaration that she found healed lacerations on the ictim-s hymen at >, 7, =, J and < o-clock 'ositions and that there was a thickening of her hymen, sim'ly indicated a fre!uent coitus. In his brief, a''ellant further made a ain attem't to im'ute illDmotie on the 'art of 'riate com'lainant to falsely charge him with ra'e. A''ellant suggested that 'riate com'lainant had an a)e to grind against him for haing allegedly sla''ed her and her an a)e sister Betty 9ani when he discoered that they took his saings of P,???.?? which was the 'roceeds of the sale of his 'ig. +his alleged incidents, a''ellants argues, should hae desered credence as this was not rebutted by the 'rosecution. *e do not agree. +his su''osed illDmotie of 'riate com'lainant was not duly established by the defense. (ence, there was nothing for the 'rosecution to rebut. +he elementary in the rules of eidence is that an affirmatie allegation made by a 'arty must be duly 'roed to merit acce'tance by the court. Besides, this 'osture of a''ellant was correctly re@ected by the trial court when it ruled that  . . . . Although, this allegation was not rebutted as the trial 'rosecutor did not 'resent again eddy Calayca as a rebuttal witness, to the mind of the court, the fact of sla''ing is not enough reason on the 'art of 'riate offended 'arty to file such heinous case as ra'e against her own father. If it were true that eddy Calayca got his money without his 'ermission, she would no t be slighted if sla''ed knowing that she got it and desered such 'unishment. +his is in accord with human e)'erience. 17 *e beliee that a teenage unmarried lass would not ordinarily file a ra'e charge against anybody, much less her own father, if it were not true. 1 :or, it is unnatural for a young and innocent girl to concoct a story of defloration, allow an e)amination of her 'riate 'art, and thereafter sub@ect herself to a 'ublic trial if she has not, in fact, been a ictim of ra'e and dee'ly motiated by a sincere desire to hae the cul'rit a''rehended and 'unished. 1= +he alleged sla''ing by a'ellant on 'riate com'lainant oer money in the amount of merely P,???.?? is too frail a reason for a teenage daughter to falsely charge her own father with the heinous crime of ra'e that is 'unishable by death.


0
It is significant to note that, as likewise em'hasi;ed by the trial court, a''ellant did not deny the im'utation of 'riate com'lainant that he ra'ed her on Fanuary 1<, 0<<7 at his house in 4olo, Balingasag, Misamis Oriental. 1J (is silence on the eidence o f ra'e against him is a mute but elo!uent admission of the crime charged. 1K *e, therefore, affirm the finding of the trial court that the charge of ra'e against a''ellant has been 'roen beyond reasonable doubt. (oweer, while we agree that the 'enalty of death should be im'osed on him, regrettably this is not in accord with the law and @uris'rudence. Although the matter of the 'ro'er im'osition of the 'enalty is not assigned as an error by the a''ellant, neertheless, it is a wellDestablished rule in criminal 'rocedure that an a''eal in a criminal 'roceeding throws the whole case o'en for reiew and it becomes the duty of the a''ellate court to correct an error as may be found in the a''ealed @udgment, whether it is made the sub@ect if assignment of errors or not. 1< +he trial court im'osed the death 'enalty on a''ellant because of the 'resence of the circumstances of minority of the ictim she was only 0 years old at the time she was ra'ed on Fanuary 1<, 0<<7% as well as the relationshi' of the offender #father% and the ictim #daughter%, 'ursuant to 4ection 00 of 5e'ublic Act o. J=< >? which amended Article >> of the 5eised Penal Code. >0 4ection 00 of 5.A. J=< reads3 4ec. 00. Article >> of the crime Code #5eised Penal Code, as amended% is hereby amended to read as follows3 Art. >>. *hen and how ra'e is committed. 5a'e is committed by haing carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances3 0.


1.


>.

*hen the woman is under twele years of age or is demented.

+he crime of ra'e shall be 'unished by reclusion 'er'etua. *heneer the crime of ra'e is committed with the use of deadly wea'on or by two or more 'ersions the 'enalty shall be reclusion 'er'etua to death. *hen by reason or on the occasion of the ra'e, homicide is committed by reason or on the occasion hereof, the 'enalty shall be death. *hen the ra'e is attem'ted or frustrated and a homicide is committed by reason or on the occasion of thereof, the 'enalty shall be reclusion 'er'etua to death.


0<0

*hen by reason or on the occasion of the ra'e a homicide is committed, the 'enalty shall be death. +he death 'enalty shall also im'osed if the crime of ra'e is committed with any of the following attendant circumstances3 0. *hen the ictim is under eighten #0K% years of age and the offender is a 'arent, asendent, ste'D'arent, guardian, relatie by consanguinity or affinity within the third ciil degree, or the commonDlaw s'ouse of the 'arent of the ictim. 1.

*hen the ictim is under the custody of the 'olice or military authorities.

>. *hen the ra'e is committed in full iew of the husband, 'arent, any of the children or other relaties within the third degree of consaguinity. 7.

*hen the ictim is a religious or a child below seen #J% years old.

. *hen the offender know that he is afflicted with Ac!uired Immune eficiency 4yndrome #AI4% desease. =. *hen committed by any member of the Armed :orces of the Phili''ines or the Phili''ine ational Police or any law enforcement agency. J. *hen by reason on the occasion of the ra'e, the ictim has suffered 'ermanent 'hysical mutilation em'hasis su''liedN. +he aboeD!uoted 4ection 00 'roides, inter alia, that where the ictim of the crime of ra'e is under eighteen #0K% years of age and the offender is a 'arent of the ictim, the death 'enalty shall be im'osed. +his is among the seen #J% circumstances enumerated in 4ection 00 which, as we hae held in the recent case of Peo'le . 6arcia, >1 are considered s'ecial circumstances s'ecifically a''licable to the crime of ra'e. In 6arcia, this Court en banc, s'eaking through Fustice :loren; . 5egalado, >> declared that "although the crime is still denominated as ra'e, such #enumerated% circumstances hae changed the nature of sim'le ra'e by 'roducing a !ualified form thereof 'unishable by the higher 'enalty of death. >7 *e reiterated this ruling in subse!uent en banc cases of Peo'le . 5amos, > Peo'le . 9eo'oldo Ilao >= and Peo'le . Omar Medina, >J with further 'ronouncement that these seen new attendant circumstances introduced in 4ection 00 of 5.A. o. J=< "'artake of the nature of Rualifying circumstances and not merely aggraating circumstances," since the said !ualifying circumstances are 'u nishable by the single indiisible 'enalty of death and not by reclusion 'er'etua to death. A !ualifying circumstances increases it to a higher while an aggraating circumstance affects only the 'eriod of the 'enalty but does not increase it to a higher degree. >K In the aforecited case of Peo'le . 5amos, we e)'lained that3 *hile 5e'ublic Act o. J=< did not gie a legal designation to the crime of ra'e attended by any of the seen new circumstances introduced in Article >> on ecember >0, 0<<>, this Court


0<1

has referred to such crime as !ualified ra'e in a number of its decisions. (oweer, with or without a name for this kind of ra'e, the concurrence of the minority of the ictim and her relationshi' with the offender gie a different character to the ra'e defined in the first 'art of Article >>. +hey raise the im'osable 'enalty u'on a 'erson accused of ra'e from reclusion 'er'etua to the higher and su'reme 'enalty of death. 4uch an effect con@ointly 'uts relationshi' and minority of the offended 'arty into the nature of a s'ecial !ualifying circumstances. #8m'hasis su''lied% A reading of the Information for ra'e filed against a''ellant in the 'resent case reeals that he is merely charged with the crime of sim'le ra'e which warrants the im'osition of the 'enalty of reclusion 'er'etua. +his is so because the fact of the monitory of the ictim, is not stated in the Information. *hat was alleged therein was only the relationshi' of the offender as the 'arent of the ictim. Again, as we hae em'hasi;ed in Peo'le . 5amos, the elements of minority of the ictim and her relationshi' to the offender must concur. As such, the charge of ra'e in the Information is not in its !ualified form so as to fall under the s'ecial !ualifying circumstances stated in 4ection 00 of 5.A. J=<. +hus, the 'enalty of death 'rescribed in 5.A. J=< should not hae been im'osed against a''ellant. In the aforecited case of Peo'le . 6arcia, we ruled3 . . ., it has long been the rule that !ualifying circumstances must be 'ro'erly 'leaded in the indictment. If the same are not 'leaded but 'roed, they shall be considered only as aggraating circumstances #Peo'le . Collado, =? Phil. 0<>7N2 Peo'le Foellano, et al., = 4C5A 0= 0?< 0<<N, since the latter admit of 'roof een if not 'leaded #&.4. . Cam'o, 1> Phil. >=K 0<01N2 Peo'le . omondon, =? Phil. J1< 0<>7N2 Peo'le . de 6u;man, 0=7 4C5A 10 0, 5eised Penal Code%. . . . . (e must, . . . , be further held liable for the corres'onding indemnity to the ictim, as well as e)em'lary damages for each count of ra'e #Peo'le . $illanuea, 17 4C5A 1?1 0<<=N%." #em'hasis su''lied% +here being no allegation of the minority of the ictim in the Information under which the a''ellant was arraigned, he cannot be conicted of !ualified ra'e as he was not 'ro'erly informed that he is being accused of !ualified ra'e. >< A''ellant-s coniction of !ualified ra'e iolates his constitutional right to be 'ro'erly informed of the nature and cause of accusation against him. 7? In a criminal 'rosecution, it is the


0<>

fundamental rule that eery element of the crime charged must be alleged in the Information. +he main 'ur'ose of this constitutional re!uirement is to enable the accused to 'ro'erly 're'are his defense. (e is 'resumed to hae no inde'endent knowledge of the facts that constitute the offense. 70 Ado'ting our 'ronouncement in the aforecited cases of Peo'le . 6arcia and Peo'le . 5amos, the failure to allege the fact of minority of the ictim in the Information for ra'e is fatal and conse!uently bars the im'osition of the death 'enalty. (aing been informed only of the elements of sim'le ra'e, the a''ellant can be conicted only of such crime and be 'unished accordingly with reclusion 'er'etua. 71 As regards the P?,???.?? which the trial court ordered the a''ellant-s to 'ay the 'riate com'lainant, the assailed @udgment does not s'ecify what this amount is intended for. *e beliee, howeer, that the said amount is for 'ayment of indemnity, which we find to be 'ro'er. In the recent case of Peo'le . Prades, 7> it was ruled that the award of moral damages to the ictim is 'ro'er een if there was no 'roof 'resented during the trial as basis therefor. +he circumstances of relationshi' between the offender and the ictim as an aggraating circumstances becomes necessary in the matter of awarding ciil damages. 77 +hus, we find the a''ellant liable for P?,???.?? as moral damages and P1,???.?? as a)em'lary damages. *(858:O58, the @udgment of the trial court conicting a''ellant A5+8MIO CA9ASCA of !ualified ra'e is MOI:I8 in the sense that a''ellant is declared guilty of sim'le ra'e and his hereby sentenced to suffer the 'enalty of reclusion 'er'etua and to 'ay eddy Calayca the sum of P?,???.?? by way of indemnity, P?,???.?? as moral damages and P1,??? as e)em'lary damages. People v. 0onaagua

Ireno Bonaagua #Ireno% seeks the reersal of the ecision0 of the Court of A''eals #CA% in CAD 6.5. C5D(.C. o. ?>0>> conicting him with three #>% counts of 4tatutory 5a'e under Paragra'h 1, Article 1==DA of the 5eised Penal Code #5PC%, as amended, in relation to 5e'ublic Act o. J=0? #5.A. o. J=0?% and Acts of 9asciiousness under 4ection  #b% of 5.A. o. J=0?. +he factual and 'rocedural antecedents are as follows3 In four #7% se'arate Informations, Ireno was charged by the Office of the City Prosecutor of 9as Pias City with four #7% counts of 5a'e under Paragra'h 1, Article 1==DA of the 5PC, as amended, in relation to 5.A. o. J=0?, for inserting his tongue and his finger into the genital of his minor daughter, AAA.1 +he accusatory 'ortion of the Information in Criminal Case o. ?>D?17 against Ireno reads3 +hat on or about the month of ecember 0<

0<7

moral ascendancy, by means of force, threat and intimidation, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously insert his tongue and finger into the genital of his daughter, AAAN, a minor then eight #K% years of age, against her will and consent. CO+5A5S +O 9A* and with the s'ecial aggraatingU!ualifying circumstance of minority of the 'riate offended 'arty, AAAN, being then only eight #K% years of age and relationshi' of the said 'riate offended 'arty with the accused, Ireno Bonaagua y Berce, the latter being the biological father of the former.> +he Information in Criminal Case o. ?>D?17 has the same accusatory allegations while the Informations in Criminal Case os. ?>D?1= and Criminal Case os. ?>D?1J= are similarly worded, e)ce't for the date of the commission of the crime and the age of AAA, which are ecember 1??? and ten #0?% years old, res'ectiely. +he cases were later consolidatedJ and u'on his arraignment, Ireno 'leaded not guilty to the four #7% counts of ra'e with which he was charged. Conse!uently, trial on the merits ensued. At the trial, the 'rosecution 'resented the testimonies of the ictim, AAA2 the ictims mother2 and r. Melissa e 9eon. +he defense, on the other hand, 'resented the lone testimony of the accused as eidence. 8idence for the Prosecution +he 'rosecution established that in 0<

0<

AccusedDa''ellant re'eated the same se)ual assault shortly thereafter. AAA again did not re'ort these incidents for fear that her mother would be killed and cemented inside a drum. On Fanuary 1=, 1??0, AAA com'lained of seere abdominal 'ain which 'rom'ted her mother to take her to 6regg (os'ital in 4ariaya, Rue;on. AAA was transferred to the Rue;on Memorial (os'ital in 9ucena City where r. Melissa e 9eon 'erformed on her a 'hysical e)amination. +he results reealed that there was a healed su'erficial laceration at the < oclock 'osition on the hymen of AAA. +his medical finding forced AAA to reeal to her mother all the incidents of ra'e committed by accusedDa''ellant. After being discharged from the hos'ital, AAAs mother took her to the Police (ead!uarters of 4ariaya, Rue;on to file a com'laint for ra'e against accusedDa''ellant. AAAs mother also took her to the office of the ational Bureau of Inestigation in 9egas'i City where she e)ecuted a sworn statement against accusedDa''ellant.K 8idence for the efense AccusedDa''ellant denied committing the charges of ra'e hurled against him. (e claimed to be working in 9as Pias City while AAA, her mother and siblings where #sic% in 4ariaya, Rue;on at the time the alleged ra'es occurred. *hile he admitted that there were times when AAA and her mother would isit him in 9as Pias City, he nonetheless aerred that they would leae on the same day they arried after he gies them money. AccusedDa''ellant asserted further that the charges of ra'e against him were fabricated by AAAs mother, who sus'ected him of haing an affair with another woman in 9as Pias City.< On August =, 1??J, the 5egional +rial Court #5+C%, after finding the eidence for the 'rosecution oerwhelming against the accuseds defense of denial and alibi, rendered a ecision0? conicting Ireno with four #7% counts of 5a'e, the dis'ositie 'ortion of which reads3 *(858:O58, 'remises considered, there being 'roof beyond reasonable doubt that accused I58O BOAA6&A, has committed four #7% counts of 5AP8 under 'ar. 1 of Article 1==DA of the 5eised Penal Code, as amended, in relation to 5.A. J=0?, as charged, the Court hereby 'ronounced him 6&I9+S and sentences him to suffer the 'enalty of 58C9&4IO P85P8+&A for each case and to 'ay 'riate com'lainant AAAN, the amount of Ph'?,??? for each case, or a total of Ph'1??,???, by way of ciil indemnity 'lus Ph'?,??? for each case or a total of Ph'1??,??? as moral damages. Costs against the accused. 4O O5858.00 Aggrieed, Ireno a''ealed the ecision before the CA, which a''eal was later docketed as CAD 6.5. C5D(.C. o. ?>0>>.


0<=

On March >0, 1??<, the CA rendered a ecision01 affirming the decision of the 5+C with modifications on the im'osable 'enalty in Criminal Case os. ?>D?17, ?>D?1=, and ?>D?1J, and finding Ireno guilty of Acts of 9asciiousness under 4ection  #b% of 5.A. o. J=0?, instead of 5a'e, in Criminal Case os. ?>D?1, the decretal 'ortion of which reads3 *(858:O58, the ecision of the 5egional +rial Court of 9as Pias City, Branch 17, finding Ireno Bonaagua y Berce guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of ra'e is A::I5M8 with MOI:ICA+IO43 0. Ireno Bonaagua y Berce is hereby sentenced to suffer the indeterminate 'enalty o f 01 years of 'rision mayor, as minimum, to 1? years of reclusion tem'oral, as ma)imum, for each ra'e in Criminal Case os. ?>D?17, ?>D?1= and ?>D?1J and is ordered to 'ay AAA the amount of P1,???.?? as e)em'lary damages in each case, a'art from the ciil indemnity and moral damages that hae already been awarded by the trial court2 1. Ireno Bonaagua y Berce is hereby held guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of acts of lasciiousness in Criminal Case o. ?>D?1, with relationshi' as an aggraating circumstance. (e is, accordingly, sentenced to suffer the indeterminate 'enalty of 01 years and 0 day to 0J years and 7 months of reclusion tem'oral in its minimum and medium 'eriods and ordered to 'ay AAA the amount of PhP0,??? as moral damages and a fine of PhP0,???.??. 4O O5858.0> In fine, the CA found Irenos defense of denial and alibi inherently weak against the 'ositie identification of AAA that he was the cul'rit of the horrid deed. +hus, aside from modifying the im'osable 'enalty in Criminal Case os. ?>D?17, ?>D?1= and ?>D?1J, the CA affirmed the decision of the 5+C finding Ireno guilty of the crime of 5a'e +hrough 4e)ual Assault. In Criminal Case o. ?>D?1, howeer, after a diligent reiew of the eidence adduced by the 'rosecution, the CA only found Ireno guilty of the crime of Acts of 9asciiousness under 4ection  #b% of 5.A. o. J=0?. +he CA o'ined that since the 'rosecution failed to establish the act of insertion by Ireno of his finger into the agina of AAA, Ireno could only be found guilty of Acts of 9asciiousness, a crime which is necessarily included in the Information filed against him in Criminal Case o. ?>D?1. Ireno now comes before this Court for relief. In a 5esolution07 dated ecember 0=, 1??<, the Court informed the 'arties that they may file their res'ectie su''lemental briefs if they so desire. In their res'ectie Manifestations,0 the 'arties waied the filing of their su''lemental briefs and, instead, ado'ted their res'ectie briefs filed before the CA. (ence, Ireno raises the lone error3 I


0
+he CO&5+ A R&O 65A$89S 8558 I :II6 +(8 ACC&48DAPP899A+ 6&I9+S O: +(8 C5IM8 O: 5AP8 84PI+8 +(8 P5O48C&+IO4 :AI9&58 +O P5O$8 (I4 6&I9+ B8SO 58A4OAB98 O&B+.0= 4im'ly 'ut, Ireno maintains that the testimony of AAA was re'lete with inconsistencies and was e)tremely unbelieable. Ireno insists that the allegation that he inserted his tongue and finger into the genital of AAA was manifestly incredible as the deed is 'hysiologically im'ossible. Moreoer, the medical findings are grossly inconclusie to 'roe that AAA was ra'ed, since it only established that there was only one healed su'erficial laceration. +his Court, howeer, finds the arguments raised by Ireno untenable. +o determine the innocence or guilt of the accused in ra'e cases, the courts are guided by three wellDentrenched 'rinci'les3 #0% an accusation of ra'e can be made with facility and while the accusation is difficult to 'roe, it is een more difficult for the accused, though innocent, to dis'roe2 #1% considering that in the nature of things, only two 'ersons are usually inoled in the crime of ra'e, the testimony of the com'lainant should be scrutini;ed with great caution2 and #>% the eidence for the 'rosecution must stand or fall on its own merits and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the eidence for the defense.0J After 'erusing the testimony of the ictim, AAA, the 'rosecution has indubitably established that Ireno was the one who se)ually assaulted her. AAA categorically narrated that Ireno se)ually abused her on seeral occasions and een threatened AAA that he would kill her mother if she would re'ort the incidents. +ime and again, this Court has consistently held that in ra'e ca ses, the ealuation of the credibility of witnesses is best addressed to the sound discretion of the trial @udge wh ose conclusion thereon deseres much weight and res'ect because the @udge had the direct o''ortunity to obsere them on the stand and ascertain if they were telling the truth or not. 6enerally, a''ellate courts will not interfere with the trial courts assessment in this regard, absent any indication or showing that the trial court has oerlooked some material facts of substance or alue, or graely abused its discretion.0K It is well entrenched in this @urisdiction that when the offended 'arties are young and immature girls, as in this case, courts are inclined to lend credence to their ersion of what trans'ired, considering not only their relatie ulnerability, but also the shame and embarrassment to which they would be e)'osed if the matter about which they testified were not true.0< A young girl would not usually concoct a tale of defloration2 'ublicly admit haing been raished and her honor tainted2 allow the e)amination of her 'riate 'arts2 and undergo all the trouble and inconenience, not to mention the trauma and scandal of a 'ublic trial, had she not in fact been ra'ed and been truly moed to 'rotect and 'resere her honor, and motiated by the desire to obtain @ustice for the wicked acts committed against her.1? Moreoer, the Court has re'eatedly held that the lone testimony of the ictim in a ra'e case, if credible, is enough to sustain a coniction.10


0
Moreoer, contrary to Irenos contention, the medical findings of r. Melissa e 9eon did not refute AAAs testimony of defilement, but instead bolstered her claim. +he 5+C correctly concluded3 It is true that r. Melissa e 9eon, when called to the witness stand to substantiate the same medical certification, did not rule out the 'ossibility that the laceration might h ae been inflicted through some other causes and that there could hae been only one instance of finger insertion into the agina of 'riate com'lainant. (oweer, it is e!ually true that r. e 9eon also did not rule out the 'ossibility that finger insertion might hae been the cause of the laceration #''. JD01, +4, Fanuary >0, 1??=%. r. e 9eon also clarified that only one laceration may be inflicted although a finger is inserted into the agina on se'arate instances #''. 0 8en Irenos contention that the charges against him were merely fabricated by his wife because she sus'ects that he is haing an affair with another woman deseres scant consideration. Aside from the fact that the said allegation was not 'roed, it must be em'hasi;ed that no member of a ra'e ictims family would dare encourage the ictim to 'ublicly e)'ose the dishonor to the family unless the crime was in fact committed, es'ecially in this case where the ictim and the


0<<

offender are relaties.17 It is unnatural for a mother to use her daughter as an engine of malice, es'ecially if it will sub@ect her child to embarrassment and lifelong stigma.1 Also, Ireno cannot likewise rely on the Affidait of esistance stating that AAA and her mother are no longer interested in 'ursuing the case filed against him. 5a'e is no longer a crime against chastity for it is now classified as a crime against 'ersons.1= Conse!uently, ra'e is no longer considered a 'riate crime or that which cannot be 'rosecuted, e)ce't u'on a com'laint filed by the aggrieed 'arty. (ence, 'ardon by the offended 'arty of the offender in the crime of ra'e will not e)tinguish the offenders criminal liability. Moreoer, an Affidait of esistance ^ een when construed as a 'ardon in the erstwhile "'riate crime" of ra'e ^ is not a ground for the dismissal of the criminal cases, since the actions hae already been instituted. +o @ustify the dismissal of the com'laints, the 'ardon should hae been made 'rior to the institution of the criminal actions.1J As correctly concluded by the CA, the said affidait was e)ecuted in connection with another accusation of ra'e which Ireno committed against AAA in Candelaria, Rue;on and not the four cases of ra'e sub@ect of this a''eal. In addition, AAAs mother testified that she e)ecuted the said affidait to regain custody of her children who were brought to Bicol by Irenos siblings.1K It has been re'eatedly held by this Court that it looks with disfaor on affidaits of desistance. As cited in Peo'le . Alca;ar,1< the rationale for this was e)tensiely discussed in Peo'le . Funio3>? ) ) ) *e hae said in so many cases that retractions are generally unreliable and are looked u'on with considerable disfaor by the courts. +he unreliable character of this document is shown by the fact that it is !uite incredible that after going through the 'rocess of haing the a''ellantN arrested by the 'olice, 'ositiely identifying him as the 'erson who ra'ed her, enduring the humiliation of a 'hysical e)amination of her 'riate 'arts, and then re'eating her accusations in o'en court by recounting her anguish, the ra'e ictimN would suddenly turn around and declare that aNfter a careful deliberation oer the case, #she% find#s% that the same does not merit or warrant criminal 'rosecution. +hus, we hae declared that at most the retraction is an afterthought which should not be gien 'robatie alue. It would be a dangerous rule to re@ect the testimony taken before the court of @ustice sim'ly because the witness who gae it later on changed his mind for one reason or another. 4uch a rule wouldN make a solemn trial a mockery an d 'lace the inestigation at the mercy of unscru'ulous witnesses. Because affidaits of retraction can easily be secured from 'oor and ignorant witnesses, usually for monetary consideration, the Court has inariably regarded such affidaits as e)ceedingly unreliable.>0 Amidst the oerwhelming eidence against him, Ireno offered nothing but his bare denial of the accusations against him and that he was some'lace else when the dastardly acts were committed. o @uris'rudence in criminal law is more settled than that alibi is the weakest of all defenses, for it is easy to contrie and difficult to dis'roe, and for which reason it is generally re@ected.>1 It has been consistently held that denial and alibi are the most common defenses in ra'e cases. enial could not 'reail oer com'lainants direct, 'ositie and categorical assertion. As


1??

between a 'ositie and categorical testimony which has the ring of truth, on one hand, and a bare denial, on the other, the former is generally held to 'reail.>> All said, as found by the CA, the 'rosecution has conincingly 'roed and more than sufficiently established that3 #0% Ireno committed the accusations of 5a'e +hrough 4e)ual Assault against AAA in Criminal Cases os. ?>D?17, ?>D?1=, and ?>D?1J2 #1% that AAA was a minor when Ireno committed the se)ual assault against her2>7 and #>% that Ireno was the biological father of AAA.> $erily, in criminal cases, an e)amination of the entire records of a case may be e)'lored for the 'ur'ose of arriing at a correct conclusion, as an a''eal in criminal cases throws the whole case o'en for reiew, it being the duty of the court to correct such error as may be found in the @udgment a''ealed from.>= 4ince the CA found Ireno guilty of Acts of 9asciiousness under 4ection  #b% of 5.A. o. J=0? in Criminal Case o. ?>D?1 instead of ra'e, the Court should thus determine whether the eidence 'resented by the 'rosecution was sufficient to establish that the intentional touching of the ictim by Ireno constitutes lasciious conduct and whether the CA im'osed the a''ro'riate 'enalties. As a'tly found by the CA3 A diligent reiew of the eidence adduced by the 'rosecution, howeer, shows that accusedD a''ellant cannot be held guilty as charged for the crime of ra'e in Criminal Case o. ?>D?1. +he 'rosecution failed to establish insertion by accusedDa''ellant of his finger into the agina of AAA, who testified on direct e)amination that accusedDa''ellant "touched my 'riate 'art and licked it but he did not insert his finger inside my agina." In fact, een the trial court asked AAA if accusedDa''ellant inserted his finger inside her agina. 4he answered in the nega tie and aerred that he licked her agina and touched her breasts. In re'ly to the 'rosecutions !uery if accusedDa''ellant did anything else aside from licking her organ, she said he also touched it. uring crossDe)amination, AAA testified that accusedDa''ellant "merely touched her agina but did not insert his finger.">J 4ection  #b%, Article III of 5.A. o. J=0?, defines and 'enali;es acts of lasciiousness committed against a child as follows3 4ection . Child Prostitution and Other 4e)ual Abuse. DD Children, whether male or female, who for money, 'rofit, or any other consideration or due to the coercion or influence of any adult, syndicate or grou', indulge in se)ual intercourse or lasciious conduct, are deemed to be children e)'loited in 'rostitution and other se)ual abuse. )))) #b% +hose who commit the act of se)ual intercourse or lasciious conduct with a child e)'loited in 'rostitution or sub@ect to other se)ual abuse2 Proided, +hat when the ictims is under twele #01% years of age, the 'er'etrators shall be 'rosecuted under Article >>, 'aragra'h >, for ra'e and Article >>= of Act o. >K0, as amended, the 5eised Penal Code, for ra'e or lasciious conduct, as the case may be3 Proided, +hat the 'enalty for lasciious conduct when the ictim is under twele #01% years of age shall be reclusion tem'oral in its medium 'eriod.>K


1?0

Paragra'h #b% 'unishes se)ual intercourse or lasciious conduct not only with a child e)'loited in 'rostitution, but also with a child sub@ected to other se)ual abuses. It coers not only a situation where a child is abused for 'rofit, but also where one ^ through coercion, intimidation or influence ^ engages in se)ual intercourse or lasciious conduct with a child.>< (oweer, 'ursuant to the foregoing 'roision, before an accused can be conicted of child abuse through lasciious conduct committed against a minor below 01 years of age, the re!uisites for acts of lasciiousness under Article >>= of the 5PC must be met in addition to the re!uisites for se)ual abuse under 4ection  of 5.A. o. J=0?.7? Acts of 9asciiousness, as defined in Article >>= of the 5PC, has the following elements3 #0% +hat the offender commits any act of lasciiousness or lewdness2 #1% +hat it is done under any of the following circumstances3 a. By using force or intimidation2 or b. *hen the offended 'arty is de'ried of reason or otherwise unconscious2 or c. *hen the offended 'arty is under 01 years of age2 and #>% +hat the offended 'arty is another 'erson of either se).70 In addition, the following elements of se)ual abuse under 4ection , Article III of 5.A. o. J=0? must be established3 0. +he accused commits the act of se)ual intercourse or lasciious conduct. 1. +he said act is 'erformed with a child e)'loited in 'rostitution or sub@ected to other se)ual abuse. >. +he child, whether male or female, is below 0K years of age.71 Corollarilly, 4ection 1 #h% of the rules and regulations7> of 5.A. o. J=0? defines "9asciious conduct" as3 +Nhe intentional touching, either directly or through clothing, of the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks, or the introduction of any ob@ect into the genitalia, anus or mouth, of any 'erson, whether of the same or o''osite se), with an intent to abuse, humiliate, harass, degrade, or arouse or gratify the se)ual desire of any 'erson, bestiality, masturbation, lasciious e)hibition of the genitals or 'ubic area of a 'erson.77


1?1

&ndeniably, all the aforeDstated elements are 'resent in Criminal Case o. ?>D?1. Ireno committed lasciious acts against AAA by touching her breasts and licking her agina and the lasciious or lewd acts were committed against AAA, who was K years old at the time as established by her birth certificate.7 +hus, the CA correctly found Ireno guilty of the crime of Acts of 9asciiousness under 4ection  #b% of 5.A. o. J=0?.0a'hi0 It must be em'hasi;ed, howeer, that like in the crime of ra'e whereby the slightest 'enetration of the male organ or een its slightest contact with the outer li' or the labia ma@ora of the agina already consummates the crime, in like manner, if the tongue, in an act of cunnilingus, touches the outer li' of the agina, the act should also be considered as already consummating the crime of ra'e through se)ual assault, not the crime of acts of lasciiousness. otwithstanding, in the 'resent case, such logical inter'retation could not be a''lied. It must be 'ointed out that the ictim testified that Ireno only touched her 'riate 'art and licked it, but did not insert his finger in her agina. +his testimony of the ictim, howeer, is o'en to arious inter'retation, since it cannot be identified what s'ecific 'art of the agina was defiled by Ireno. +hus, in conformity with the 'rinci'le that the guilt of an accused must be 'roen beyond reasonable doubt, the statement cannot be the basis for conicting Ireno with the crime of ra'e through se)ual assault. Penalties and Award of amages (aing found Ireno guilty beyond reasonable doubt of 5a'e +hrough 4e)ual Assault in Criminal Case os. ?>D?17, ?>D?1=, and ?>D?1J and Acts of 9asciiousness in Criminal Case o. ?>D ?1, *e shall 'roceed to determine the a''ro'riate 'enalties im'osable for each offense. Criminal Case os. ?>D?17, ?>D?1=, and ?>D?1J &nder Article 1==DB of the 5PC, the 'enalty for ra'e by se)ual assault is reclusion tem'oral "if the ra'e is committed by any of the 0? aggraatingU!ualifying circumstances mentioned in this article."7= In Criminal Case os. ?>D?17, ?>D?1=, and ?>D?1J, the aggraatingU!ualifying circumstance of minority and relationshi' are 'resent, considering that the ra'e was committed by a 'arent against his minor child. 5eclusion tem'oral ranges from twele #01% years and one #0% day to twenty #1?% years. A''lying the Indeterminate 4entence 9aw, the ma)imum term of the indeterminate 'enalty shall be that which could be 'ro'erly im'osed under the 5PC. Other than the aggraatingU!ualifying circumstances of minority and relationshi' which hae been taken into account to raise the 'enalty to reclusion tem'oral,7J no other aggraating circumstance was alleged and 'roen. (ence, the 'enalty shall be im'osed in its medium 'eriod,7K or fourteen #07% years, eight #K% months and one #0% day to seenteen #0J% years and four #7% months. On the other hand, the minimum term of the indeterminate sentence should be within the range of the 'enalty ne)t lower in degree than that 'rescribed by the Code which is 'rision mayor or si) #=% years and one #0% day to twele #01% years.7< +hus, Ireno should be meted the indeterminate 'enalty of ten #0?% years of 'rision mayor, as minimum, to seenteen #0J% years and four #7% months of reclusion tem'oral, as ma)imum.


1?>

It must be clarified, howeer, that the reasoning e)'ounded by the Court in the recent case of Peo'le . Armando Chingh y Parcia,? for im'osing u'on the accused the higher 'enalty 'roided in 4ection  #b%, Article III of 5.A. o. J=0?, has no a''lication in the case at bar. In the said case, the Court, acknowledging the fact that to im'ose the lesser 'enalty would be unfair to the child ictim, meted u'on the accused the higher 'enalty of reclusion tem'oral in its medium 'eriod as 'roided in 4ection  #b%, Article III of 5.A. o. J=0?, instead of the lesser 'enalty of 'rision mayor 'rescribed by Article 1==DB for ra'e by se)ual assault under 'aragra'h 1, Article 1==DA of the 5PC. +he Court elucidated3 In this case, the offended 'arty was ten years old at the time of the commission of the offense. Pursuant to the aboeD!uoted 'roision of law, Armando was a'tly 'rosecuted under Art. 1==DA, 'ar. 1 of the 5eised Penal Code, as amended by 5.A. o. K>>, for 5a'e +hrough 4e)ual Assault. (oweer, instead of a''lying the 'enalty 'rescribed therein, which is 'rision mayor, considering that $$$ was below 01 years of age, and considering further that Armandos act of inserting his finger in $$$s 'riate 'art undeniably amounted to lasciious conduct, the a''ro'riate im'osable 'enalty should be that 'roided in 4ection  #b%, Article III of 5.A. o. J=0?, which is reclusion tem'oral in its medium 'eriod. +he Court is not unmindful to the fact that the accused who commits acts of lasciiousness under Art. >== in relation to 4ection  #b%, Article III of 5.A. o. J=0?, suffers the more seere 'enalty of reclusion tem'oral in its medium 'eriod than the one who commits 5a'e +hrough 4e)ual Assault, which is merely 'unishable by 'rision mayor. +his is undeniably unfair to the child ictim. +o be sure, it was not the intention of the framers of 5.A. o. K>> to hae disallowed the a''licability of 5.A. o. J=0? to se)ual abuses committed to children. es'ite the 'assage of 5A o. K>>, 5.A. o. J=0? is still good law, which must be a''lied when the ictims are children or those "'ersons below eighteen #0K% years of age or those oer but are unable to fully take care of themseles or 'rotect themseles from abuse, neglect, cruelty, e)'loitation or discrimination because of a 'hysical or mental disability or condition." In the 'resent case, the factual milieu was different since the offender, Ireno, is the father of the minor ictim. (ence, the offenses were committed with the aggraatingU!ualifying circumstances of minority and relationshi', attendant circumstances which were not 'resent in the Chingh case, which in turn, warrants the im'osition of the higher 'enalty of reclusion tem'oral 'rescribed by Article 1==DB of the 5PC. Considering that the 5PC already 'rescribes such 'enalty, the rationale of unfairness to the child ictim that Chingh wanted to correct is absent. (ence, there is no more need to a''ly the 'enalty 'rescribed by 5.A. o. J=0?. As to ciil liabilities, the damages awarded in the form of ciil indemnity in the amount of P?,???.?? and moral damages, also in the amount of P?,???.??, for each count of 5a'e must be both reduced to P>?,???.??, res'ectiely, in line with current @uris'rudence.0 Also, the amount of e)em'lary damages awarded in the amount of P1,???.?? must be increased to P>?,???.?? for each count of 5a'e.1 Criminal Case o. ?>D?1


1?7

It is beyond cail that when the se)ual abuse was committed by Ireno, AAA was only eight #K% years old. (ence, the 'roisions of 5.A. o. J=0?, or +he 4'ecial Protection of Children Against Child Abuse, 8)'loitation and iscrimination Act, should be a''lied. +hus, the a''ro'riate im'osable 'enalty should be that 'roided in 4ection  #b%, Article III of 5.A. o. J=0?, which is reclusion tem'oral in its medium 'eriod which is fourteen #07% years, eight #K% months and one #0% day to seenteen #0J% years and four #7% months. As the crime was committed by the father of the offended 'arty, the alternatie circumstance of relationshi' should be a''reciated. In crimes against chastity, such as Acts of 9asciiousness, relationshi' is always aggraating.> +herefore, Ireno should be meted the indeterminate 'enalty of thirteen #0>% years, nine #<% months and eleen #00% days of reclusion tem'oral, as minimum, to si)teen #0=% years, fie #% months and ten #0?% days of reclusion tem'oral, as ma)imum. Moreoer, the award in the amount of P0,???.?? as moral damages and a fine in the amount of P0,???.??, is 'ro'er in line with current @uris'rudence.7 (oweer, ciil indemnity e) delicto in the amount of P1?,???.?? should also be awarded. In iew of the 'resence of the aggraating circumstance of relationshi', the amount of P0,???.?? as e)em'lary damages should likewise be awarded.= *(858:O58, 'remises considered, the ecision of the Court of A''eals, dated March >0, 1??< in CAD6.5. C5D(.C. o. ?>0>>, is A::I5M8 with MOI:ICA+IO43 0. In Criminal Case os. ?>D?17, ?>D?1=, and ?>D?1J, I58O BOAA6&A y B85C8 is hereby sentenced to suffer the indeterminate 'enalty of ten #0?% years of 'rision mayor, as minimum, to seenteen #0J% years and four #7% months of reclusion tem'oral, as ma)imum, for each count. (e is likewise ordered to 'ay AAA the amounts of P>?,???.?? as ciil indemnity, P>?,???.?? as moral damages, and P>?,???.?? as e)em'lary damages for each count of Rualified 5a'e +hrough 4e)ual Assault or a total of PD?1, I58O BOAA6&A y B85C8 is meted to suffer the indeterminate 'enalty of thirteen #0>% years, nine #<% months and eleen #00% days of reclusion tem'oral, as minimum, to si)teen #0=% years, fie #% months and ten #0?% days of reclusion tem'oral, as ma)imum. In addition to moral damages and fine, he is likewise ordered to 'ay P1?,???.?? as ciil indemnity and P0,???.?? as e)em'lary damages. People v. @umawan ="A&(,A$ &AP*> Facts: AccusedDa''ellant 8dgar Fumawan and his wife, EEE, were married on October 0K,

0 3?? a.m. of ecember >, 0<

1?

On Fuly 0=, 0<<<, two Informations for ra'e were filed before the 5+C. +he 'rosecution-s theory was anchored on the testimonies of EEE, and her daughters MMM and ???, which, together with 'ertinent 'hysical eidence, de'icted the following eents3 EEE met the accusedDa''ellant at the farm of her 'arents where his father was one of the laborers. +hey got married after a year of courtshi'. *hen their first child, MMM, was born, EEE and the accusedDa''ellant 'ut u' a sariDsari store. 9ater on, they engaged in seeral other businesses Dtrucking, rice mill and hardware. EEE managed the businesses e)ce't for the rice mill, which, ideally, was under the accusedDa''ellant-s su'erision with the hel' of a trusted em'loyee. In reality, howeer, he merely assisted in the rice mill business by occasionally driing one of the trucks to haul goods. AccusedDa''ellant-s keenness to make the businesses flourish was not as ferent as EEE-s dedication. 8en the daughters obsered the dis'ro'ortionate labors of their 'arents. (e would drie the trucks sometimes but EEE was the one who actiely managed the businesses. Con@ugal intimacy did not really cause marital 'roblems between EEE and the accusedD a''ellant. It was, in fact, both fre!uent and fulfilling. (e treated her well and she, of course, res'onded with e!ual degree of enthusiasm. (oweer, in MML8 he started to be brutal in bed. 'e would immediatel remove her panties and8 sans an forepla8 insert her penis in her vagina. 'is abridged method of lovema-ing was phsicall painful for her so she would resist his se1ual ambush but he would threaten her into submission .

In 0<

1?=

+he accusedDa''ellant then lay beside EEE and not before long, e)'ressed his desire to co'ulate with her by ta''ing his fingers on her la'. 4he 'olitely declined by warding off his hand and reiterating that she was not feeling well. +he accusedDa''ellant again asserted his se)ual yearning and when EEE tried to resist by holding on to her 'anties, he 'ulled them down so forcefully they tore on the sides. EEE stayed defiant by refusing to bend her legs. +he accusedDa''ellant then raised EEE-s daster, stretched her legs a'art and rested his own legs on them. 4he tried to wrestle him away but he held her hands and succeeded in 'enetrating her. As he was carrying out his carnal desires, EEE continued to 'rotest by des'erately shouting3 "on -t do that to me because I-m not feeling well." *ith a concrete wall on one side and a mere wooden 'artition on the other enclosing the s'ouses- bedroom, EEE-s 'leas were audible in the children-s bedroom where MMM lay awake. &'on hearing her mother crying and hysterically shouting3 "8ddie, don-t do that to me, hae 'ity on me," MMM woke u' ??? who 'rodded her to go to their 'arents- room. MMM hurriedly climbed u'stairs, igorously knocked on the door of her 'arents- bedroom and in!uired3 "Pa, why is it that Mama is cryingG"7= +he accusedDa''ellant then !uickly 'ut on his briefs and shirt, 'artly o'ened the door and said3 "on -t interfere because this is a family trouble," before closing it again. 4ince she heard her mother continue to cry, MMM ignored his father-s admonition, knocked at the bedroom door again, and then kicked it. A furious accusedDa''ellant o'ened the door wider and rebuked MMM once more3 "on-t interfere us. 6o downstairs because this is family troubleQ" &'on seeing EEE crouching and crying on to' of the bed, MMM boldly entered the room, a''roached her mother and asked3 "Ma, why are you cryingG" before asking her father3 "Pa, what ha''ened to Mama, why is it that her underwear is tornG" *hen MMM receied no definite answers to her !uestions, she hel'ed her mother get u' in order to bring her to the girls- bedroom. EEE then 'icked u' her torn underwear and coered herself with a blanket. (oweer, their breakout from the room was not easy. +o 'reent EEE from leaing, the accusedDa''ellant blocked the doorway by e)tending his arm towards the knob. (e commanded EEE to "4tay here, you slee' in our room," when the trembling EEE 'leaded3 "8ddie, allow me to go out." (e then held EEE-s hands but she 'ulled them back. etermined to get away, MMM leaned against door and embraced her mother tightly as they 'ushed their way out. In their bedroom, the girls gae their mother some water and !ueried her as to what ha''ened. EEE relayed3 "Sour father is an animal, a beast2 he forced me to hae se) with him when I-m not feeling well." +he girls then locked the door and let her rest." +he accusedDa''ellant-s aggression recurred the following night. After closing the family store on October 0J, 0<

1?J

"*hy are you slee'ing in the room of our childrenG", he asked EEE, who res'onded that she 'referred to slee' with the children. (e then scoffed3 "Its alright if you will not go with me, anyway, there are women that could be 'aid P0,???." 4he dismissed his comment by turning her head away after retorting3 "4o be it." After that, he left the room. (e returned 0 minutes later and when EEE still refused to go with him, he became infuriated. (e lifted her from the bed and attem'ted to carry her out of the room as he e)claimed3 "*hy will you slee' hereG 9ets go to our bedroom." *hen she defied him, he grabbed her short 'ants causing them to tear a'art.J At this 'oint, MMM interfered, "Pa, don-t do that to Mama because we are in front of you." +he 'resence of his children a''arently did not 'acify the accusedDa''ellant who yelled, "8Nen in front of you, I can hae se) of your mother because I-m the head of the family." (e then ordered his daughters to leae the room. :rightened, the girls obliged and went to the staircase where they subse!uently heard the 'leas of their hel'less mother resonate with the creaking bed. +he e'isodes in the bedroom were no less disturbing. +he accusedDa''ellant forcibly 'ulled EEE-s short 'ants and 'anties. (e 'aid no heed as she begged, "on -t do that to me, my body is still aching and also my abdomen and I cannot do what you wanted me to do sicN. I cannot withstand se)."=? After remoing his own short 'ants and briefs, he fle)ed her legs, held her hands, mounted her and forced himself inside her. Once gratified, the accusedDa''ellant 'ut on his short 'ants and briefs, stood u', and went out of the room laughing as he conceitedly uttered3 "(tBs nice8 that is what ou deserve because ou are a flirt or fond of se1 ." (e then retreated to the masters bedroom.=0 4ensing that the commotion in their bedroom has ceased, MMM and OOO scurried u'stairs but found the door locked. MMM 'ulled out a @alousie window, inserted her arm, reached for the doorknob inside and disengaged its lock. &'on entering the room, MMM and OOO found their mother crouched on the bed with her hair disheeled. +he girls asked3 "Ma, what ha''ened to you, why are you cryingG" EEE re'lied3 "Sour father is a beast and animal, he again forced me to hae se) with him een if I don-t feel well. +he trial court rendered a decision finding the accused guilty. +he CA affirmed the 5+C. (ssue: *hether or not rape ma be committed b the husband against the wife 'eld: %es. Clearly, it is now acknowledged that ra'e, as a form of se)ual iolence, e)ists within

marriage. A man who 'enetrates her wife without her consent or against her will commits se)ual iolence u'on her, and the Phili''ines, as a 4tate Party to the C8A * and its accom'anying eclaration, defines and 'enali;es the act as ra'e under 5.A. o. K>>. A woman is no longer the chattelDanti!uated 'ractices labeled her to be. A husband who has se)ual intercourse with his wife is not merely using a 'ro'erty, he is fulfilling a marital


1?K

consortium with a fellow human being with dignity e!ual01? to that he accords himself. (e cannot be 'ermitted to iolate this dignity by coercing her to engage in a se)ual act without her full and free consent. 4urely, the Phili''ines cannot renege on its international commitments and accommodate conseratie yet irrational notions on marital actiities010 that hae lost their releance in a 'rogressie society. It is true that the :amily Code, obligates the s'ouses to loe one another but this rule sanctions affection and se)ual intimacy, as e)'ressions of loe, that are both s'ontaneous and mutual and not the kind which is unilaterally e)acted by force or coercion. :urther, the delicate and reerent nature of se)ual intimacy between a husband and wife e)cludes cruelty and coercion. 4e)ual intimacy brings s'ouses wholeness and oneness. It is a gift and a 'artici'ation in the mystery of creation. It is a dee' sense of s'iritual communion. It is a function which enliens the ho'e of 'rocreation and ensures the continuation of family relations. It is an e)'ressie interest in each other-s feelings at a time it is need ed by the other and it can go a long way in dee'ening marital relationshi'. *hen it is egoistically utili;ed to des'oil marital union in order to adance a felonious urge for coitus by force, iolence or intimidation, the Court will ste' in to 'rotect its lofty 'ur'ose, indicate @ustice and 'rotect our laws and 4tate 'olicies. Besides, a husband who feels aggrieed by his indifferent or uninterested wife-s absolute refusal to engage in se)ual intimacy may legally seek the court-s interention to declare her 'sychologically inca'acitated to fulfill an essential marital obligation. But he cannot and should not demand se)ual intimacy from her coerciely or iolently. People v. @alos5os

+his Court has declared that the state 'olicy on the heinous offense of ra'e is clear and unmistakable. &nder certain circumstances, some of them 'resent in this case, the offender may be sentenced to a long 'eriod of confinement, or he may suffer death. +he crime is an assault on human dignity. o legal system worthy of the name can afford to ignore the traumatic conse!uences for the unfortunate ictim and grieous in@ury to the 'eace and good order of the community.0 5a'e is 'articularly odious, one which figuratiely scra'es the bottom of the barrel of moral de'raity, when committed against a minor.1 In iew of the intrinsic nature of the crime of ra'e where only two 'ersons are usually inoled, the testimony of the com'lainant is always scrutini;ed with e)treme caution.> In the 'resent case, there are certain 'articulars which im'elled the court to deote an een more 'ainstaking and meticulous e)amination of the facts on record and a similarly conscientious ealuation of the arguments of the 'arties. +he ictim of ra'e in this case is a minor below twele #01% years of age. As narrated by her, the details of the ra'e are mesmerically sordid and re'ulsie. +he ictim was 'eddled for commercial se) by her own guardian whom she treated as a foster father. Because the com'lainant was a willing ictim, the acts of ra'e were 'rec eded by seeral acts of lasciiousness on distinctly se'arate occasions. +he accused is also a most


1?<

unlikely ra'ist. (e is a member of Congress. Ins'ite of his haing been charged and conicted by the trial court for statutory ra'e, his constituents liked him so much tha t they knowingly reD elected him to his congressional office, the duties of which h e could not 'erform. 4tatutory ra'e committed by a distinguished Congressman on an eleen #00% year old commercial se) worker is bound to attract wides'read media and 'ublic attention. In the words of accusedDa''ellant, "he has been demoni;ed in the 'ress most unfairly, his image transmogrified into that of a dastardly, ogre, out to get his slimy hands on innocent and na_e girls to satiate his lustful desires."7 +his Court, therefore, 'unctiliously considered accusedD a''ellants claim that he suffered "inidiously discriminatory treatment." 5egarding the aboe allegation, the Court has ascertained that the e)tensie 'ublicity generated by the case did not result in a mistrial2 the records show that the accused had am'le and free o''ortunity to adduce his defenses. +his is an a''eal from the decision of the 5egional +rial Court of Makati, Branch =1, in Criminal Case os. <=D0, for si) #=% counts of acts of lasciiousness defined and 'enali;ed under Article >>= of the 5eised Penal Code, in relation to 4ection #b% of 5e'ublic Act o. J=0?, also known as the Child Abuse 9aw. +here were si) #=% other cases, Criminal Case os. <=D0<<0, <=D0<<7, <=D0<<, <=D0<<=, <=D 0<>= of the 5eised Penal Code, in relation to 4ection #b% of 5e'ublic Act o. J=0?, were filed against accusedDa''ellant. +he accusatory 'ortion of said informations for the crime of statutory ra'e state3 In Criminal Case o. <=D0> #>% of the 5eised Penal Code, committed as follows3 +hat on or about Fune 0K, 0<<= at 5oom o.0J?1, 5it; +owers, Makati City, and within the @urisdiction of this (onorable Court, the aboeDnamed accused, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously hae carnal knowledge with #sic% eleen year old minor 5osilyn elantar against her will, with damage and 're@udice. CO+5A5S +O 9A*.= In Criminal Case o. <=D0

10?

+he undersigned, u'on 'rior sworn com'laint by the offended 'arty, eleen #00% year old minor 5O4I9S 89A+A5, accuses 5OM8O FA9O4FO4 of the crime of 5AP8 defined and 'enali;ed under Art. >> #>% of the 5eised Penal Code, committed as follows3 +hat on or about Fune 1?, 0<<= at 5oom o. 0J?1, 5it; +owers, Makati City, and within the @urisdiction of this (onorable Court, the aboeDnamed accused, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously hae carnal knowledge with #sic% eleen year old minor 5osilyn elantar against her will, with damage and 're@udice. CO+5A5S +O 9A*.J :or acts of lasciiousness, the informationsK under which accusedDa''ellant was co nicted were identical e)ce't for the different dates of commission on Fune 07, 0<<=2 Fune 0, 0<<=2 Fune 0=, 0<<=2 Fune 1?, 0<<=2 Fune 10, 0<<=2 and Fune 11, 0<<=, to wit3 +he undersigned, u'on 'rior sworn com'laint by the offended 'arty, eleen #00%Dyear old minor 5O4I9S 89A+A5 accuses 5OM8O FA9O4FO4 of the crime of AC+4 O: 9A4CI$IO&4844 in relation to 4ection  #b%, Article III of 5e'ublic Act o. J=0?, otherwise known as the 4'ecial Protection of Children against Abuse, 8)'loitation and iscrimination Act, committed as follows3 +hat in the eening of Fune 07, 0<<=, or thereabout, in 5oom o. 0J?1, 5it; +owers, Makati City, MetroDManila and within the @urisdiction of this (onorable Court, the aboeDnamed accused, with lewd design, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously kiss, caress and fondle said com'lainant-s face, li's, neck, breasts, whole body, and agina, suck her ni''les and insert his finger and then his tongue into her agina, 'lace himself on to' of her, then insert his 'enis in between her thighs until e@aculation, and other similar lasciious conduct against her will, to her damage and 're@udice. CO+5A5S +O 9A*. In Criminal Cases os. <=D0, there were added aerments that on the different dates, the accused gae the com'lainant P0?,???.??, P,???.?? and P,???.?? res'ectiely. &'on arraignment on Fanuary 1<, 0<, inclusie of submarkings. +he records of the case are e)tremely oluminous. +he Peo'les ersion of the facts, culled mainly from the testimony of the ictim, are as follows3 Maria 5osilyn elantar was a slim, eleenDyear old lass with long, straight black hair and almondDsha'ed black eyes. 4he grew u' in a twoDstorey a'artment in Pasay City under the care


100

of 4im'licio elantar, whom she treated as her own father. 4im'licio was a fiftyDsi) year old homose)ual whose ostensible source of income was selling longgani;a and tocino and acce'ting boarders at his house. On the side, he was also engaged in the skin trade as a 'im'. 5osilyn neer got to see her mother, though she had known a younger brother, 4handro, who was also under the care of 4im'licio. At a ery young age of , fair and smoothDcom'le)ioned 5osilyn was e)'osed by 4im'licio to his illicit actiities. 4he and her brother would tag along with 4im'licio wheneer he deliered 'rostitutes to his clients. *hen she turned <, 5osilyn was offered by 4im'licio as a 'rostitute to an Arabian national known as Mr. (ammond. +hus begun her ordeal as one of the girls sold by 4im'licio for se)ual faors. 5osilyn first met accusedDa''ellant, 5omeo Falos@os, sometime in :ebruary 0<<= at his office located near 5obinsons 6alleria. 5osilyn and 4im'licio were brought there and introduced b y a talent manager by the name of 8duardo 4uare;. AccusedDa''ellant 'romised to hel' 5osilyn become an actress. *hen he saw 5osilyn, accusedDa''ellant asked how old she was. 4im'licio answered, "0?. 4he is going to be 00 on May 00." AccusedDa''ellant in!uired if 5osilyn knows how to sing. 4im'licio told 5osilyn to sing, so she sang the song, "+ell Me Sou 9oe Me." AccusedDa''ellant then asked if 5osilyn has nice legs and then raised her skirt u' to the midD thighs. (e asked if she was already menstruating, and 4im'licio said yes. AccusedDa''ellant further in!uired if 5osilyn already had breasts. *hen nobody answered, accusedDa''ellant cu''ed 5osilyns left breast. +hereafter, accusedDa''ellant assured them that he would hel' 5osilyn become an actress as he was one of the 'roducers of the +$ 'rograms, "$aliente" and "8at Bulaga." 4im'licio and 4uare; then discussed the e)ecution of a contract for 5osilyns moie career. AccusedDa''ellant, on the other hand, said that he would ado't 5osilyn and that the latter would hae to lie with him in his condominium at the 5it; +owers. Before 4im'licio and 5osilyn went home, accusedDa''ellant gae 5osilyn P1,???.??. +he second time 5osilyn met accusedDa''ellant was at his condominium unit, located at 5oom 0J?1, 5it; +owers, Makati City. AccusedDa''ellant and 4im'licio discussed the contract and his 'lan to finance 5osilyns studies. AccusedDa''ellant gae 4im'licio P??.??, thereafter, 5osilyn, 4handro and 4im'licio left. +he third meeting between 5osilyn and accusedDa''ellant was also at 5it; +owers to discuss her acting career. AccusedDa''ellant referred the 're'aration of 5osilyns contract to his lawyer, who was also 'resent. After the meeting, 4im'licio and 5osilyn left. As they were walking towards the eleator, accusedDa''ellant a''roached them and gae 5osilyn P>,???.??. On Fune 07, 0<<=, at about K3>? to <3?? '.m., 4im'licio and 5osilyn returned to accusedD a''ellants condominium unit at 5it; +owers. *hen accusedDa''ellant came out of his bedroom, 4im'licio told 5osilyn to go inside the bedroom, while he and accusedDa''ellant stayed outside. After a while, accusedDa''ellant entered the bedroom and found 5osilyn watching teleision. (e walked towards 5osilyn and kissed her on the li's, then left the room again. 4im'licio came in and bid her goodbye. 5osilyn told 4im'licio that accusedDa''ellant kissed her to which 4im'licio re'lied, "(alik lang naman."


101

5osilyn was left alone in the bedroom watching teleision. After some time, accusedDa''ellant came in and entered the bathroom. (e came out clad in a long white +Dshirt on which was 'rinted the word, "akak." In his hand was a 'lain white +Dshirt. AccusedDa''ellant told 5osilyn that he wanted to change her clothes. 5osilyn 'rotested and told accusedDa''ellant that she can do it herself, but accusedDa''ellant answered, "addy mo naman ako." AccusedDa''ellant then took off 5osilyns blouse and skirt. *hen he was about to take off her 'anties, 5osilyn said, "(uwag 'o." Again, accusedDa''ellant told her, "After all, I am your addy." AccusedDa''ellant then remoed her 'anties and dressed her with the long white +Dshirt. +he two of them watched teleision in bed. After sometime, accusedDa''ellant turned off the lam' and the teleision. (e turned to 5osilyn and kissed her li's. (e then raised her shirt, touched her breasts and inserted his finger into her agina. 5osilyn felt 'ain and cried out, "+ama na 'o." AccusedDa''ellant sto''ed. (e continued to kiss her li's and fondle her breasts. 9ater, accusedDa''ellant told 5osilyn to slee'. +he following morning, 5osilyn was awakened by accusedDa''ellant whom she found bent oer and kissing her. (e told her to get u', took her hand and led her to the bathroom. (e remoed 5osilyns shirt and gae her a bath. *hile accusedDa''ellant rubbed soa' all oer 5osilyns body, he caressed her breasts and inserted his finger into her agina. After that, he rinsed her body, dried her with a towel and a''lied lotion on her arms and legs. +hen, he dried her hair and told her to dress u'. 5osilyn 'ut on her clothes and went out of the bathroom, while accusedD a''ellant took a shower. AccusedDa''ellant ate breakfast while 5osilyn stayed in the bedroom watching teleision. *hen accusedDa''ellant entered the room, he knelt in front of her, remoed her 'anties and 'laced her legs on his shoulders. +hen, he 'laced his tongue on her agina. +hereafter, he gae 5osilyn P0?,???.?? and told his housemaid to take her sho''ing at 4hoemart. *hen she returned to the 5it; +owers, 4im'licio was waiting for her. +he two of them went home. 5osilyn narrated to 4im'licio what accusedDa''ellant did to her, and 'leaded for h im not to bring her back to the 5it; +owers. 4im'licio told her that eerything was alright as long as accusedDa''ellant does not hae se)ual intercourse with her. +hat same eening, at around <3?? to <3>? in the eening, 4im'licio again brought 5osilyn to the 5it; +owers. After 4im'licio left, accusedDa''ellant remoed 5osilyns clothes and dressed her with the same long +Dshirt. +hey watched teleision for a while, then accusedDa''ellant sat beside 5osilyn and kissed her on the li's. (e made 5osilyn lie down, lifted her shirt aboe her breasts, and inserted his finger into her agina. +hen, accusedDa''ellant remoed his own clothes, 'laced his 'enis between 5osilyns thighs and made thrusting motions until he e@aculated on her thighs. +hereafter, accusedDa''ellant kissed her and told her to slee'. +he ne)t day, Fune 0=, 0<<=, accusedDa''ellant roused her from slee' and bathed her. Again, he rubbed soa' all oer her body, washed her hair, and thereafter rinsed her body and dried her hair. *hile accusedDa''ellant was bathing 5osilyn, he asked her to fondle his 'enis while he caressed her breasts and inserted his finger into her agina. After their shower, accusedDa''ellant ate breakfast. (e gae 5osilyn P,???.?? and told her to @ust wait for 4im'licio in the condominium


10>

unit. On their way home, 4im'licio told 5osilyn that if accusedDa''ellant tries to insert his 'enis into her agina, she should refuse. At around K3?? '.m. of Fune 0K, 0<<=, 4im'licio brought 5osilyn to the 5it; +owers. +hey found accusedDa''ellant sitting on the bed in his bedroom. 4im'licio told 5osilyn to a''roach accusedD a''ellant, then he left. AccusedDa''ellant took off 5osilyns clothes and dressed her with a long +Dshirt on which was 'rinted a 'icture of accusedDa''ellant and a woman, with the ca'tion, "Cong. Falos@os with his +oy." +hey watched teleision for a while, then accusedDa''ellant lay beside 5osilyn and kissed her on the li's. (e raised her shirt and 'arted her legs. (e 'ositioned himself between the s'read legs of 5osilyn, took off his own shirt, held his 'enis, and 'oked and 'ressed the same against 5osilyns agina. +his caused 5osilyn 'ain inside her se) organ. +hereafter, accusedDa''ellant fondled her breasts and told her to slee'. *hen 5osilyn woke u' the following morning, Fune 0<, 0<<=, accusedDa''ellant was no longer around but she found P,???.?? on the table. 8arlier that morning, she had felt somebody touching her 'riate 'arts but she was still too slee'y to find out who it was. 5osilyn took a bath, then went off to school with 4im'licio, who arried to fetch her. +he ne)t encounter of 5osilyn with accusedDa''ellant was on Fune 10, 0<<=, at about <3?? oclock in the eening in his bedroom at the 5it; +owers. AccusedDa''ellant stri''ed her naked and again 'ut on her the long shirt he wanted her to wear. After watching teleision for a while, accusedDa''ellant knelt beside 5osilyn, raised her shirt, caressed her breasts and inserted his finger into her agina. +hen, he cli''ed his 'enis between 5osilyns thighs, and made thrusting motions until he e@aculated. +hereafter, 5osilyn went to slee'. +he ne)t day, Fune 11, 0<<=, 5osilyn was awakened by accusedDa''ellant who was kissing her and fondling her se) organ. 4he, howeer, ignored him and went back to slee'. *hen she woke u', she found the P,???.?? which accusedDa''ellant left and gae the same to 4im'licio elantar, when the latter came to 'ick her u'. On Fune 1<, 0<<=, 5osilyn again went to the 5it; +owers. uring that isit, accusedDa''ellant took 'hotogra'hs of 5osilyn. (e asked her to 'ose with her +Dshirt 'ulled down thereby e)'osing her breasts. (e also took her 'hotogra'hs with her +Dshirt rolled u' to the 'elis but without showing her 'ubis, and finally, while straddled on a chair facing the backrest, showing her legs. Before 5osilyn went to slee', accusedDa''ellant kissed her li's, fondled her breasts and inserted his finger into her agina. +he following morning, she woke u' and found the P,???.?? left by accusedDa''ellant on the table. 4he recalled that earlier that morning, she felt somebody caressing her breasts and se) organ. On Fuly 1, 0<<= at J3?? '.m., 5osilyn and 4im'licio returned to the 5it; +owers. 5osilyn had to wait for accusedDa''ellant, who arried between 013?? to 03?? a.m. (e again dressed her with the long white shirt similar to what he was wearing. *hile sitting on the b ed, accusedDa''ellant kissed her li's and inserted his tongue into her mouth. (e then fondled her breasts and inserted his finger into her agina, causing her to cry in 'ain. AccusedDa''ellant sto''ed and told her to slee'.


107

+he ne)t morning, accusedDa''ellant bathed her again. *hile he soa'ed her body, he fondled her breasts and inserted his finger in her agina. 5osilyn felt 'ain and shoed his hand away. After bathing her, accusedDa''ellant had breakfast. Before he left, he gae 5osilyn P,???.??. As soon as 4im'licio arried, 5osilyn gae her the money and then they left for school. On Fuly 1?, 0<<=, 4im'licio again brought 5osilyn to the 5it; +owers. AccusedDa''ellant was waiting in his bedroom. (e took off 5osilyns clothes, including her 'anties, and dressed her with a long +Dshirt similar to what he was wearing. After watching teleision, accusedDa''ellant kissed 5osilyn on the li's, inserted his tongue in her mouth and fondled her breasts. +hen, he made 5osilyn lie on the bed, s'read her legs a'art and 'laced a 'illow under her back. (e inserted his finger in her agina and mounted himself between her legs with his hands rested on her sides. After that, he lifted his shirt, then 'ointed and 'ressed his 'enis against her agina. AccusedDa''ellant made thrusting motions, which caused 5osilyn 'ain. +hereafter, accusedD a''ellant told her to slee'. In the early morning of Fuly 10, 0<<=, 5osilyn felt somebody touching her se) organ, but she did not wake u'. *hen she woke u' later, she found P,???.?? on the table, and she gae this to 4im'licio when he came to fetch her. On August 0, 0<<=, 5osilyn and 4im'licio went to the 5it; +owers at around J3?? '.m. AccusedDa''ellant was about to leae, so he told them to come back later that eening. +he two did not return. +he following day, 5osilyn ran away from home with the hel' of Samie 8streta, one of their boarders. Samie accom'anied 5osilyn to the Pasay City Police, where she e)ecuted a sworn statement against 4im'licio elantar. 5osilyn was thereafter taken to the custody of the e'artment of 4ocial *elfare and eelo'ment #4*%. +he ational Bureau of Inestigation #BI% conducted an inestigation, which eentually led to the filing of criminal charges against accusedDa''ellant. On August 1>, 0<<=, 5osilyn was e)amined by r. 8mmanuel 9. Aranas at Cam' Crame. +he e)amination yielded the following results3 8+85A9 A 8+5A68I+A9 :airly deelo'ed, fairly nourished and coherent female sub@ect. Breasts are conical with 'inkish brown areola and ni''les from which no secretions could be 'ressed out. Abdomen is flat and soft 68I+A9 +here is moderate growth of 'ubic hair. 9abia ma@ora are full, cone) and coa'tated with the 'inkish brown labia minora 'resenting in between. On se'arating the same disclosed an elastic, fleshy ty'e hymen, with shallow healed laceration at > o-clock 'osition and dee' healed laceration at K o-clock 'osition. 8)ternal aginal orifice offers moderate resistance to the


10

introduction of the e)amining inde) finger and the irgin si;ed aginal s'eculum. $aginal canal is narrow with 'rominent rugosities. Ceri) is firm and closed. COC9&4IO3 4ub@ect is in nonDirgin state 'hysically. +here are no e)ternal signs of a''lication of any form of iolence.< uring the trial, accusedDa''ellant raised the defense of denial and alibi. (e claimed that it was his brother, ominador "Fun" Falos@os, whom 5osilyn had met, once at accusedDa''ellants akak office and twice at the 5it; +owers. AccusedDa''ellant insisted that he was in the 'roince on the dates 5osilyn claimed to hae been se)ually abused. (e attributed the filing of the charges against him to a small grou' of blackmailers who wanted to e)tort money from him, and to his 'olitical o''onents, 'articularly 8)DCongressman Artemio Ada;a, who are allegedly determined to destroy his 'olitical career and boost their 'ersonal agenda. More s'ecifically, accusedDa''ellant claims that on Fune 0=, 0<<=, he was on the Phili''ine Airlines #PA9% <37? a.m. flight from Manila to i'olog. (e stayed in i'olog until Fune 0K, 0<<=. (e submitted in eidence airline ticket no. 0?J<1717,0? showing that he was on board :light P5 0=2 the said flights 'assengers manifest,00 where the name FA9O4FO4U5MUM5 a''ears2 and 'hotogra'hs showing accusedDa''ellants constituents welcoming his arrial and showing accusedDa''ellant talking with former Mayor (ermanico Carreon and :iscal 8m'ainado. AccusedDa''ellant further alleges that on Fune 1K, 0<<=, he again took the <37? a.m. flight from Manila to i'olog City. On the same flight, he met Armando ocom of the Phili''ine aily In!uirer. &'on arrial and after talking to his re'resentaties, he 'roceeded to his residence known as "Barangay (ouse" in +aguinon, a'itan, near akak Beach resort, and s'ent the night there. On Fune 1<, 0<<=, accusedDa''ellant attended the fiesta at Barangay 4an Pedro. (e stayed in the house of Barangay Ca'tain Mila Sa' until 3>? '.m. +hen, together with some friends, he isited the 5i;al 4hrine and the Pirate Bar at akak Beach 5esort. +hereafter, he retired in the "Barangay (ouse" in +aguilon. On Fune >?, 0<<=, accusedDa''ellant alleges that he attended a cityDwide consultation with his 'olitical leaders at the Blue 5oom of akak, which lasted till the afternoon. In the eening, he went home and sle't in the "Barangay (ouse." On Fuly 0, 0<<=, he attended the whole day celebration of i'olog ay. (e s'ent the night in the "Barangay (ouse." On Fuly 1, 0<<=, he attended the inauguration of the rece'tion hall of akak Beach 5esort. +he blessing ceremony was officiated by Assistant Parish Priest Adelmo 9a'ut.


10=

On Fuly >, 0<<=, he was the guest in the inaguration of the >rd 8ngineering istrict of a'itan City. After the mass, he isited the Famboree site in Barangay +aguilon, a'itan City. (e further contended that after his arrial in i'olog on Fune 1K, 0<<=, there was neer an instance when he went to Manila until Fuly <, 0<<=, when he attended a conference called by the President of the Phili''ines. AccusedDa''ellant likewise alleged that on Fuly 10, 0<<=, he took the 3?? a.m. flight of PA9 from Manila to umaguete City. :rom there, he was flown by a 'riate 'lane to i'olog, where he stayed until the President of the Phili''ines arried. +o buttress the theory of the defense, ominador "Fun" Falos@os testified that he was the one, and not accusedDa''ellant, whom 5osilyn met on three occasions. +hese occurred once during the first week of May 0<<=, at accusedDa''ellants akak office where 5osilyn and 4im'licio elantar were introduced to him by 8duardo 4uare;, and twice at the 5it; +owers when he interiewed 5osilyn, and later when 5osilyn and 4im'licio followed u' the 'ro'osed entry of 5osilyn into the show business. ominadors admission of his meetings with 5osilyn on three instances were limited to interiewing her and assessing her singing and modeling 'otentials. (is testimony made no mention of any se)ual encounter with 5osilyn. After trial, the court rendered the assailed decision, the dis'ositie 'ortion of wh ich reads3 *(858:O58, 'remises considered, @udgment is hereby rendered as follows3 0. In Criminal Cases os. <=D0> of the 5eised Penal Code. (e is hereby declared CO$IC+8 in each of these cases. 1. Accordingly, he is sentenced to3 1a. suffer the 'enalty of reclusion 'er'etua in each of these cases. 1b. indemnify the ictim, MA. 5O4I9S 89A+A5, in the amount of :I:+S +(O&4A P84O4 #P?,???.??% as moral damages for each of the cases. >. In Criminal Cases os. <=D0, the 'rosecution has 'roen beyond reasonable doubt the guilt of the accused, 5OM8O FA9O4FO4 y 6A5CIA, as 'rinci'al in si) #=% counts of acts of lasciiousness defined und er Article >>= of the 5eised Penal Code and 'enali;ed under 4ection  #b% of 5.A. J=0? otherwise known as the Child Abuse 9aw. (e is hereby declared CO$IC+8 in each of these cases2 7. Accordingly he is sentenced to3


10J

7.a. suffer in each of the cases an indeterminate 'rison term of from eight #K% years, eight #K% months and one #0% day of 'rision mayor in its medium 'eriod, as ma)imum, to fifteen #0% years, si) #=% months and twenty #1?% days of reclusion tem'oral in its medium 'eriod, as ma)imum2 7.b. indemnify the ictim, MA 5O4I9S 89A+A5, in the amount of +*8+S +(O&4A #P1?,???.??% as moral damages for each of the cases2 . In Criminal Case os. <=D0<<0, <=D0<<7, <=D0<<, <=D0<<=, <=D0< In this @urisdiction, the testimony of the 'riate com'lainant in ra'e cases is scrutini;ed with utmost caution. +he constitutional 'resum'tion of innocence re!uires no less than moral


10K

certainty beyond any scintilla of doubt. +his a''lies with more igor in ra'e cases where the eidence for the 'rosecution must stand or fall on its own merits and is not allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the eidence of the defense. As an ineitable conse!uence, it is the ra'e ictim herself that is actually 'ut on trial. +he case at bar is no e)ce'tion. Bent on destroying the eracity of 'riate com'lainants testimony, the errors assigned by accusedD a''ellant, 'articularly the first three, are focused on the issue of credibility. AccusedDa''ellant makes much of his ac!uittal in Criminal Case os. <=D0<<0, <=D0<<7, <=D 0<<, <=D0<<=, <=D0<111D>11>, the following was !uoted with a''roal by the Court of A''eals from 0 Moore on :acts, '. 1>3 "0K. +estimony may be 'artly credited and 'artly re@ected. DDD +rier of facts are not bound to beliee all that any witness has said2 they may acce't some 'ortions of his testimony and re@ect other 'ortions, according to what seems to them, u'on other facts and circumstances to be the truthX 8en when witnesses are found to hae deliberately falsified in some material 'articulars, the @ury are not re!uired to re@ect the whole of their uncorroborated testimony, but may credit such 'ortions as they deem worthy of belief." #'. <7%0K Being in the best 'osition to discriminate between the truth and the falsehood, the trial court-s assignment of alues and weight on the testimony of 5osilyn should be gien credence. 4ignificantly, it should be borne in mind that the issue at hand hinges on credibility, the assessment of which, as oftDre'eated, is best made by the trial court because of its untrammeled o''ortunity to obsere her demeanor on the witness stand. On the demeanor and manner of testifying shown by the com'lainant, the trial court stated3 6uided by the foregoing 'rinci'les, this court found no reason why it should not beliee 5osilyn when she claimed she was ra'ed. +estimonies of ra'e ictims es'ecially those who are young and immature desere full credence #Peo'le . 9i!uiran, 11K 4C5A =1 #0<<>% considering that "no woman would concoct a story of defloration, allow an e)amination of her 'riate 'arts and thereafter allow herself to be 'ererted in a 'ublic trial if she was not motiated solely by the desire to hae the cul'rit a''rehended and 'unished." #Peo'le . Buyok, 1> 4C5A =11 0<<=N%.


10<

*hen asked to describe what had been done to her, 5osilyn was able to narrate s'ontaneously in detail how she was se)ually abused. (er testimony in this regard was firm, candid, clear and straightforward, and it remained to be so een during the intense and rigid crossDe)amination made by the defense counsel.0< AccusedDa''ellant ne)t argues that 5osilyns direct and redirect testimonies were rehearsed and lacking in candidness. (e 'oints to the su''osed hesitant and een idiotic answers of 5osilyn on cross and reDcross e)aminations. (e added that she was trained to gie answers such as, "Ano 'oG", "Parang 'o," "Medyo 'o," and "4a tingin ko 'o." AccusedDa''ellants arguments are far from 'ersuasie. A reading of the 'ertinent transcri't of stenogra'hic notes reeals that 5osilyn was in fact firm and co nsistent on the fact of ra'e and lasciious conduct committed on her by accusedDa''ellant. 4he answered in clear, sim'le and natural words customary of children of her age. +he aboe 'hrases !uoted by accusedDa''ellant as uttered by 5osilyn are, as correctly 'ointed out by the 4olicitor 6eneral, ty'ical answers of child witnesses like her. At any rate, een assuming that 5osilyn, during her lengthy ordeals on the witness stand, may hae gien some ambiguous answers, they refer merely to minor and 'eri'heral details which do not in any way detract from her firm and straightforward declaration that she had been molested and sub@ected to lasciious conduct by accusedDa''ellant. Moreoer, it should be borne in mind that een the most candid witness oftentimes makes mistakes and c onfused statements. At times, far from eroding the effectieness of the eidence, such la'ses could, indeed, constitute signs of eracity.1? +hen, too, accusedDa''ellant ca'itali;es on the alleged absence of any allegation of ra'e in the fie #% sworn statements e)ecuted by 5osilyn as well as in the interiews and case study conducted by the re'resentaties of the 4*. In 'articular, accusedDa''ellant 'oints to the following documents3 #0% 4worn statements dated August 11 and 1=, 0<<=, e)ecuted before 4PO Milagros A. Carrasco of the Pasay City Police2 #1% 4worn statements dated 4e'tember , 00, and 0<, 0<<=, e)ecuted before BI Agents Cynthia 9. Mariano and 4u'erising BI Agent Arlis 8. $ela2 #>% +he Initial Interiew of 5osilyn by the 4* dated August >?, 0<<=2 #7% 4* :inal Case 4tudy 5e'ort dated Fanuary 0?, 0<

11?

the ictims agina. It may well be that 5osilyn thought, as any layman would 'robably do, that there must be the fullest 'enetration of the ictims agina to !ualify a se)ual act to ra'e. In Peo'le . Cam'uhan,10 we ruled that rape is consummated 7b the slightest penetration of the female organ8 i.e.8 touching of either labia of the pudendum b the penis ." +here need not be full and complete penetration of the victimBs vagina for rape to be consummated . +here being no showing that the foregoing technicalities of rape was full e1plained to &osiln on all those occasions that she was interiewed by the 'olice, the BI agents and 4* social workers, she could not therefore be e1pected to intelligibl declare that accused4appellantBs act of pressing his se1 organ against her labia without full entr of the vaginal canal amounted to rape .

In the decision of the trial court, the testimony on one of the ra'es is cited 'lus the courts mention of the @uris'rudence on this issue, to wit3 R3 Sou said that when Congressman Falos@os inserted his finger into your agina, your back was rested on a 'illow and your legs were s'read wide a'art, what else did he doG A3 (e lifted his shirt, and held his 'enis2 and again "idinikitDdikit niya ang ari niya sa ari ko." #Italics su''lied% R3

And, after doing that3 "IdinikitDdikit niya yong ari niya sa ari ko"2 what else did he doG

A3 After that, "Itinutok niya 'o yong ari niya at idiniinDdiin niya ang ari niya sa ari ko." #underscoring su''lied% #''. 1>, 1 to >?, +4, 0= A'ril 0<1<2 Peo'le s. +ismo, 1?7 4C5A >2 Peo'le s. Bacani, 0K0 4C5A ><>%. "Penetration of the 'enis by entry into the li's of the female organ suffices to warrant a coniction." #Peo'le s. 6alimba, 6.5. o. 000=>D=7, :ebruary 1?, 0<<= citing Peo'le s. Abonada, 0=< 4C5A >?%. (ence, with the testimony of 5osilyn that the accused 'ressed against #"idiniin"% and 'ointed to #"itinutok"% 5osilyns agina his se)ual organ on two #1% occasions, two #1% acts of ra'e were consummated.11 Moreoer, it must be borne in mind that 5osilyns 'ur'ose in e)ecuting the affidaits on August 11 and 1=, 0<<= before the Pasay City Police was to charge 4im'licio elantar, not accusedD a''ellant. As a'tly 'ointed out by the trial court, it is 're'osterous to e)'ect 5osilyn to make an e)haustie narration of the se)ual abuse of accusedDa''ellant when he was not the ob@ect of the said com'laint.


110

Additionally, 5osilyns statements, gien to the BI on 4e'tember 00 and 0<, 0<<=, concerned mainly the identification of 'ictures. +here was thus no occasion for her to narrate the details of her se)ual encounter with accusedDa''ellant. As to the interiews and studies conducted by the 4*, suffice it to state that said meetings with 5osilyn were s'ecially focused on the emotional and 'sychological re'ercussions of the se)ual abuse on 5osilyn, and had nothing to do with the legal actions being 're'ared as a conse!uence thereof. +hus, the documents 'ertaining to said interiews and studies cannot be relied u'on to reeal eery minute as'ect of the se)ual molestations com'lained of. At any rate, the inconsistencies between the affidaits and 5osilyns testimony, if at all they e)isted, cannot diminish the 'robatie alue of 5osilyns declarations on the witness stand. +he consistent ruling of this Court is that, if there is an inconsistency between the affidait of a witness and her testimonies gien in o'en court, the latter commands greater weight than the former.1> In the third assigned error, accusedDa''ellant attem'ts to im'ress u'on this Court that 5osilyn gae the name Congressman 5omeo Falos@os as her abuser only because that was the name gien to her by the 'erson to whom she was introduced. +hat same name, accusedDa''ellant claims, was merely 'icked u' by 5osilyn from the name 'late, 'la!ue, and memo 'ad she saw on accusedDa''ellants office desk. AccusedDa''ellant 'resented his brother, ominador "Fun" Falos@os, in an attem't to cast doubt on his cul'ability. It was ominador "Fun" Falos@os who allegedly met and interiewed 5osilyn at the akak office. In adancement of this theory, accusedDa''ellant cites the fact that out of a total of 0= 'ictures 'resented to 5osilyn for identification, she 'icked u' only 7, which de'ict ominador "Fun" Falos@os. In the same ein, accusedDa''ellant claims that the resulting cartogra'hic sketch from the facial characteristics gien by 5osilyn to the cartogra'her, resembles the facial a''earance of ominador "Fun" Falos@os. AccusedDa''ellant also 'oints out that 5osilyn failed to gie his correct age or state that he has a mole on his lower right @aw. Contrary to the contentions of accusedDa''ellant, the records reeal that 5osilyn 'ositiely and unhesitatingly identified accusedDa''ellant at the courtroom. 4uch identification during the trial cannot be diminished by the fact that in her sworn statement, 5osilyn referred to accusedD a''ellant as her abuser based on the name she heard from the 'erson to whom she was introduced and on the name she saw and read in accusedDa''ellants office. $erily, a 'ersons identity does not de'end solely on his name, but also on his 'hysical features. +hus, a ictim of a crime can still identify the cul'rit een without knowing his n ame. 4imilarly, the Court, in Peo'le . $as!ue;,17 ruled that3 It matters little that the eyewitness initially recogni;ed accusedDa''ellant only by faceX the witnessN X acted like any ordinary 'erson in making in!uiries to find out the name that matched a''ellantsN face. 4ignificantly, in o'en court, he une!uiocally identified accusedDa''ellant as their assailant. 8en in the case of Peo'le . +imon,1 relied u'on by accusedDa''ellant to discredit his identification, this Court said that een assuming that the outDofDcourt identification of accusedD


111

a''ellant was defectie, their subse!uent identification in court cured any flaw that may hae initially attended it. In light of the foregoing, 5osilyns failure to identify accusedDa''ellant out of the 0= 'ictures shown to her does not foreclose the credibility of her un!ualified identification of accusedD a''ellant in o'en court. +he same holds true with the sub@ect cartogra'hic sketch which, incidentally, resembles accusedDa''ellant. As noted by the trial court, accusedDa''ellant and his brother ominador Falos@os hae a striking similarity in facial features. aturally, if the sketch looks like ominador, it logically follows that the same drawing would definitely look like accusedDa''ellant. 9ikewise, 5osilyns failure to correctly a''ro)imate the age of accusedDa''ellant and to state that he has a mole on the lower right @aw, cannot affect the eracity of accusedDa''ellants identification. At a young age, 5osilyn cannot be e)'ected to gie the accurate age of a = yearD old 'erson. As to accusedDa''ellants mole, the 4olicitor 6eneral is c orrect in contending that said mole is not so distinctie as to ca'ture 5osilyns attention and memory. *hen she was asked to gie additional information about accusedDa''ellant, 5osilyn described him as haing a "'rominent belly." +his, to our mind, is indeed a more distinguishing feature that would naturally catch the attention of an eleen yearDold child like 5osilyn. In his fifth assigned error, accusedDa''ellant insists that the words "idinikit," "itinutok," and "idiniinDdiin," which 5osilyn used to describe what accusedDa''ellant d id to her agina with his genitals, do not constitute consummated ra'e. In addition, the defense argued that 5osilyn did not actually see accusedDa''ellants 'enis in the su''osed se)ual contact. In fact, the y stressed that 5osilyn declared that accusedDa''ellants semen s'illed in her thighs and not in her se) organ. Moreoer, in his 5e'ly Brief, accusedDa''ellant, citing Peo'le . Cam'uhan, argued that, assuming that his 'enis touched or brushed 5osilyns e)ternal genitals, the same is not enough to establish the crime of ra'e. +rue, in Peo'le . Cam'uhan,1= we e)'lained that the 'hrase, "the mere touching of the e)ternal genitalia by the 'enis ca'able of consummating the se)ual act is sufficient to constitute carnal knowledge," means that the act of touching should be understood here as inherently 'art of the entry of the 'enis into the labia of the female organ and not mere touching alone of the mons 'ubis or the 'udendum. *e further elucidated that3 +he 'udendum or ula is the collectie term for the female genital organs that are isible in the 'erineal area, e.g., mons 'ubis, labia ma@ora, labia minora, the hymen, the clitoris, the aginal orifice, etc. +he mons 'ubis is the rounded eminence that becomes hairy after 'uberty, and is instantly isible within the surface. +he ne)t layer is the labia ma@ora or the outer li's of the female organ com'osed of the outer cone) surface and the inner surface. +he skin of the outer cone) surface is coered with hair follicles and is 'igmented, while the inner surface is a thin skin which does not hae any hairs but has many sebaceous glands. irectly beneath the labia ma@ora is the labia minora. Furis'rudence dictates that the labia ma@ora must be entered for ra'e to be consummated, and not merely for the 'enis to stroke the surface of the female organ. +hus,


11>

a gra;ing of the surface of the female organ or touching the mons 'ubis of the 'udendum is not sufficient to constitute consummated ra'e. Absent any showing of the slightest 'enetration of the female organ, i.e., touching of either labia of the 'udendum by the 'enis, there can be no consummated ra'e2 at most, it can only be attem'ted ra'e, if not acts of lasciiousness.1J In the 'resent case, there is sufficient 'roof to establish that the acts of accusedDa''ellant went beyond "strafing of the citadel of 'assion" or "shelling of the castle of orgasmic 'otency," as de'icted in the Cam'uhan case, and 'rogressed into "bombardment of the drawbridge whichN is inasion enough,"1K there being, in a manner of s'eaking, a con!uest of the fortress of ignition. *hen the accusedDa''ellant brutely mounted between 5osilyns wideDs'read legs, unfetteredly touching, 'oking and 'ressing his 'enis against her agina, which in her 'osition would then be naturally wide o'en and ready for co'ulation, it would re!uire no fertile imagination to belie the hy'ocrisy claimed by accusedDa''ellant that his 'enis or that of someone who looked like him, would under the circumstances merely touch or brush the e)ternal genital of 5osilyn. +he ineitable contact between accusedDa''ellants 'enis, and at the ery least, the labia of the 'udendum of 5osilyn, was confirmed when she felt 'ain inside her agina when the "idiniin" 'art of accused a''ellants se) ritual was 'erformed. +he incident on Fune 0K, 0<<= was described by 5osilyn as follows3 P5O4. V&O3 R.

And, after kissing your li's2 after kissing you in your li's, what else did he doG

A.

After that, he was lifting my shirt.

R.

ow, while he was lifting your shirt, what was your 'osition2 will you tell the courtG

A.

I was lying, sir.

R.

9ying on whatG

A.

On the bed, sir.

R.

And, after lifting your shirt, what else did he doG

A.

(e s'read my legs sir.

R.

And, after s'reading your legs a'art2 what did he doG

A.

After that, he lifted his shirt and held his 'enis.

R.

And while he was holding his 'enis2 what did he doG

A.

(e 'ressed it in my agina.


117

A++S. :85A8V3 May we re!uest that the ernacular be usedG A.

+a'os 'o, idinikitDdikit 'o niya yong ari niya sa ari ko.

P5O4. V&O3 May I res'ectfully moe that the word3 "idinikitDdikit niya ang ari niya sa ari ko," be incor'oratedG R. And while he was doing that2 according to you, "idinikitDdikit niya ang ari niya sa ari mo2" what did you feelG A.

I was afraid and then, I cried.

R.

*ill you tell the Court why you felt afraid and why you criedG

A.

Because I was afraid he might insert his 'enis into my agina.

R. And, for how long did Congressman Falos@os 'erform that act, which according to you, "idinikitDdikit niya yong ari niya sa ari koG" CO&5+3 Place the +agalog words, into the records. A.

4andali lang 'o yon.

R.

*hat 'art of your agina, or "ari" was being touched by the ari or 'enisG

)))

)))

)))

R. Sou said that you feltX I withdraw that !uestion. (ow did you know that Congressman Falos@os was doing, "idinikitDdikit niya yung ari niya sa ari koG" A.

Because I could feel it, sir.

R. ow, you said you could feel it. *hat 'art of the aginaX in what 'art of your agina was Congressman Falos@os, according to you, "idinikitDdikit niya yong ari niya sa ari moG" A.

In front of my agina, sir.

R. In front of your aginaG O.E.2 will you tell the Court the 'ositionG *ill you describe the 'osition of Congressman Falos@os when he was doing that. "IdinikitDdikit niya sa ari koG"


11

A.

IdeDdemonstrate ko 'o baG

:I4CA9 V&O3 R.

Can you demonstrateG

)))

)))

)))

A. (e was holding me like this with his one hand2 and was holding his 'enis while his other hand, or his free hand was on the bed. )))

)))

)))

P5O4. V&O3 ow, according to you, you dont know how to say it2 or what was done to you. ow, will you tell the Court how can you describe what was done to youG A.

After he "dinikitDdikit niya yong ari niya sa ari ko2 itinutok naman niya ito."

R.

O.E. you said "itinutok niya ito2" what else did he doG

P5O4. V&O3 4he is now trying to describe. CO&5+3 +ranslate. A.

(e seems to be "'arang idinidiin 'o niya."

R.

ow, what did you feel, when according to you2 as I would !uote3 "'arang idinidiin niyaG"

A.

Masakit 'o.

R.

And, @ust to make it clear in +agalog3 Ano itong idinidiin niyaG

CO&5+3 R.

4abi mo itinutok. akita mo bang itinutokG

A.

I saw him na nakaganuon 'o sa ano niya.

P5O4. V&O3


11=

R.

O.E., clarify. Sou said "nakaganuon siya" what do you mean by "nakaganuon siyaG"

A.

(e was holding his 'enis, and then, that was the one which he itinutok sa ari ko.

P5O4. V&O3 R. And, when you said "idinidiin 'o niya2" to which you are referringG *hat is this "idinidiin niyaG" A.

Idinidiin niya ang ari niya sa ari ko.

R.

And what did you feel when you said3 he was "idinidiin niya ang ari niya sa ari koG"

A.

Masakit 'o.

CO&5+3 +he answer is "masakit 'o." Proceed. P5O4. V&O3 R.

*here did you feel the 'ainG

A.

Inside my ari 'o. #4a loob 'o ng ari ko.%

)))

)))

)))

P5O4. V&O3 R.

And then, after that, what else did he do

A.

After that, he touched my breast, sir.

R.

And, after touching your breast, what did he doG

A. And after that I felt that he was #witness demonstrating to the court, with her inde) finger, rubbing against her o'en left 'alm% R.

And after doing that, what else did he doG

A.

After that, he instructed me to go to slee'.

)))

)))

)))


11J

A.

I 'ut down my clothes and then, I cried myself to slee', sir.

R. *hy did you cryG *ill you tell the court, why did you cried after 'utting down your clothesG A. )))

Because I felt 'ity for myself. #aaawa 'o ako sa sarili ko.% )))

) ) ).

#8m'hasis su''lied.%1< 8en the Fuly 1?, 0<<= encounter between 5osilyn and accusedDa''ellant would not ta) the sketchy isuali;ation of the na_e and uninitiated to conclude that there was indeed 'enile inasion by accusedDa''ellant of 5osilyns labia. On that occasion, accusedDa''ellant was similarly ensconced between the 'arted legs of 5osilyn, e)ce't that, this time, 5osilyn was coneniently rested on, and eleated with a 'illow on her back while accusedDa''ellant was touching, 'oking and 'ressing his 'enis against her agina. +o''ed with the thrusting motions em'loyed by accusedDa''ellant, the resulting 'ain felt by 5osilyn in her se) organ was no doubt a conse!uence of consummated ra'e. +he 'ertinent 'ortions of 5osilyns account of the Fuly 1?, 0<<= incident is as follows3 P5O4. V&O3 )))

)))

)))

R. +he moment when Cong. Falos@os inserted his finger into your agina, what was your 'ositionG I+85P58+853 +he witness is asking he #sic% she has to demonstrateG :I4CA9 V&O3 R.

I'aliwanag mo langG

A.

My back was rested on a 'illow and my legs were s'read a'art.

R. Sou said that when Congressman Falos@os inserted his finger into your agina, your back was rested on a 'illow and your legs were s'read wide a'art, what else did he doG A.

(e lifted his shirt, and held his 'enis2 and again "idinikitDdikit niya ang ari niya sa ari ko."

R. And what did you feel when he was doing that which according to you and I would !uote in +agalog3 "idinikitDdikit niya yong ari niya sa ari koG"


11K

A.

I was afraid sir.

R.

And, after doing that3 "idinikitDdikit niya yong ari niya sa ari ko," what else did he doG

A.

After that, "itinutok niya 'o yong ari niya at idiniinDdiin niya ang ari niya sa ari ko."

R. Sou said3 "Congressman Falos@os itinutok niya yong ari niya sa ari ko2 at idiniinDdiin niya yong ari niya sa ari ko2" ow, while he was doing that act, what was the 'osition of Congressman Falos@osG A. (is two #1% hands were on my side and since my legs were s'read a'art2 he was inD between them, and doing an u'ward and downward moement. #*itness demonstrated a 'ushing, or 'um'ing moement% R. :or how long did Congressman Falos@os 'erform that act, 'ushing or 'um'ing moement while his 'enis, or "ang ari niya ay nakatutok at idinidiinDdiin yong ari niya sa ari moG" A.

I dont know.

R. And what did you feel when Congressman Falos@os was making that moement, 'ushing, or 'um'ingG A.

I felt 'ain and then I cried.

R.

*here did you feel the 'ainG

A.

Inside my agina, sir.

)))

)))

) ) ).>?

+he childs narration of the ra'e se!uence is reealing. +he act of "idinikitDdikit niya" was followed by "itinutok niya ))) at idiniinDdiin niya." +he "idiniinDdiin niya" was succeeded by "Masakit 'o." Pain inside her "ari" is indicatie of consummated 'enetration. +he enironmental circumstances dis'layed by the gra'hic narration of what took 'lace at the a''ellants room from Fune 07 to Fune 0= and Fune 10 to Fune 11, 0<<= are consistent with the com'lainants testimony which shows that ra'e was legally consummated. In the case of Peo'le . Cam'uhan, the ictim 'ut u' a resistance DDD by 'utting her legs close together DDD which, although futile, somehow made it inconenient, if not difficult, for the accusedDa''ellant to attem't 'enetration. On the other hand, the ease with which accusedD a''ellant herein 'er'etrated the se)ual abuse, not to mention the absence of time constraint, totally distinguishes the instant case from Cam'uhan. (ere, the ictim was 'assie and een submissie to the lecherous acts of accusedDa''ellant. +hus, een assuming that his 'enis then


11<

was flaccid, his act of holding, guiding and assisting his 'enis with his one hand, while touching, 'oking and 'ressing the same against 5osilyn-s agina, would surely result in een the slightest contact between the labia of the 'udendum and accusedDa''ellant-s se) organ. Considering that 5osilyn is a selfDconfessed se) worker, and the circumstances of the alleged se)ual assault at bar, the defense argued that it is highly im'robable and contrary to human e)'erience that accusedDa''ellant e)ercised a 4'artanDlike disci'line and restrained himself from fully consummating the se)ual act when there was in fact no reason for him not to do so. In the same light, the defense likewise branded as unnatural the testimony of 5osilyn that accusedD a''ellant contented himself with rubbing his 'enis cli''ed be tween her thighs until he reached orgasm and desisted from fully 'enetrating her, when 5osilyn was then entirely at his dis'osal. +he defense seems to forget that there is no standard form of behaior when it comes to gratifying ones basic se)ual instinct. +he human se)ual 'erersity is far too intricate for the defense to 'rescribe certain forms of conduct. 8en the word "'ererse" is not entirely 'recise, as what may be 'ererse to one may not be to another. &sing a child of tender years who could een 'ass as ones granddaughter, to unleash what others would call downright bestial lust, may be utterly nauseating and re'ulsie to some, but may 'eculiarly be a festie celebration of salacious fantasies to others. :or all we know, accusedDa''ellant may hae found a distinct and com'lete se)ual gratification in such kind of libidinous stunts and maneuers. eertheless, accusedDa''ellant may not hae fully and for a longer 'eriod 'enetrated 5osilyn for fear of 'er'etrating his name through a child from the womb of a minor2 or because of his 'reious agreement with his "suking bugaw," 4im'licio elantar, that there would be no 'enetration, otherwise the latter would demand a higher 'rice. +his may be the reason why 4im'licio elantar gae his mocking fatherly adice to 5osilyn that it is bad if accusedDa''ellant inserts his 'enis into her se) organ, while at the same time o rdering her to call him if accusedD a''ellant would 'enetrate her. 4uch instance of 'enile inasion would 'rom't 4im'licio to demand a higher 'rice, which is, after all, as the 4olicitor 6eneral calls it, the 'eculiarity of 'rostitution. +he defense contends that the testimony of 5osilyn that accusedDa''ellant e@aculated on her thighs and not in her agina, only 'roes that there was no ra'e. It should be noted that this 'ortion of 5osilyns testimony refers to the Fune 0 and 10, 0<<= charges of acts of lasciiousness, and not the ra'e charges. In any eent, granting that it occurred during the twin instances of ra'e on Fune 0K and Fuly 1?, 0<<=, the e@aculation on the ictims thighs would not 'reclude the fact of ra'e. +here is no truth to the contention of the defense that 5osilyn did not see the 'enis of accusedD a''ellant. As can be gleaned from the aboeD!uoted 'ortions of the transcri'ts, 5osilyn une!uiocally testified that accusedDa''ellant held his 'enis then 'oked her agina with it. And een if she did not actually see accusedDa''ellants 'enis go inside her, surely she could hae felt whether it was his 'enis or @ust his finger.


1>?

*e now come to the issue of whether or not 5osilyn was below twele #01% years of age at the time the ra'e com'lained of occurred. +o bolster the declaration of 5osilyn that she was then eleen years old, the 'rosecution 'resented the following documents3 #0% 5osilyns birth certificate showing her birthday as May 00, 00 #1% 5osilyns ba'tismal certificate showing her birthday as May 00, 01 #>% Master 9ist of 9ie Births stating that Ma. 5osilyn elantar was born on Ma y 00, 0> #7% Marked 'ages of the Cord ressing 5oom Book2>7 #% 4ummary of the Cord ressing Book, showing her birthday as May 00, 0 #=% 5ecord of admission showing her 'arents 'atient number #>= It is settled that in cases of statutory ra'e, the age of the ictim may be 'roed by the 'resentation of her birth certificate. In the case at bar, accusedDa''ellant contends that the birth certificate of 5osilyn should not hae been considered by the trial court because said birth certificate has already been ordered cancelled and e)'unged from the records by the 5egional +rial Court of Manila, Branch >K, in 4'ecial Proceedings o. , dated A'ril 00, 0<J (oweer, it a''ears that the said decision has been annulled and set aside by the Court of A''eals on Fune 0?, 0<<<, in CAD6.5. 4P o. 71K<. +he decision of the Court of A''eals was a''ealed to this Court by 'etition for reiew, docketed as 6.5. o. 07?>?. Pending the final outcome of that case, the decision of the Court of A''eals is 'resumed alid and can be inoked as 'rima facie basis for holding that 5osilyn was indeed eleen years old at the time she was abused by accusedDa''ellant. (oweer, een assuming the absence of a alid birth certificate, there is sufficient and am'le 'roof of the com'lainants age in the records. 5osilyns Ba'tismal Certificate can likewise sere as 'roof of her age. In Peo'le . 9iban,>K we ruled that the birth certificate, or in lieu thereof, any other documentary eidence that can hel' establish the age of the ictim, such as the ba'tismal certificate, school records, and documents of similar nature, can be 'resented. And een assuming e) gratia argumenti that the birth and ba'tismal certificates of 5osilyn are inadmissible to 'roe her age, the Master 9ist of 9ie Births and the Cord ressing Book of r. Fose :abella Memorial (os'ital where 5osilyn was born are sufficient eidence to 'roe that her date of birth was May 00, 0

1>0

+hus, 5ule 0>?, 4ection 77, of the 5ules of Court states3 8ntries in official records. DDD 8ntries in official records made in the 'erformance of his duty by a 'ublic officer of the Phili''ines, or by a 'erson in the 'erformance of a duty es'ecially en@oined by law, are 'rima facie eidence of the facts therein stated. In Africa . Calte), et al., #Phil%, Inc., et al.,>< the Court laid down the re!uisites for the a''lication of the foregoing rule, thus3 #a% +hat the entry was made by a 'ublic officer, or by another 'erson s'ecially en@oined by law to do so2 #b% +hat it was made by the 'ublic officer in the 'erformance of his duties or by such other 'erson in the 'erformance of a duty s'ecially en@oined by law2 and #c% +hat the 'ublic office or the other 'erson had sufficient knowledge of the facts by him stated, which must hae been ac!uired by him 'ersonally or through official information. In order for a book to classify as an official register and admissible in eidence, it is not necessary that it be re!uired by an e)'ress statute to be ke't, nor that the nature of the office should render the book indis'ensable2 it is sufficient that it be directed b y the 'ro'er authority to be ke't. +hus, official registers, though not re!uired by law, ke't as conenient and a''ro'riate modes of discharging official duties, are admissible.7? 8ntries in 'ublic or official books or records may be 'roed by the 'roduction of the books or records themseles or by a co'y certified by the legal kee'er thereof.70 It is not necessary to show that the 'erson making the entry is unaailable by reason of death, absence, etc., in order that the entry may be admissible in eidence, for his being e)cused from a''earing in court in order that 'ublic business be not deranged, is one of the reasons for this e)ce'tion to the hearsay rule.71 Corollary thereto, Presidential ecree o. =0, as amended by P.. o. J==,7> mandates hos'itals to re'ort and register with the local ciil registrar the fact of birth, a mong others, of babies born under their care. 4aid ecree im'oses a 'enalty of a fine of not less that P??.?? nor more than P0,???.?? or im'risonment of not less than three #>% months nor more than si) #=% months, or both, in the discretion of the court, in case of failure to make the necessary re'ort to the local ciil registrar. (ence, under the aboeDcited P.. =0, as amended, in connection with 5ule >?, 4ection 77, of the 5ules of Court, it is clear that the Cord ressing 5oom Book where the fact of birth, name of the mother and other related entries are initially recorded, as well as the Master 9ist of 9ie Births of the hos'ital, are considered entries in official record, being indis'ensable to and a''ro'riate modes of recording the births of children 're'aratory to registration of said entries with the local ciil registrar, in com'liance with a duty s'ecifically mandated by law.


1>1

It matters not that the 'erson 'resented to testify on these hos'ital records was not the 'erson who actually made those entries way back in 0?, Fuly 1, and Fuly >, 0<<= #Criminal Cases os. <=D0<<7, <=D0<<, <=D0<<=, and <=D0<

1>>

therefore, the trial court correctly disregarded his unsubstantiated defense of denial, wh ich cannot 'reail oer his 'ositie identification by 5osilyn as the cul'rit. As regards the charge of acts of lasciiousness committed in the morning o f Fune 0=, 0<<=, accusedDa''ellant claimed that it was im'ossible for him to hae committed the same because he flew to i'olog on that day. +he records disclose, howeer, that accusedDa''ellants flight was at <37? a.m. +he 'ossibility, therefore, of accusedDa''ellants haing 'erformed the lasciious acts on the ictim before he went off to the air'ort is not at all 'recluded. :or his failure to 'roe the 'hysical im'ossibility of his 'resence at the 5it; +owers in the morning of Fune 0=, 0<<=, when the se)ual abuse of 5osilyn was committed, his defense of alibi must fail. Article III, 4ection  of 5e'ublic Act o. J=0?, states3 Child Prostitution and other 4e)ual Abuse. DDD Children, whether male or female, who for money or 'rofit, or any other consideration or due to the coercion or influence of any adult, syndicate or grou', indulge in se)ual intercourse or lasciious conduct are deemed to be children e)'loited in 'rostitution and other se)ual abuse. +he 'enalty of reclusion tem'oral in its medium 'eriod to reclusion 'er'etua shall be im'osed u'on the following3 )))

)))

)))

#b% +hose who commit the act of se)ual intercourse or lasciious conduct with a child e)'loited in 'rostitution or sub@ected to other se)ual abuse2 Proided, +hat whe n the ictim is under twele #01% years of age, the 'er'etrators shall be 'rosecuted under Article >>, 'aragra'hs >, for ra'e and Article >>= of Act o. >K0, as amended, the 5eised Penal Code, for ra'e or lasciious conduct, as the case may be3 Proided, +hat the 'enalty for lasciious conduct when the ictim is under twele #01% years of age shall be reclusion tem'oral in its medium 'eriod2 ) ) ) . #8m'hasis su''lied.% In Peo'le . O'tana,77 the Court, citing the case of Peo'le . 9arin,7 e)'lained the elements of the offense of iolation of 4ection  #b% of 5.A. J=0?, or the Child Abuse 9aw, as follows3 0. +he accused commits the act of se)ual intercourse or lasciious conduct. 1. +he said act is 'erformed with a child e)'loited in 'rostitution or sub@ected other se)ual abuse. >. +he child, whether male or female, is below 0K years of age. A child is deemed e)'loited in 'rostitution or sub@ected to other se)ual abuse, when the child indulges in se)ual intercourse or lasciious conduct #a% for mone y, 'rofit, or any other consideration2 or #b% under the coercion or influence of any adult, syndicate or grou'. &nder 5A J=0?, children are "'ersons below eighteen years of age or those unable to fully take care of themseles or 'rotect themseles from abuse, neglect, cruelty, e)'loitation or discrimination because of their age or mental disability or condition."


1>7

"9asciious conduct" is defined under Article III, 4ection >1 of the Im'lementing 5ules and 5egulation of 5.A. J=0?, as follows3 +Nhe intentional touching, either directly or through clothing, of the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks, or the introduction of any ob@ect into the genitalia, anus or mouth, of any 'erson, whether of the same or o''osite se), with an intent to abuse, humiliate, harass, degrade, or arouse or gratify the se)ual desire of any 'erson, bestiality, masturbation, lasciious e)hibition of the genitals or 'ubic area of a 'erson. In the case at bar, accusedDa''ellants acts of kissing 5osilyn on the li's, fondling her breast, inserting his finger into her agina and 'lacing his 'enis between her thighs, all constitute lasciious conduct intended to arouse or gratify his se)ual desire. (ence, the trial court correctly conicted accusedDa''ellant of iolation of 4ection  #b% of 5.A. J=0?, or the Child Abuse 9aw, in Criminal Cases os. <=D0, charging him with the aboeDdescribed lasciious acts. +he 'enalty for iolation of 4ection  #b% of 5.A. J=0?, or the Child Abuse 9aw, where the ictim is below 01 years of age, is reclusion tem'oral in its medium 'eriod. +he records show that on at least nine #<% se'arate occasions, the accusedDa''ellant inserted his finger into the com'lainants agina. +hese insertions took 'lace in 0<<=. A year later, Congress enacted 5e'ublic Act o. K>>, the AntiD5a'e law of 0<

1>

+he 'enalties for the crime of ra'e in the light of arious circumstances, which are now set forth and contained in Article 1==DB of the 5eised Penal Code, hae also been increased. Considering that there are neither mitigating nor aggraating circumstance, the trial court correctly im'osed on accusedDa''ellant the ma)imum 'enalty of fifteen #0% years, si) #=% months and twenty #1?% days of reclusion tem'oral, which is within the medium 'eriod of reclusion tem'oral medium, 'ursuant to our ruling in ulla . Court of A''eals.7= otwithstanding that 5.A. J=0? is a s'ecial law, accusedDa''ellant may en@oy a minimum term of the indeterminate sentence to be taken within the range of the 'enalty ne)t lower to that 'rescribed by the Code.7J (oweer, the trial court erroneously fi)ed the minimum term of the indeterminate sentence at eight #K% years, eight #K% months an d one #0% day of 'rision mayor in its medium 'eriod. In the aforesaid case of ulla,7K we held that the 'enalty ne)t lower in degree to reclusion tem'oral medium is reclusion tem'oral minimum, the range of which is from twele #01% years and one #0% day to fourteen #07% years and eight #K% months. (ence, for iolation of Article III, 4ection  #b% of 5.A. J=0?, accusedDa''ellant shall suffer the indeterminate sentence of twele years #01% and one #0% day of reclusion tem'oral, as minimum, to fifteen #0% years, si) #=% months and twenty #1?% days of reclusion tem'oral as ma)imum. At the time of commission of the crimes com'lained of herein in 0<<=, statutory ra'e was 'enali;ed under 4ection 00 of 5.A. J=<, which amended Article >> of the 5eised Penal Code, to wit3 *hen and how ra'e is committed. DDD 5a'e is committed by haing carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances3 0. By using force or intimidation2 1. *hen the woman is de'ried of reason or otherwise unconscious2 and >. *hen the woman is under twele years of age or is demented. +he crime of ra'e shall be 'unished by reclusion 'er'etua. ))). In statutory ra'e, mere se)ual congress with a woman below twele years of age consummates the crime of statutory ra'e regardless of her consent to the act or lack of it. +he law 'resumes that a woman of tender age does not 'ossess discernment and is inca'able of giing intelligent consent to the se)ual act. +hus, it was held that carnal knowledge of a child below twele years old een if she is engaged in 'rostitution is still considered statutory ra'e. +he a''lication of force and intimidation or the de'riation of reason of the ictim becomes irreleant. +he absence of struggle or outcry of the ictim or een her 'assie submission to the se)ual act will not mitigate nor absole the accused from liability.7< In the case at bar, the 'rosecution established beyond reasonable doubt that accusedDa''ellant had carnal knowledge of 5osilyn. Moreoer, the 'rosecution successfully 'roed that 5osilyn was only eleen years of age at the time she was se)ually abused. As such, the absence of 'roof


1>=

of any struggle, or for that matter of consent or 'assie submission to the se)ual adances of accusedDa''ellant, was of no moment. +he fact that accusedDa''ellant had se)ual congress with eleen yearDold 5osilyn is sufficient to hold him liable for statutory ra'e, and sentenced to suffer the 'enalty of reclusion 'er'etua. As to accusedDa''ellant-s ciil liability, the amount of moral damages awarded by the trial court for each count of acts of lasciiousness under 4ection  #b% of 5.A. J=0? should be increased from P1?,???.?? to P?,???.??.? On the other hand, the award of the amount of P?,???.?? as moral damages for each count of statutory ra'e was correct. In Peo'le . 9or,0 citing the cases of Peo'le . $ictor,1 and Peo'le . 6ementi;a,> we held that the indemnity authori;ed by our criminal law as ciil indemnity e) delicto for the offended 'arty, in the amount authori;ed by the 'reailing @udicial 'olicy and aside from other 'roen actual damages, is itself e!uialent to actual or com'ensatory damages in ciil law. 4aid ciil indemnity is mandatory u'on finding of the fact of ra'e2 it is distinct from and should not be denominated as moral damages which are based on different @ural foundations and assessed by the court in the e)ercise of sound @udicial discretion.7 (ence, accusedDa''ellant should be ordered to 'ay the offended 'arty another P?,???.?? as ciil indemnity for each count of ra'e and acts of lasciiousness. *(858:O58, the ecision of the 5egional +rial Court of Makati, Branch =1, in Criminal Case os. <=D0, finding accusedDa''ellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of acts of lasciiousness in si) counts, is A::I5M8 with MOI:ICA+IO4. As modified, accusedD a''ellant is sentenced to suffer, for each count of acts of lasciiousness, the indeterminate 'enalty of twele years #01% and one #0% day of reclusion tem'oral, as minimum, to fifteen #0% years, si) #=% months and twenty #1?% days of reclusion tem'oral as ma)imum. :urther, accusedD a''ellant is ordered to 'ay the ictim, Ma. 5osilyn elantar, the additional amount of P?,???.?? as ciil indemnity for each count of statutory ra'e and acts of lasciiousness. :inally, the award of moral damages for each count of acts of lasciiousness is increased to P?,???.??. People v. /iao Facts: On May 1J, 0<<7, at about >3??PM, accusedDa''ellant 5ene 4iao, in his residence,

ordered 5eylan 6imena, his familys 0JDyear old houseboy, to 'ull 8strella 5aymundo, their 0 7D year old housemaid, to the womens !uarters. Once inside, a''ellant 4iao 'ushed her to the wooden bed and asked her to choose one among a 'istol, candle or a bottle of s'rite. A''ellant lit the candle and dro''ed the melting candle on her chest. 8strella was made to lie down on her back on the bed wU her head hanging oer one end. A''ellant then 'oured s'rite into her nostrils as she was made to s'read her arms wU his gun 'ointed to her face. A''ellant 4iao then tied her feet and hands wU an electric cord or wire as she


1>J

was made to lie face down on the bed. As 4iao 'ointed his 'istol at her, he ordered 8strella to undress and commanded her to take the initiatie on 6imena. ot understanding what he meant, a''ellant motioned to her 'oking the gun at her tem'le. 6imena was then ordered to remoe his shorts. (e did not do so but only let his 'enis out. A''ellant 4iao s'read the arms of 8strella and made her lie down s'readDeagled. 4he felt di;;y and shouted for hel' twice. 4iao then ordered 6imena to ra'e 8strella. At first, 6imena refused because he has a sister. (oweer, 4iao said that if they would not obey, he would kill both of them. Both 6imena and 8strella were forced and intimidated at gun'oint by 4iao to hae carnal knowledge of each other. +hey 'erformed the se)ual act because they were afraid they would be killed. 4iao commanded 6imena to ra'e 8strella in > diff 'ositions #i.e. missionary 'osition, sideDbyDside and dog 'osition as narrated iidly in the case%, 'ointing the handgun at them the whole time. +hereafter, 4iao warned them, If you will tell the 'olice, I will kill your mothers./ A''ellant 4iao, for his defense, denies the whole eent. (e asserts that she retaliated through this accusation because 8strella herself was accused of stealing many of his familys 'ersonal effects. (ssue: *hether or not ignominy, as an aggraating circumstance of the crime of ra'e, is

attendant to @ustify the award of e)em'lary damages 'eld: %es. +he 5+C oerlooked and did not take into account the aggraating circumstance of

ignominy and sentenced accusedDa''ellant to the single indiisible 'enalty of reclusion 'er'etua. It has been held that where the accused in committing the ra'e used not only the missionary 'osition i.e. male su'erior, female inferior but also the dog 'osition as dogs do, i.e. entry from behind, as was 'roen in the case, the aggraating circumstance of ignominy attended the commission thereof. 4till, 4C res'ected 5+Cs finding of facts and found any inconsistencies in the witnesses testimonies inconse!uential considering that they referred to triial matters wUc hae nothing to do wU the essential fact of the commission of ra'e that is carnal knowledge through force and intimidation. 8rgo, een if it was 'ointed out that in all > 'ositions, 6imena e@aculated >) in a s'an of less than >? mins, wUc does not conform to common e)'erience, ra'e was still 'resent from the eidence because ra'e is not the emission of semen but the 'enetration of the female genitalia by the male organ. Penetration, howeer slight, and not e@aculation, is what constitutes ra'e. Moreoer, een if the house was occu'ied by many 'eo'le at the time of the crime, ra'e was still committed because lust is no res'ecter of time and 'lace. And 8strellas and 6imenas decision not to flee 'roes only the fear and intimidation that they were under because 4iao was after all their amo/ or em'loyer who threatened to kill them or their family if they did not succumb to his demands. +he goerning law is Art >> 5PC as amended by 5A J=< wUc im'oses the 'enalty of reclusion 'er'etua to death, if committed wU the use of a deadly wea'on. 4iao is further ordered to 'ay the offended 'arty moral damages, wUc is automatically granted in ra'e cases wUo need of any 'roof, in the amount of PhP?E. :urthermore, the 'resence of the aggraating circumstance of


1>K

ignominy @ustifies the award of e)em'lary damages 'ursuant to Art 11>? CC. Fudgment affirmed wU modification of damages awarded. People v. Crisostomo

"+Nhe trial court-s ealuation of the credibility of the witnesses is entitled to he highest res'ect absent a showing that it oerlooked, misunderstood or misa''lied some facts or circumstances of weight and substance that would affect the result of the case."1 On a''eal is the October 11, 1?0? ecision> of the Court of A''eals #CA% in CAD6.5. C5D(.C. o. ?>K>1 which affirmed with modification the Fuly >, 1??K ecision7 of the 5egional +rial Court #5+C% of Anti'olo City, Branch J> finding a''ellant Foel Crisostomo y Malliar guilty beyond reasonable doubt of two counts of ra'e by se)ual assault and one count of statutory ra'e. In three se'arate Informations, a''ellant was charged with ra'e committed as follows3 Criminal Case o. < #5a'e by 4e)ual Assault% +hat, on or about the Kth day of A'ril, 0<<<, in the City of Anti'olo, Phili''ines and within the @urisdiction of this (onorable Court, the aboeDnamed accused, with lewd designs, did then and there commit an act of se)ual assault by using a lighted cigarette as an instrument or ob@ect and insertingN the same into the genital orifice of "AAA,"= a minor who is si) #=% years of age, thereby causing the labia ma@ora of the agina of said minor to suffer a third degree burn, against her will and consent. Contrary to law. Criminal Case o. <= #5a'e by 4e)ual Assault% +hat, on or about the Kth day of A'ril, 0<<<, in the City of Anti'olo, Phili''ines and within the @urisdiction of this (onorable Court, the aboeDnamed accused, with lewd designs, did then and there commit an act of se)ual assault by using a lighted cigarette as an instrument or ob@ect and insertingN the same into the anal orifice of "AAA", a minor who is si) #=% years of age, thereby causing the 'erianal region of the said anal orifice of said minor to suffer a third degree burn, against her will and consent. Contrary to law. Criminal Case o. <J #4tatutory 5a'e% +hat, on or about the Kth day of A'ril, 0<<<, in the City of Anti'olo, Phili''ines and within the @urisdiction of this (onorable Court, the aboeDnamed accused, with lewd designs and by means of force, iolence and intimidation, did, then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously hae carnal knowledge ofN "AAA", a minor who is si) #=% years of age2 that on the same occasion that


1><

the Accused ra'ed said minor, the accused did, then and there burn her buttocks by the use of a lighted cigarette, against her will and consent. Contrary to law. *hen arraigned on Fanuary <, 1??0, a''ellant 'leaded not guilty.J PreDtrial conference was terminated u'on agreement of the 'arties. +rial on the merits ensued. :actual Antecedents +he facts as summari;ed by the 5+C, are as follows3 +he ictim in these cases,N "AAA,N" testified that at noon time of A'ril K, 0<<<, she was ) ) ) 'laying ) ) ) with her 'laymates whereu'on she wandered by the house of accused which ) ) ) was @ust below their house. "AAA" clarified during her crossDe)amination that there was a ulcani;ing sho' owned by her father located in their house ) ) ) and where accused was em'loyed. *hile "AAA" was at the house of accused, she claimed that her genitals and buttocks were burned with a lighted cigarette by the said accused. "AAA" testified further that her clothes were taken off by the same accused who also took his clothes off after which he allegedly 'laced himself on to' of her, inserted his 'enis and 'roceeded to hae illicit carnal knowledge ofN the then si) #=% year old girl. #+4 May 1<, 1??0, ''. D<2 +4 Aug. J, 1??0, ''. 0?D01.% "BBB," father of "AAA," 'resented in court his daughters birth certificate #8)hibit "B"% which stated that she was born on A'ril 7, 0<<> #+4 4e't. 1, 1??0, '. 7%. On the other hand, r. 8mmanuel 5eyes the MedicoD9egal Officer who e)amined "AAA" identified his MedicoD9egal 5e'ort #8)hibit "M"% and testified that the ictim indeed had two #1% third degree burns in the 'erianal region. r. 5eyes testified that it was 'ossible that the said burns were caused by a lighted cigarette stick being forced on the ictims skin. Moreoer, r. 5eyes confirmed that there was a loss of irginity on the 'art of the ictim and that the same could hae been done 17 hours from the time of his e)amination which was also on A'ril K, 0<<<. #+4 o. J, 1??0 ''. 00D0J% "CCC" aunt of "AAA"N testified that ) ) ) she ) ) ) assisted the mother of "AAA" in bringing the ictim to the Pasig 6eneral (os'ital and thereafter to Cam' Crame where a doctor also e)amined "AAA" and confirmed that the latter was indeed a ictim of ra'e. "CCC" testified that they then 'roceeded to the *omens Nesk to file the instant com'laint against the accused. #+4 August , 1??> ''. 7DK% On the other hand, accused denied the allegation of ra'e against him. Accused 'resented his brotherDinDlaw 5ogelio Oletin who testified that he was tending the store located at the house of accused when the latter su''osedly arried from work at 0?3?? a.m.N of A'ril K, 0<<< and sle't until 3?? '.m.N of the same day. According to 5ogelio that is the usual routine of accused as the latter worked in the night shift schedule as ulcani;er in the ulcani;ing sho' owned by the ictims father. #+4 :ebruary >, 1??= ''. =DK%


17?

*hen accused testified on oember 0J, 1??=, he essentially confirmed the testimony of his brotherDinDlaw that it was im'ossible for him to hae ra'ed "AAA" on the date and time stated in the information as his night shift work schedule @ust would not 'ermit such an incident to occur. Accused added that he knew of no reason why the family of the 'riate com'lainant would 'in the crime against him. #+4 o. 0J, 1??= ''. , 1??K, the 5+C rendered its ecision finding a''ellant guilty of three counts of ra'e, i;3 *(858:O58, 'remises considered, accused Foel Crisostomo y Malliar is found 6&I9+S of all offenses stated in the three #>% Criminal Informations and is hereby sentenced to the following3 a% In Criminal Information ` < and Criminal Information ` <=, accused is to suffer the Indeterminate Penalty of im'risonment of ten #0?% years and one #0% day of Prision Mayor as minimum to seenteen #0J% years, four #7% months and one #0% day of 5eclusion +em'oral as ma)imum and is ordered to 'ay the ictim "AAA" ciil indemnity of P>?,???.??, moral damages of P>?,???.?? and e)em'lary damages of P0,???.?? for each of the two Criminal Informations. b% In Criminal Information ` <J, accused is to suffer the 'enalty of 5eclusion Per'etua and is ordered to 'ay the ictim ciil indemnity of PJ,???.??, moral damages of P?,???.?? and e)em'lary damages of P>?,???.?? with cost ofN suit for all Criminal Informations. 4O O5858.< Aggrieed, a''ellant filed a otice of A''eal0? which was gien due course by the trial court in its Order00 dated :ebruary 1, 1??<. 5uling of the Court of A''eals In his Brief filed before the CA, a''ellant raised the following assignment of error3 +(8 CO&5+ A R&O 65A$89S 8558 I :II6 +(8 ACC&48DAPP899A+ 6&I9+S :O5 +(8 C5IM8 O: 5AP8 #A5+IC98 1==DA PA5. 0 A A5+. 1=JDB, PA5. J I 589A+IO +O 5.A. O. J=0?% 84PI+8 +(8 P5O48C&+IO4 :AI9&58 +O P5O$8 (I4 6&I9+ B8SO 58A4OAB98 O&B+.01


170

A''ellant claimed that the trial court graely erred when it lent full credence to the testimonies of the 'rosecution witnesses.0aw'i0 In 'articular, a''ellant insisted that the trial court erred in finding "AAAs" testimony credible considering that she was unsure whether a match, rod or a cigarette stick, was used in burning her 'riate 'arts.0> A''ellant argued that "AAA" neer showed signs of shock, distress, or an)iety des'ite her alleged traumatic e)'erience.07 A''ellant also alleged that "CCCs" testimony should be disregarded as she was not een 'resent when the ra'e incidents ha''ened.0 (e o'ined that "CCC" influenced her niece, "AAA," to file the suit against him which bes'oke of illDmotie on her 'art. A''ellant concluded that these "inconsistencies and contradictions" are enough to set aside the erdict of coniction im'osed u'on by the 5+C.0= (oweer, the CA gae short shrift to a''ellants arguments. +he CA rendered its ecision dis'osing as follows3 ACCO5I69S, the instant a''eal is I4MI448. +he assailed Fuly >, 1??K ecision is hereby A::I5M8 with MOI:ICA+IO as to the 'enalties im'osed, and to be read thus3 "0. :or Criminal Case os. < and <=, Foel Crisostomo is hereby sentenced to suffer the indeterminate 'enalty of im'risonment ranging from ten0J #K% years and one #0% day of Prision Mayor, as minimum, to seenteen #0J% years and four #7% months of 5eclusion +em'oral, as ma)imum, and ordered to 'ay AAA +hirty +housand 'esos #P>?,???.??% as ciil indemnity, +hirty +housand 'esos #P>?,???.??% as moral damages, and :ifteen +housand 'esos #P0,???.??% as e)em'lary damages, all for each count of ra'e by se)ual assault2 and #1% :or Criminal Case o. <J, Foel Crisostomo is hereby sentenced to suffer the 'enalty of 5eclusion Per'etua without eligibility of 'arole, and ordered to 'ay AAA 4eentyD:ie +housand 'esos #PJ,???.??% as ciil indemnity, :ifty +housand 'esos #P?,???.??% as moral damages, and +hirty +housand 'esos #P>?,???.??% as e)em'lary damages, and all the costs of suit." 4O O5858.0K (ence, this a''eal0< which the CA gae due course in its 5esolution1? of Fanuary =, 1?00. In a 5esolution10 dated Fune 0, 1?00, this Court re!uired the 'arties to file their res'ectie su''lemental briefs. In its Manifestation and Motion,11 the Office of the 4olicitor 6eneral #O46% informed this Court that it will no longer file a 4u''lemental Brief bec ause it had already e)haustiely discussed and refuted all the arguments of the a''e llant in its brief filed before the CA. A''ellant likewise filed a Manifestation In 9ieu of 4u''lemental Brief1> 'raying that the case be deemed submitted for decision based on the 'leadings submitted. Our 5uling +he a''eal lacks merit.


171

+he 5+C, as affirmed by the CA, correctly found a''ellant guilty of two counts of ra'e by se)ual assault and one count of ra'e by se)ual intercourse. Article 1==DA of the 5eised Penal Code #5PC% 'roides3 A5+. 1==DA. 5a'e, *hen and (ow Committed. D 5a'e is committed H 0. By a man who shall hae carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances3 a. +hrough force, threat or intimidation2 b. *hen the offended 'arty is de'ried of reason or is otherwise unconscious2 c. By means of fraudulent machinations or grae abuse of authority2 d. *hen the offended 'arty is under twele #01% years of age or is demented, een though none of the circumstances mentioned aboe should be 'resent2 1. By any 'erson who, under any of the circumstances mentioned in 'aragra'h 0 hereof, shall commit an act of se)ual assault by inserting his 'enis into another 'ersons mouth or anal orifice, or any instrument or ob@ect, into the genital or anal orifice of another 'erson. #8m'hases su''lied% *hen the offended 'arty is under 01 years of age, the crime committed is "termed statutory ra'e as it de'arts from the usual modes of committing ra'e. *hat the law 'unishes is carnal knowledge of a woman below 01 years of age. +hus, the only sub@ect of in!uiry is the age of the woman and whether carnal knowledge took 'lace. +he law 'resumes that the ictim does not and cannot hae a will of her own on account of her tender years."17 In this case, the 'rosecution satisfactorily established all the elements of statutory ra'e. "AAA" testified that on A'ril K, 0<<<, a''ellant took off her clothes and made her lie down. A''ellant also remoed his clothes, 'laced himself on to' of "AAA," inserted his 'enis into her agina, and 'roceeded to hae carnal knowledge of her. At the time of the ra'e, "AAA" was only si) years of age. (er birth certificate showed that she was born on A'ril 7, 0<<>. "AAAs" testimony was corroborated by r. 8mmanuel 5eyes who found "AAA" to hae fresh and bleeding hymenal lacerations. 9ikewise, the 'rosecution 'roed beyond reasonable doubt a''ellants guilt for two counts of ra'e by se)ual assault.0Yw'hi0 5ecords show that a''ellant inserted a lit cigarette stick into "AAAs" genital orifice causing her labia ma@ora to suffer a >rd degree burn. A''ellant likewise inserted a lit cigarette stick into "AAAs" anal orifice causing >rd degree burns in her 'erianal region. *e agree with the CA that "AAAs" "uncertainty" on whether it was a match, rod or a cigarette stick that was inserted into her 'riate 'arts, did not lessen her credibility. 4uch "uncertainty" is so inconse!uential and does not diminish the fact that an instrument or ob@ect was inserted into her 'riate 'arts. +his is the essence of ra'e by se)ual assault. "+Nhe graamen of the crime of ra'e by se)ual assault ) ) ) is the insertion of the 'enis into another 'ersons mouth or anal


17>

orifice, or any instrument or ob@ect, into another 'ersons genital or anal orifice."1 In any eent, "inconsistencies in a ra'e ictims testimony do not im'air her credibility, es'ecially if the inconsistencies refer to triial matters that do not alter the essential fact of the commission of ra'e."1= *e also held in Peo'le . Piosang1J that H "tNestimonies of childDictims are normally gien full weight and credit, since when a girl, 'articularly if she is a minor, says that she has been ra'ed, she says in effect all that is necessary to show that ra'e has in fact been committed. *hen the offended 'arty is of tender age and immature, courts are inclined to gie credit to her account of what trans'ired, considering not only her relatie ulnerability but also the shame to which she would be e)'osed if the matter to which she testified is not true. South and immaturity are generally badges of truth and sincerity. Considering her tender age, AAA could not hae inented a horrible story. ) ) ) " Moreoer, a''ellants argument that "AAA" did not manifest any stress or an)iety considering her traumatic e)'erience is 'urely s'eculatie and bereft of any legal basis. Besides, it is settled that 'eo'le react differently when confronted with a startling e)'erience. +here is no standard behaioral res'onse when one is confronted with a traumatic e)'erience. 4ome may show signs of stress2 but others may act nonchalantly. eertheless, "AAAs" reaction does not in any way 'roe the innocence of a''ellant. As correctly 'ointed out by the O46, regardless of "AAAs" reactions, it did not diminish the fact that she was ra'ed by a''ellant or that a crime was committed.1K *e also agree with the CA that "CCCs" efforts to hale a''ellant to the court should not be e!uated with illDmotie on her 'art. On the contrary, we find "CCCs" efforts to seek @ustice for her niece who was ra'ed more in accord with the norms of society. At any rate, een if we disregard "CCCs" testimony, a''ellants coniction would still stand. *e agree with the obseration of the O46 that "CCCs" "testimony actually had no great im'act on the case. In truth, her testimony wasN com'osed mainly of the fact that she was the one who accom'anied the mother of "AAA" in bringing "AAA" to the Pasig 6eneral (os'ital and thereafter to Cam' Crame and later on to the *omens desk."1< On the other hand, a''ellants alibi and denial are weak defenses es'ecially when weighed against "AAAs" 'ositie identification of him as the malefactor. A''ellant did not een attem't to show that it was 'hysically im'ossible for him to be at the crime scene at the time of its commission. In fact, he admitted that he lied @ust four houses away from the house of "AAA". (is denial is also unsubstantiated hence the same is selfDsering and deseres no consideration or weight. +he 5+C 'ro'erly disregarded the testimony of 5ogelio Oletin #Oletin%, a''ellants brotherDinDlaw, who claimed that a''ellant was at his house at the time of the incident. As a''ellant already admitted, his house is near the house of "AAA" hence there was no 'hysical im'ossibility for him to be 'resent at the crime scene. Also, the 5+C obsered that Oletins testimony did not "'roe beneficial to the defense. 4uffice it to state that the 'riate 'rosecutor correctly noted that the said witness was always smiling and laughing when answering !uestions 'ro'ounded to him as if making a mockery of the 'roceedings which his own brotherDinDlaw was facing.">?


177

Pursuant to Article 1==DB of the 5PC, the 'enalty for statutory ra'e #Criminal Case o. <J% is death when the ictim is a child below seen years old. +here is no dis'ute that at the time the ra'e was committed on A'ril K, 0<<<, "AAA" was only si) yea rs old, haing been born on A'ril 7, 0<<>. (oweer, 'ursuant to 5e'ublic Act o. <>7=,>0 the 'enalty of reclusion 'er'etua shall be im'osed on the a''ellant but without eligibility for 'arole.>1 +he CA thus correctly im'osed the said 'enalty on a''ellant. On the other hand, ra'e by se)ual assault committed against a child below seen years old is 'unishable by reclusion tem'oral.>> A''lying the Indeterminate 4entence 9aw, and there being no other aggraating or mitigating circumstance, the 'ro'er im'osable 'enalty shall be 'rision mayor>7 as minimum, to reclusion tem'oral,> as ma)imum. +he CA thus correctly im'osed the 'enalty of eight #K% years and one #0% day of'rision mayor, as minimum, to seenteen #0J% years and four #7% months of reclusion tem'oral, as ma)imum, for each count of se)ual assault. As regards damages, the CA correctly awarded the amounts of PJ,???.?? as ciil indemnity and P>?,???.?? as e)em'lary damages in Criminal Case o. <J #statutory ra'e%. (oweer, the award of moral damages must be increased to PJ,???.?? in line with 'reailing @uris'rudence.>= As regards Criminal Case o. < and Criminal Case o. <= #ra'e by se)ual assault%, the CA likewise 'ro'erly awarded the amounts of P>?,???.?? as ciil indemnity and P>?,???.?? as moral damages, for each count. (oweer, the award of e)em'lary damages for each count of ra'e by se)ual assault must be increased to P>?,???.?? in line with 'reailing @uris'rudence.>J In addition, all damages awarded shall earn interest at the rate of = 'er annum from date of finality of @udgment until fully 'aid. *(858:O58, the a''eal is I4MI448. +he October 11, 1?0? ecision of the Court of A''eals in CAD6.5. C5D(.C. o. ?>K>1 which affirmed with modification the Fuly >, 1??K ecision of the 5egional +rial Court of Anti'olo City, Branch J> finding a''ellant Foel Crisostomo y Malliar guilty beyond reasonable doubt of two counts of ra'e by se)ual assault and one count of statutory ra'e is A::I5M8 with MOI:ICA+IO4 that the award of moral damages in Criminal Case o. <J #statutory ra'e% is increased to PJ,???.?? and the award of e)em'lary damages in Criminal Case o. < and Criminal Case o. <= #ra'e by se)ual assault% is increased to P>?,???.?? for each count. In addition, interest is im'osed on all damages awarded at the rate of = 'er annum from date of finality of @udgment until fully 'aid. People v. 2aduon

+his is a case of a father defiling his 01Dyear old daughter on three se'arate occasions. On a''eal is the ecision0 dated Fuly >0, 1??J of the Court of A''eals #CA% in CAD6.5. C5D (.C. o. ?100 that affirmed in toto the Fanuary 0K 1??= ecision1 of the 5egional +rial Court #5+C%, Branch J=, 4an Mateo, 5i;al, in Criminal Case os. =J1DJ7, finding a''ellant oney 6aduyon y +a'is'isan #a''ellant% guilty beyond reasonable doubt of !ualified ra'e,> !ualified ob@ect ra'e7 and se)ual abuse committed against his own daughter "AAA".=


17

:actual Antecedents +hree Informations were filed against a''ellant, the releant 'ortions of which read as follows3 In Criminal Case o. =J1 for Rualified 5a'e +hat on or about the 11nd day of August 1??1, in the Munici'ality of 4an Mateo, Proince of 5i;al, Phili''ines and within the @urisdiction of this (onorable Court, the aboeDnamed accused, taking adantage of his moral authority and ascendancy and by means of force and intimidation, did then and there willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously hae carnal knowledge of one "AAA," a minor, 01 years of age, against her will and without her consent, the said crime haing been attended by the !ualifying circumstances of relationshi' and minority, the said accused being the 'arent of the said ictim, a 01Dyear old minor daughter of the accused thereby raising the crime to Rualified 5a'e which is aggraated by the circumstance of +reachery, Abuse of 4u'erior 4trength, ighttime and welling. CO+5A5S +O 9A*.J In Criminal Case o. =J> for 4e)ual Abuse +hat on or about the 10st day of August 1??1, in the Munici'ality of 4an Mateo, Proince of 5i;al, Phili''ines and within the @urisdiction of this (onorable Court, the aboeDnamed accused, taking adantage of his moral authority and ascendancy being the 'arent of the ictim "AAA", with lewd design ) ) ) and intent to debase, degrade or demean said ictim, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and knowingly commit lasciious conduct on the said "AAA," a minor, 01 years of age, by then and there touching her breast and rubbing her arms, against her will and without her consent thereby constituting 48&A9 AB&48 which is 're@udicial to her normal growth and deelo'ment with attendant aggraating circumstance of 589A+IO4(IP increasing the 'enalty of the offense to its ma)imum 'eriod. CO+5A5S +O 9A*.K In Criminal Case o. =J7 for Rualified Ob@ect 5a'e +hat on or about the

17=

A''ellant 'leaded not guilty to all the charges. &'on termination of the 'reDtrial conference, trial ensued. $ersion of the Prosecution A''ellant is married to the mother of "AAA" with whom he has three daughters. +heir eldest child is "AAA," who at the time material to this case was only 01 years old. On August 10, 1??1, the mother and sisters of "AAA" attended the wake of her auntie in Caloocan City. "AAA" and her father, the a''ellant, were thus the only ones left in the family residence in 4an Mateo, 5i;al. At around <3?? '.m. of the said date, "AAA" was lying in her bed in the family room located at the u''er 'ortion of their house when a''ellant fondled her breasts and touched her arms.0? A''ellant threatened "AAA" not to tell her mother about the incident or else something bad might ha''en to the latter.00 At around 003?? '.m. of the following day, August 11, 1??1, and while her mother and sisters were still in Caloocan City, "AAA" was awakened when a''ellant lowered her shorts and 'anty.01 A''ellant s'read her legs and inserted his 'enis into her agina.0> "AAA" felt 'ain but could do nothing but cry.07 A''ellant 'ulled out his 'enis and inserted it again into "AAAs" agina. *hen he was done, a''ellant 'ut her shorts and 'anty back on and again threatened "AAA."0 After more than a month or on October <, 1??1, at about 0?3>? '.m. and while "AAA" was slee'ing in a doubleDdeck bed and her sister was in the lower 'ortion thereof, "AAA" was suddenly awakened. 4he noticed that her short 'ants had been lowered while a''ellant was already lying beside her.0= A''ellant then inserted his inde) finger into "AAAs" agina. "AAA" only cried u'on feeling the 'ain. After his de'lorable act, a''ellant reiterated his 'reious threat to "AAA."0J After a few minutes, "AAAs" mother entered the room where her daughters were slee'ing. 4he noticed that "AAA" was coered with 'illows, e)ce't for her head and feet.0K &'on a''roaching "AAA," she saw that her legs were s'read a'art and her 'anty was slightly lowered and inserted at the center of her genitals.0< +he mother then sus'ected that her husband did something bad to "AAA" since only she and her husband were awake at that time. (oweer, she o'ted to remain silent and @ust 'ray.1? *hen "AAA" went to school the following day, she was asked by her religion teacher if her father did something bad to her.10 "AAA" who was tearyDeyed did not answer.11 9ater, "AAAs" class adiser called her.1> +hey ate in the canteen and thereafter 'roceeded to the adoration cha'el to 'ray.17 After 'raying, the teacher asked "AAA" the same !uestion 'ro'ounded by the religion teacher.1 +his time, "AAA" re'lied that her father did something bad to her twice but did not reeal the details surrounding the same.1= "AAAs" mother then came and asked her daughter if a''ellant did something bad to her. "AAA" answered "Ses. It ha''ened twice."1J +hus, "AAA" and her mother went to the 'olice station and re'orted the incidents of her defilement.1K A 'hysical e)amination done u'on "AAA" reealed that she was in a nonDirgin 'hysical state but that there are no signs of any form of trauma.1< A 'sychiatric ealuation


17J

likewise reealed that "AAA" was suffering from PostDtraumatic 4tress isorder with e'ressed Mood.>? $ersion of the efense A''ellant denied the accusations against him and instead adanced the following ersion of eents. :rom August 10, 1??1 until <3?? a.m. of August 11, 1??1, his wife and their two younger daughters attended the wake of his wifes sister in Caloocan City.>0 *hile he admitted that only he and "AAA" were left in their house, he denied mashing her breast.>1 (e claimed that at the time of the alleged incident on August 10, 1??1, he was oerseeing their com'uter sho'.>> (e also denied ra'ing "AAA" the following day since his wife and his youngest daughter were already home by then and they all sle't in their house in the eening of that day.>7 Anent what trans'ired on October <, 1??1, a''ellant claimed that he closed their com'uter sho' at around 0?3?? '.m.> (e then 'roceeded u'stairs and saw his wife feeding their youngest daughter.>= 4he asked him to take oer so she could go to the bathroom downstairs.>J At 0?31 '.m., his wife returned.>K A''ellant then heard a noise from the outside. After a while, his kum'are called him to re'ort that his brother threw stones at the house of his kum'ares father.>< A''ellant immediately went outside.7? +here was therefore no truth to the claim of "AAA" that he inserted his finger inside her agina that night.70 +he defense belieed that "AAA" was @ust induced by a''ellants wife to make false accusations against him.71 +his was due to his wifes infidelity which was confirmed when his wife confessed that she went out with another man7> and when their younger daughter saw his wife kissing another man.77 es'ite this, a''ellant claimed that he already forgae his wife for the sake of their children.7 A''ellants mother corroborated his story. According to her, a''ellants family was in their house in the morning of August 11, 1??1.7= 4he een talked to the wife of a''ellant at around =3?? '.m. and was told that she went home with her youngest daughter so they could rest since they hae no 'lace to stay in the wake they attended in Caloocan City.7J +he ne)t day, "AAA," her mother and sister went back to the wake.7K A''ellants sisterDinDlaw testified that after "AAA," her mother and sister went to the wake on August 1>, 1??1, she, together with her son, motherDinDlaw, and a''ellant followed that eening.7< 4he obsered that there seemed to be nothing wrong with "AAA" since she was sering food in the wake and 'laying with her cousins.? 5uling of the 5egional +rial Court In its Fanuary 0K, 1??= ecision,0 the 5+C gae more weight to "AAAs" 'ositie testimony as against a''ellants bare denials since her testimony was candid, straightforward and free from material contradictions. (er testimony was com'lemented by the findings of the medicoDlegal


17K

officer who e)amined "AAA." In fact, "AAA" suffered intense 'sychological stress and de'ression as a result of the abuses. On the other hand, the 5+C found that a''ellants denials were not substantiated by clear and conincing eidence.0Yw'hi0 It also found unacce'table his attem't to malign the re'utation of his wife and daughter in order to e)cul'ate himself. According to the said court, this easie attitude of a''ellant cannot 'reail oer "AAAs" testimony. Accordingly, the 5+C dis'osed of the criminal cases thus3 *(858:O58, 'remises considered @udgment is hereby rendered as follows3 #a% In Criminal Case o. =J1, for the ra'e committed on August 11, 1??1, accused oney 6aduyon y +a'is'isan is hereby sentenced to suffer the 'enalty of 8A+( and to 'ay the ictim "AAA," the amount of P?,??? as ciil indemnity, P?,??? as moral damages and P1,???.?? as e)em'lary damages. #b% In Criminal Case o. =J>, for the se)ual abuse committed on August 10, 1??1, accused oney 6aduyon y +a'is'isan is hereby sentenced to an indeterminate 'enalty of One #0% year and One #0% month of Prision Correcional as minimum to +wo #1% years, 8leen #00% months of Prision Correccional in its medium 'eriod as ma)imum. #c% In Criminal Case o. =J7, for the ra'e committed on October <, 1??1, accused oney 6aduyon y +a'is'isan is hereby sentenced to suffer the 'enalty of 8A+( and to 'ay the ictim "AAA" the amount of P?,??? as ciil indemnity, P?,??? as moral damages and P1,???.?? as e)em'lary damages. 4O O5858.1 On 4e'tember 7, 1??=, the 5+C, howeer, 'artially modified the aboe @udgment> insofar as the 'enalty im'osed in Criminal Case o. =J7 is concerned, i;3 +he aforesaid @udgment is hereby 'artially modified ) ) ) to read, as follows3 "*(858:O58, 'remises considered, the @udgment is hereby rendered, as follows3 #a% ) ) ) #b% ) ) ) #c% In Criminal Case o. =J7, for the ra'e committed on October <, 1??1, accused oney 6aduyon y +a'is'isan is hereby sentenced to suffer the indeterminate 'enalty of im'risonment of = years and 0 day of 'rision mayor, as minimum, to 07 years, K months and 0 day of reclusion tem'oral, as ma)imum and to 'ay the ictim "AAA", the amount of P>?,???.??, as ciil indemnity, P>?,???.??, as moral damages and P0,???.??, as e)em'lary damages.


17<

4O O5858."7 5uling of the Court of A''eals On a''eal, the a''ellate court sustained a''ellants coniction. 9ike the 5+C, it stressed that a''ellants bare assertions cannot oercome the categorical testimony of the ictim. It brushed aside the inconsistencies on the 'art of "AAA" as 'ointed out by a''ellant and concluded, after a careful ealuation of the facts and eidence on record, that a''ellants guilt was 'roen beyond reasonable doubt. (ence, the dis'ositie 'ortion of the CAs Fuly >0, 1??J ecision3 *(858:O58, the a''ealed ecision is A::I5M8 in toto. 4O O5858.= Assignment of 8rrors 4till insisting on his innocence, a''ellant 'rays for the reersal of the CAs a''ealed ecision and ado'ts the same assignment of errors he adanced before the said court, i;3 +(8 9O*85 CO&5+ 8558 I O+ ACCO5I6 +O +(8 ACC&48 +(8 P584&MP+IO O: IOC8C8 +O *(IC( (8 I4 8+I+98 I C5IMIA9 CA484 A :O5 CO$IC+I6 (IM O: +(8 O::8484 C(A568 *I+(O&+ +(8 B88:I+ O: P5OO: B8SO 58A4OAB98 O&B+ 84PI+8 +(8 8$I8C8 4(O*I6 +(A+ H A. +(8 C9AIM O: +(8 P5O48C&+IO +(A+ +(8 ACC&48 A (I4 A&6(+85 *858 A9O8 A+ +(8I5 4A MA+8O 584I8C8 I +(8 8$8I6 O: 11 A&6&4+ 1??1, +(8 A+8 *(8 +(8 A99868 P8I98 P88+5A+IO +OOE P9AC8 I4 A B5AV8 9I82 B. "AAA" I O+ MAI:84+ O$85+ P(S4ICA9 4I64 +(A+ 4(8 *A4 5AP82 C. "AAA" 6A$8 :O&5 CO:9IC+I6 ACCO&+4 O (O* 4(8 *A4 5AP82 . "AAA" 6A$8 +(588 CO:9IC+I6 ACCO&+4 O (O* 4(8 *A4 ":I6858" BS (85 :A+(85 I +(8 8$8I6 O: < OC+OB85 1??12 8.    +(8 MO+(85 O: +(8 A99868 $IC+IM, COCOC+8 +(8 < OC+OB85 1??1 ICI8+2 :. +(858 I4 O 4PO+A8O&4 I4C9O4&58. "AAA" *A4 P5844&58 +O ACC&48 (85 :A+(852 6. "AAA" I4 4&4C8P+IB98 +O P5844&58 A MAIP&9A+IO2


1?

(. "AAA" B84+O*8 ON (85 :A+(85 A *A5M 4MI98 *(8 4(8 I8+I:I8 (IM I CO&5+, *(IC( I4 &8P8C+8 I: 4(8 (A I :AC+ B88 5AP8 A MO984+8 BS (85 O* :A+(852 I. +(8 8M8AO5 O: "AAA"    I +(8 CO&548 O: +(8 CO&5+ P5OC88I64 I4 :A5 :5OM I4PI5I62 F. "AAA" 6A$8 :O&5 CO:9IC+I6 $854IO4 O: *(A+ +5A4PI58 A:+85 +(8 A99868 5AP82 E. "AAA" I4 CO4I4+8+ I 6I$I6 ICO4I4+8+ 4+A+8M8+42 9. +(8 4+A+8M8+ O: "AAA" +(A+ (85 :A+(85 I BA +(I64 +O (85 +*IC8 CO+5AIC+4 (85 C9AIM +(A+ 4(8 *A4 48&A99S MO984+8 +(5IC82 M. "AAA" 6A$8 CO:9IC+I6 ACCO&+4 O (O* 4(8 :IA99S I4C9O48 (85 O58A92 . +(8 *I+84484 :O5 +(8 P5O48C&+IO 6A$8 CO:9IC+I6 ACCO&+4 O: (O* "AAA" MA8 +(8 I4C9O4&582 O.    +(8 C9A44 A$I485 O: "AAA" A A *I+844 :O5 +(8 P5O48C&+IO, CO&9 O+ B8 B89I8$8 *I+( 4A:8+S2 P. +(8 C9AIM +(A+ +(8 ACC&48 ":I6858" (I4 A&6(+85 I +(8 8$8I6 O: < OC+OB85 1??1 I4 IC58IB982 R. :5OM (85 +84+IMOS, I+ APP8A54 +(A+ "AAA" I4 4&BCO4CIO&49S 48I6 4&B+98 (I+4 +O +(8 CO&5+ +O 58C8I$8 (85 +84+IMOS *I+( CA&+IO2 5. +(8 PA58+4 O: "AAA" A58 O+ 68++I6 A9O6 *8992 4. +(8 C9IICA9 :II6 O: +(8 P4SC(IA+5I4+ I4 :A&9+S A ICOC9&4I$82 A +. +(8 M8ICA9 8$I8C8 I4 O+ COC9&4I$8 O: 5AP8.J In fine, a''ellant contends that the 'rosecution failed to establish by 'roof beyond reasonable doubt that he committed the crimes attributed to him.K (e argues that his alibi and denial desere greater weight in eidence than the testimony of the 'rosecution witnesses.< Our 5uling +he a''eal is unmeritorious. +he crime of ra'e under Article 1==DA of the 5eised Penal Code #5PC%


10

+he enactment of 5e'ublic Act #5A% o. K>>, otherwise known as the AntiD5a'e 9aw of 0<> of the 5PC and incor'orated therein Article 1==DA which reads3 Art. 1==DA. 5a'e, *hen and (ow Committed. H 5a'e is committedD 0. By a man who shall hae carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances3 a. +hrough force, threat or intimidation2 b. *hen the offended 'arty is de'ried of reason or is otherwise unconscious2 c. By means of fraudulent machination or grae abuse of authority2 d. *hen the offended 'arty is under twele #01% years of age or is demented, een though none of the circumstances mentioned aboe be 'resent2 1. By any 'erson who, under any of the circumstances mentioned in 'aragra'h 0 hereof, shall commit an act of se)ual assault by inserting his 'enis into another 'ersons mouth or anal orifice, or any instrument or ob@ect, into the genital or anal orifice of another 'erson. +hus, ra'e can now be committed either through se)ual intercourse or through se)ual assault. In ra'e under 'aragra'h 0 or ra'e through se)ual intercourse, carnal knowledge is the crucial element which must be 'roen beyond reasonable doubt.=0 +his is also referred to as "organ ra'e" or "'enile ra'e"=1 and must be attended by any of the circumstances enumerated in sub'aragra'hs #a% to #d% of 'aragra'h 0. +here must be eidence to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the 'er'etrators 'enis touched the labia of the ictim or slid into her female organ, and not merely stroked the e)ternal surface thereof, to ensure his coniction of ra'e by se)ual intercourse.=> On the other hand, ra'e under 'aragra'h 1 of the aboeD!uoted article is commonly known as ra'e by se)ual assault. +he 'er'etrator, under any of the attendant circumstances mentioned in 'aragra'h 0, commits this kind of ra'e by inserting his 'enis into another 'ersons mouth or anal orifice, or any instrument or ob@ect into the genital or anal orifice of another 'erson. It is also called "instrument or ob@ect ra'e", also "genderDfree ra'e", or the narrower "homose)ual ra'e."=7 +he crime of se)ual abuse under 5e'ublic Act o. J=0? On the other hand, 5A J=0?, otherwise known as the "4'ecial Protection of Children Against Child Abuse, 8)'loitation and iscrimination Act", defines and 'enali;es child 'rostitution and other se)ual abuse. "4e)ual abuse includes the em'loyment, use, 'ersuasion, inducement, enticement or coercion of a child to engage in, or assist another 'erson to engage in, se)ual intercourse or lasciious conduct or the molestation, 'rostitution, or incest with children. 9asciious conduct means the intentional touching, either directly or through clothing, of the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks, or the introduction of any ob@ect into the


11

genitalia, anus or mouth, of any 'erson, whether of the same or o''osite se), with an intent to abuse, humiliate, harass, degrade, or arouse or gratify the se)ual desire of any 'erson, bestiality, masturbation, lasciious e)hibition of the genitals or 'ubic area of a 'erson."= +he Information in Criminal Case o. =J> against a''ellant was for iolation of 4ection #b%, Article III of 5A J=0?, which 'ertinently 'roides3 48C. . Child Prostitution and Other 4e)ual Abuse. D Children, whether male or female, who for money, 'rofit, or any other consideration or due to the coercion or influence of any adult, syndicate or grou', indulge in se)ual intercourse or lasciious conduct, are deemed to be children e)'loited in 'rostitution and other se)ual abuse. +he 'enalty of reclusion tem'oral in its medium 'eriod to reclusion 'er'etua shall be im'osed u'on the following3 )))) #b% +hose who commit the act of se)ual intercourse or lasciious conduct with a child e)'loited in 'rostitution or sub@ected to other se)ual abuse3 Proided, +hat whe n the ictim is under twele #01% years of age, the 'er'etrators shall be 'rosecuted under Article >>, 'aragra'h >, for ra'e and Article >>= of Act o. >K0, as amended, the 5eised Penal Code, for ra'e or lasciious conduct, as the case may be3 Proided, that the 'enalty for lasciious conduct when the ictim is under twele #01% years of age shall be reclusion tem'oral in its medium 'eriod2 ) ) ). #8m'hasis su''lied% In 'aragra'h #b%, the following re!uisites must concur3 #0% the accu sed commits the act of se)ual intercourse or lasciious conduct2 #1% the act is 'erformed with a child e)'loited in 'rostitution or sub@ected to other se)ual abuse2 and #>% the child, whether male or female is below eighteen #0K% years of age.== +his 'aragra'h "'unishes se)ual intercourse or lasciious conduct not only with a child e)'loited in 'rostitution but also with a child sub@ected to other se)ual abuse. It coers not only a situation where a child is abused for 'rofit but also one in which a child, through coercion, intimidation or influence, engages in se)ual intercourse or lasciious conduct."=J A''ellant is guilty of the two kinds of ra'e under Art. 1==DA of the 5PC and of se)ual abuse under 5A J=0?. Our e)amination of the testimony of "AAA" reeals that there was carnal knowledge or se)ual intercourse through force, threat and intimidation on August 11, 1??1. A''ellant also committed ra'e by se)ual assault when he inserted his finger into the genitalia of "AAA" on October <, 1??1. (e also sub@ected "AAA," a minor at 01 years of age, to se)ual abuse by means of lasciious conduct through intimidation or influence, when he mashed her breasts and stroked her arms on August 10, 1??1. "AAA" gae detailed accounts of these acts of 'erersion, i;3 R3 9ast August 10, 1??1, at around <3?? oclock in the eening where were youG


1>

A3 I was in our house, sir. )))) R3 At such time, 'lace and date do you recall an y unusual incident that ha''enedG A3 +here was, sir. R3 *hat was thatG A3 I saw my daddy fondling my breasts and holding my arms, sir. R3 And where were you in the house when your father did that to youG A3 I was in the room, sir. R3 *here in the roomG )))) A3 In the bed, sir. A++S. 4A FOAR&I3 R3 *hat were you doing in bedG A3 I was lying, sir. R3 And you said that your father, while you were in bed in the room, touched your breasts, would you 'lease demonstrate to the court how your father touched your breastsG A3 9ike this, sir. A++S. 4A FOAR&I3 *itness cu''ing with her two #1% 'alms her breasts ) ) ). )))) A++S. 4A FOAR&I3 R3 Sou also said that your father touched your arms, would you 'lease demonstrate to the court how your father touched your armsG A3 9ike this, sir.


17

A++S. 4A FOAR&I *itness demonstrating with her right 'alm 'laced on her left shoulder and the left 'alm 'laced on her right shoulder and then moing them downwards. R3 *hen your father did that to you, what did you doG A3 I was crying, sir. R3 And did you say anything to your fatherG A3 one, sir. R3 id your father say anything to youG A3 Ses, sir. R3 *hat was thatG A3 (e told me not to tell anything to my mother because in case I would tell something to my mother, something will ha''en to her, sir. A++S. 4A FOAR&I3 May we manifest, your (onor, that the witness, while saying the words she had @ust said, had teary eyes and was wi'ing her tears with her handkerchief. R3 *hen that was done to you by your father, who were in the houseG A3 Only the two #1% of us, sir. R3 *here was your motherG A3 4he was in the wake of my aunt, sir. R3 *here was your sister "CCC"G A3 Also at the wake, sir. R3 (ow about your sister ""G A3 Also at the wake of my aunt, sir. R3 *hat time was that againG A3 <3?? oclock, sir.


1

R3 aytime or nighttimeG A3 8ening, sir. )))) R3 "AAA," while you are testifying now, what do you feelG A3 I am afraid #natatakot 'o%, sir. A++S. 4A FOAR&I3 May we manifest that while the witness answers "natatakot 'o" she is crying and wi'ing her eyes with her handkerchief. R3 At about 00 oclock in the eening after August 11, 1??1, where were youG A3 I was in the house, sir. R3 *hat houseG A3 +he house of my grandmother, sir. R3 *here is thatG A3 "SSS," 4an Mateo, 5i;al, sir. R3 At that time, date and 'lace, do you recall an unusual incident that ha''enedG A3 +here was, sir. R3 *hat was thatG A3 *hile I was slee'ing I was suddenly awakened, sir. R3 *hy were you suddenly awakened from slee'G A3 Because my dad was lowering my shorts, sir. R3 (ow did you know that your daddy was lowering your shortsG A3 I saw it, sir. R3 *as your daddy able to lower your shortsG


1=

A3 Ses, sir. R3 *hat else did he do after lowering your shortsG A3 (e lowered my 'anty, sir. R3 *as your daddy able to lower your 'antyG A3 Ses, sir. R3 *hat were you doing when your daddy was lowering your shorts and then 'anty, what were you doingG A3 I was crying, sir. R3 After your daddy has lowered your shorts and 'anty what ha''ened ne)tG A3 (e se'arated my legs #ibinuka niya 'o ang hita ko%, sir. R3 After your daddy se'arated your legs, what ha''ened ne)tG A3 (e inserted his 'enis into my agina, sir. R3 Sou said he inserted his 'enis into your agina, was he able to insert his 'enis into your aginaG A3 Ses, sir. R3 *hen your daddy inserted his 'enis into your agina, what did you feelG A3 It was 'ainful, sir. )))) R3 *hen the 'enis of your father was already inserted into your agina, what ha''ened ne)tG A3 (e 'ulled it out and then inserted it again #hinugot niya ta'os ay i'inasok niya uli%, sir. R3 (ow many times did that ha''en that your daddy 'ulled out his 'enis from you and then inserted it, how many timesG A3 +wo #1% times, sir. R3 +hen afterwards what ha''enedG A3 (e 'ulled it out again then he returned my 'anty, sir.


1J

R3 *hat elseG A3 (e also returned my shorts, sir. R3 id you say anything to your daddy when he did that to youG A3 o, sir. R3 (ow about your daddy, did he tell you anythingG A3 Ses, sir. R3 *hat was thatG A3 ot to tell anything to my mother because something will ha''en to her if I tell anything to her, sir. R3 *ho were in the house when your father did that to youG A3 Only the two #1% of us, sir. R3 *here was your motherG A3 4he was still in the wake of my aunt, sir. R3 (ow about your sister "CCC"G A3 4he was also in the wake, sir. )))) R3 *hat time was that when it ha''enedG A3 At 003?? oclock, sir. R3 aytime or nighttimeG A3 ighttime, sir. )))) R3 "AAA," I am asking you this !uestion, at about 0?3>? oclock in the eening of October <, 1??1, where were youG A3 I was in the house, sir.


1K

R3 *hat houseG A3 "SSS," 4an Mateo, 5i;al, sir. R3 At such time, date and 'lace, do you recall an y unusual incident that ha''enedG A3 +here was, sir. R3 *hat was thatG A3 *hen I saw my shorts under my feet and my dad was already lying beside me, sir. R3 (ow do you know that your daddy was beside youG A3 I saw him, sir. R3 *here were you at that time, what 'lace in the houseG A3 In the room, sir. R3 *here in the roomG A3 ) ) ) my bed, sir. R3 *hat are you doing in bedG A3 I was slee'ing, sir. R3 ow, you said that you found out that your shorts was no longer being worn by you, what ha''ened ne)tG A3 My daddy inserted his finger in my agina, sir. R3 *hich finger of your daddy was inserted at that time into your aginaG A3 +he inde) finger, sir. )))) R3 "AAA," when your father inserted his finger into your agina, what did you feelG A3 It was 'ainful, sir. R3 *hat did you do when your father inserted his finger into your aginaG


1<

A3 I @ust cried, sir. R3 id you tell your father anythingG A3 one, sir. R3 (ow about your father, did he tell you anythingG A3 Ses, there was, sir. R3 *hat was thatG A3 ot to tell anything to my mother, sir. R3 ow, who were in the house when that ha''enedG A3 My sisters "CCC" and "" and also my mother, sir. R3 *here was your mother when your father was inserting his finger into your agina, where was your motherG A3 I do not know, sir. R3 (ow about your sister "CCC"G A3 At the lower 'ortion of the doubleDdeck, sir. R3 *hat was "CCC" doing there at the lower 'ortion of your doubleDdeck bedG A3 4he was slee'ing, sir. R3 (ow about ""G A3 4he was on the mattress, sir. R3 *hat time was that in the eeningG A3 At about 0?3>?, sir.=K *e agree with the obseration of the lower courts that the testimony of "AAA" is worthy of credence. 4he 'ositiely identified a''ellant as her abuser. 4he did not waer on the material 'oints of her testimony and maintained the same een on crossDe)amination. Indeed, her statements under oath are sufficient eidence to conict a''ellant for the crimes alleged in the Informations.=<


1=?

Moreoer, "AAAs" testimony is corroborated by the result of her medical e)amination which showed the 'resence of a dee' healed laceration in her 'riate 'art.J? +his finding is consistent with her declaration that a''ellant inserted his 'enis and finger into her agina. "*here a ictims testimony is corroborated by the 'hysical findings of 'enetration, there is sufficient basis for concluding that se)ual intercourse did take 'lace."J0 A''ellant seeks to discredit "AAAs" testimony by insisting that he could not hae ra'ed the latter in the eening of August 11, 1??1 since the whole family was in their house that day. +his assertion is undesering of credence due to our constant 'ronouncement that a bare assertion cannot 'reail oer the categorical testimony of a ictim.J1 8en if corroborated by a''ellants mother, the same does not desere any weight since courts usually frown u'on the corroboratie testimony of an immediate member of the family of an accused and treat it with sus'icion. +he close filial relationshi' between the witness and the accused casts a thick cloud of doubt u'on the formers testimony. 8en assuming that a''ellant was not alone with "AAA" on August 11, 1??1, the 'resence of other 'eo'le is not a deterrent to the commission of ra'e. +his obseration is a''arent from the ra'e by se)ual assault committed on October <, 1??1 while the entire family was in the residence. As a'tly held by the 5+C and the CA, ra'e indeed does not res'ect time and 'lace. A''ellant im'ugns the credibility of "AAA" by em'hasi;ing that she gae conflicting accounts on the manner she was ra'ed. (e also stresses the contradictions in the testimony of "AAA" and the other 'rosecution witnesses on the eents that trans'ired after the alleged ra'e and regarding the disclosure by "AAA" of her ordeal. *e are not 'ersuaded. Our reiew of the transcri't of stenogra'hic notes of the testimonies of the 'rosecution witnesses reeals that these inconsistencies refer to inconse!uential matters "that do not bear u'on the elements of the crime of ra'e. +he decisie factor in the 'rosecution for ra'e is whether the commission of the crime has been sufficiently 'roen. :or a discre'ancy or inconsistency in the testimony of a witness to sere as a basis for ac!uittal, it must refer to the significant facts indis'ensable to the guilt or innocence of the a''ellant for the crime charged. As the inconsistencies alleged by the a''ellant had nothing to do with the elements of the crime of ra'e, they cannot be used as groundsN for his ac!uittal."J> *ith regard to the inconsistencies on the 'art of "AAA," it bears stressing that "ictims do not cherish kee'ing in their memory an accurate account of the manner in which they were se)ually iolated. +hus, an errorless recollection of a harrowing e)'erience cannot be e)'ected of a witness, es'ecially when she is recounting details from an e)'erience as humiliating and 'ainful as ra'e. :urthermore, ra'e ictims, es'ecially child ictims, should not b e e)'ected to act the way mature indiiduals would when 'laced in such a situation."J7 $erily, in this case, minor inconsistencies in the testimony of "AAA" are to be e)'ected because #0% she was a minor child during her defloration2 #1% she was to testify on a 'ainful and humiliating e)'erience2 #>% she was se)ually assaulted seeral times2 and, #7% she was e)amined on details and eents that ha''ened almost si) months before she testified.J Anent a''ellants other assigned errors, we !uote the following findings of the CA3


1=0

+he argument that "AAA" did not manifest oert 'hysical 'h ysical signs of haing been ra'ed since she acted and walked normally the following day cannot @ustify the reersal of a''ellants coniction. (ow a 'erson goes about the day after the ha''ening of a horrid eent is not a tellD tale sign of the truth or falsity of an allegation. +he workings of the human mind 'laced under a great deal of emotional and 'sychological 's ychological stress are un'redictable and different 'eo'le react differently. differently. :urthermore, under the circumstances of this case, oert o ert 'hysical manifestations cannot be e)'ected since "AAA" did not 'ut u' any form of resistance. +he threat of harm to be inflicted on her mother was sufficient intimidation for her to succumb to her fathers lust out of fear. +he 'attern of instilling fear, utili;ed by the 'er'etrator in incestuous ra'e to intimidate his h is ictim into submission, is eident in irtually all cases. It is through this fear that the 'er'etrator ho'es to create a climate of e)treme e) treme 'sychological terror which would, he ho'es, numb his ictim into silence and force her to submit to re'eated acts of ra'e oer a 'eriod of time. +he relationshi' of the ictim to the 'er'etrator magnifies this terror, because the 'er'etrator is a 'erson normally e)'ected to gie solace and 'rotection to the ictim. A''ellant would also want to im'ress u'on this Court that the accusation of his daughter was concocted by his wife because of their marital 'roblems. +his contention is 're'osterous. It is unnatural for a mother to sacrifice her own daughter, a child of tender years, and sub@ect her to the rigors and humiliation of a 'ublic trial for ra'e if she was not drien by an honest desire to hae her daughters dau ghters transgressor 'unished accordingly. either can it be said that there was no s'ontaneous disclosure by "AAA" of the incident.0Yw'hi0 A''ellant threatened "AAA." +he humiliation caused by the ra'e by her own father in addition to the burden of being res'onsible should her mother be harmed har med are sufficient to 'reent any child from freely disclosing her ordeal. *e must be reminded that the crime of ra'e by itself attaches much humiliation and more so if the loss is caused by her father. elay and the initial reluctance of a ra'e ictim to make 'ublic the assault on her irtue is neither unknown norN uncommon. +hat there was no s'ontaneous disclosure does not mean that a''ellant is innocent of the crimes. "AAA" was a''arently a'' arently a terrified young child who was com'letely at the mercy of her shameless father. +hus, +hus, "AAAs" "AAAs" hesitation may be attributed to her age, the moral ascendancy ascendanc y of the accused oer her, and his threats against her. On the other hand, neither should the smile of "AAA" while identifying her father in court co urt be gien any malicious significance. *hile a''ellant 'uts much im'ortance to said smile, which could be a way of concealing her nerousness, he ignored the fact that "AAA" cried while testifying on the details of the incidents. In fact, during her testimony, she she categorically stated that she was afraid and ashamed. +he candid c andid and straightforward narration of how she was abused and the tears that accom'anied acco m'anied her story are earmarks of credibility and must be gien full faith and credit. *ith res'ect to a''ellants contention that the clinical finding of r. Foen Ignacio, the 'sychiatrist, is faulty and not conclusie because she a''eared to be biased, it is noteworthy that een without said 'sychiatric test, the finding of the trial court would still be affirmed considering that the sole testimony of the ictim is sufficient basis for coniction in ra'e, which is a crime usually committed in seclusion.


1=1

Indeed, *e are coninced that "AAA" had no reason to falsely incriminate her own father in iew of the fact that the accusation would surely deny her mother the com'anionshi' of a husband and the 'rotection of o f a father for her younger sisters. It has been consistently held that the testimony of a ra'e ictim as to who abused her is credible where she has no motie to testify against the accused.J= On the other hand, what a''ellant offered for his defense were mere denials which, as a 'tly obsered by the 5+C, are unsu''orted by clear and conincing eidence. 6ien the foregoing circumstances, the CA correctly affirmed the ecision of the 5+C finding a''ellant guilty of the crimes charged. +he Pro'er Penalty +he 5+C im'osed u'on a''ellant the 'enalty of death for committing the crime of !ualified ra'e through se)ual intercourse in Criminal Case o. =J1. +he Information in this case alleged the !ualifying circumstances of relationshi' and minority. minority. A''ellant is the father of "AAA" and he admitted this filial bond between them during the 'reDtrial conferenceJJ and trial. "Admission in o'en court of relationshi' has been held to be sufficient and, hence, conclusie to 'roe relationshi' with the ictim."JK Also, "AAA "AAAs" birth certificate was submitted as 'roof of her age. +his document suffices as com'etent eidence of her a ge.J< "In iew, howeer, howeer, of the 'assage of 5.A. o. <>7=, which 'rohibits the im'osition of the 'enalty of death, the 'enalty of reclusion 'er'etua, without eligibility for 'arole, should be im'osed."K? A''ellant is thus sentenced to reclusion 'er'etua without eligibility for 'arole for the crime of !ualified ra'e committed through se)ual intercourse in Criminal Case o. =J1. *ith regard to the crime of se)ual abuse under 5A J=0?, the 'enalty 'roided for iolation of 4ection , Article III thereof is reclusion tem'oral in its medium 'eriod to reclusion 'er'etua . "As the crime was committed by the father of o f "AAA,"N the alternatie circumstance of relationshi' should be a''reciated. In crimes against chastity, such as Acts of 9asciiousness, relationshi' is always aggraating."K0 *ith the 'resence of this aggraating circumstance and no mitigating circumstance, the 'enalty in Criminal Case o. =J> shall be a''lied in its ma)imum 'eriod H reclusion 'er'etua.K1 On the other hand, 'rision mayor is the 'enalty 'rescribed for ra'e by se)ual assault under Article 1==DB of the 5PC. +he 'enalty is increased to reclusion tem'oral if the ra'e is committed with any of the 0? aggraatingU !ualifying circumstances mentioned in said article.K> Fust like in Criminal Case o. =J1, the !ualifying circumstances of relationshi' and minority are sufficiently alleged and 'roen in this case. +he 'enalty therefore is reclusion tem'oral which ranges from twele #01% years and one #0% day to twenty #1?% years. A''lying the Indeterminate 4entence 9aw, the 'enalty ne)t lower in degree is 'rision mayor which ranges from si) #=% years and one #0% day to twele #01% years. (ence, the trial court and the CA correctly im'osed the indeterminate 'enalty of im'risonment of si) #=% years and one #0% day of 'rision mayor as minimum, to fourteen #07% years, eight #K% months and #0% day of reclusion tem'oral, as ma)imum in Criminal Case o. =J7.


1=>

+he amages In line with 'reailing @uris'rudence, the award of damages d amages to "AAA" in Criminal Case o. =J1 must be increased as follows3 PJ,???.?? PJ,???.? ? as ciil indemnity, PJ,???.?? as moral damages and P>?,???.?? as e)em'lary damages.K7 4he is further awarded ciil indemnity of P1?,???.??, moral damages and a fine at P0,???.?? each in Criminal Case o. =J>.K In Criminal Case o. =J7, the awards of ciil indemnity and moral damages at P>?,???.?? each are maintained but the award of e)em'lary damages is increased to P>?,???.??.K= "AAA" is also entitled to an interest on all the amounts of damages awarded at the legal rate of = 'er annum from the date of finality of this @udgment until fully 'aid.KJ *(858:O58, the Fuly >0, 1??J ecision of the Court of A''eals in CAD6.5. C5D(.C. o. ?100 which affirmed in toto the ecision of the 5egional +rial Court of 4an Mateo, 5i;al, Branch J= finding a''ellant oney 6aduyon y +a'is'isan guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crimes charged is A::I5M8 with MOI:ICA+IO4 MOI:ICA+IO4 in that3 0. In Criminal Case o. =J1, a''ellant oney 6aduyon y +a'is'isan is sentenced to suffer the 'enalty of reclusion 'er'etua without eligibility for 'arole and ordered to 'ay AAA PJ,???.?? as ciil indemnity, PJ,???.?? as moral damages, and P>?,???.?? as e)em'lary damages2 1. In Criminal Case o. =J>, a''ellant oney 6aduyon y +a'is'isan is sentenced to suffer the 'enalty of reclusion 'er'etua and ordered to 'ay AAA P1?,???.?? as ciil indemnity, Pl,???.?? Pl,???.?? as moral damages and a fine of 0,???.??2 >. In Criminal Case o. =J7, a''ellant oney 6aduyon 6adu yon y +a'is'isan +a'is'isan is ordered to 'ay AAA P>?,???.?? as e)em'lary damages. "AAA" is entitled to an interest on all damages awarded at the legal rate of = =  'er annum from the date of finality of this @udgment until fully 'aid. People v. ,eodoro

+he recantation of her testimony by the ictim of ra'e is to be disregarded if the records show that it was im'elled either by intimidation or by the need for the financial su''ort of the accused. acc used. +his rule comes to the forefront once again aga in in our reiew of the affirmance by the Court of A''eals #CA% of the coniction for two counts co unts of ra'e of o f +omas +omas +eodoro +eodoro y Angeles,0 in which the ictim, AAA,1 was the KDyear old daughter of BBB, his commonDlaw wife. +he 5egional +rial Court had 'ronounced +eodoro +eodoro guilty of two counts of statutory ra'e on o n ecember 0?, 1??0, and condignly meted him the 'enalty of reclusion 'er'etua for each count.> Antecedents


1=7

+wo +wo informations, both dated March 1, 0<>, 5eised Penal Code, as amended by 5.A. J=<%7 Criminal Case o. +hat on or about the Kth day of :ebruary, 0<>, 5eised Penal Code, as amended by 5.A. J=<% *ith res'ect to the statutory ra'e charged in Criminal Case o. %, BBB was again away from the house, haing gone to Manila. +eodoro +eodoro committed the ra'e in a fashion similar to that in the first ra'e. (oweer, AAA could no longer bear her ordeal, and told of the ra'es to CCC, the older brother of BBB3 +ay, guihilabtan ko ni +omas +eodoro #+ay, I was touched by +omas +eodoro%.= +eodoro%.= CCC immediately re'orted the crimes to the Eitcharao Police 4tation. +he 'olice !uickly arrested +eodoro. &'on BBBs return return in the afternoon, CCC informed her h er about what


1=

+eodoro +eodoro had done d one to her daughter. BBB and CCC took AAA to the Eitcharao istrict (os'ital for 'hysical and medical e)amination. r. Mary Ann Ann . Abrenillo of the Eitcharao istrict (os'ital e)amined AAA, and issued a medical certificate on her findings, as follows3 0. Intact (ymen that admits 5ight 4mall :inger of e)aminer and with slight 'eri'heral erythema. 1. 9abia Ma@ora and Minora slightly 6a'ed 8)'osing (ymenal O'ening, with tenderness.J Based on the medical certificate, the Office of the Proincial P roincial Prosecutor of Agusan del orte charged +eodoro +eodoro with two counts cou nts of statutory ra'e through the afore!uoted informations.K At his arraignment on August 0J, 0<, 0< and that he did not ra'e AAA on the night of ecember 0K, 0< 6&I9+S 6&I9+S beyond reasonable doubt of the crimes of ra'e committed against AAA, an eight #K%Dyear old minor. Accordingly, Accordingly, he is hereby sentenced to suffer the 'enalty of 58C9&4IO P85P8+&A in each of the cases, with the accessories 'roided for by law, to 'ay the offended 'arty the sum of P0??,??? .??, P?,???.?? for each case, and to 'ay the costs.


1==

In the serice of his sentence, accused is credited with the full time during which he has undergone 'reentie im'risonment conformably to Article 1< of the 5eised Penal Code, as amended. I+ I4 4O O5858.0= +he 5+C re@ected AAA AAAs recantation of her accusation for being inconsistent with the testimony of r. Abrenillo showing that the redness on the edges of the 'rotectie structure of her aginal o'ening had been caused by friction from the forceful introduction of an erect 'enis2 and that such forceful introduction of an erect 'enis had led to the ga'ing of the labia minora and labia ma@ora of AAA. 5uling of the CA On a''eal, +eodoro focused on the 5+Cs re@ection of AAAs recantation. (e argued in his a''ellants brief0J that no ra'e was committed considering that the CebuanoD$isayan CebuanoD$isayan word guihilabtan used by AAA in describing what he did to her signified only touching, as contrasted with lugos, the 'ro'er CebuanoD$isayan CebuanoD$isayan term for ra'e that AAA did not use. &nim'ressed, the CA sustained the 5+C, 5+C, and ignored AAA AAAs recantation for being dictated by her familys financial difficulties. difficulties. It agreed with the obseration of the Office of the 4olicitor 6eneral to the effect that AAA AAAs recantation should not be considered because it came about after she had returned home from the custody of the e'artment of 4ocial *elfare *elfare and eelo'ment #4*%. In contrast, it found AAAs AAAs court testimony gien on oember 0J, 0<

1=J

Articles 1==DA and 1==DB of the 5eised Penal Code, as amended by 5e'ublic Act o. K>>,0< define and 'unish ra'e as follows3 Article 1==DA. 5a'e2 *hen and (ow Committed. H 5a'e is committed H 0% By a man who shall hae carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the circumstances3 a% +hrough force, threat, or intimidation2 b% *hen the offended 'arty is de'ried of reason or otherwise otherwise unconscious2 c% By means of fraudulent machinations or grae g rae abuse of authority2 and d% *hen the offended 'arty is under twele #01% years of age or is demented, een though none of the circumstances mentioned aboe be 'resent. Article 1==DB. Penalties. H 5a'e under 'aragra'h 0 of the ne)t 'receding article shall be 'unished by reclusion 'er'etua. )))) +he crimes charged were two counts of statutory ra'e. +he elements of statutory ra'e are that3 #a% the ictim is a female under 01 years or is demented2 and #b% the offender has carnal knowledge of the ictim. Considering that the essence of statutory ra'e is carnal knowledge of a female without her consent, neither the use of force, threat or intimidation on the female, nor the females de'riation de'riation of reason or being otherwise unconscious, nor the em'loyment on the female of fraudulent machinations or grae abuse of o f authority is necessary to commit statutory ra'e.1? :ull 'enile 'enetration of the females genitalia is not likewise re!uired, because carnal knowledge is sim'ly the act of a man haing se)ual bodily connections with a woman.10 escribing the ra'e committed against her on ecember 0K, 0<

1=K

)))) R3 *hat do you mean by he drinks somethingG A3 It was Eulafu, Maam, because it smelt bad. )))) R3 ) ) ). After your uncle 'ut off the light, did you immediately fall aslee'G A3 ot yet. I first looked at the light because I was sur'rised why it was 'ut off and I noticed that it was my uncle who 'ut off the light. )))) R3 4o you are telling the Court that you were the last one to slee' that night including your uncle, of course, among you and your siblingsG Sou were the last one who went to slee' that night A3 Ses maam R3 ow, when you already fell aslee', was it then the time you were awakened again because your uncle came near youG A3 Ses maam )))) R3 (ow did he force you to undressG A3 (e was the one who undressed me maam. R3 After he undressed you, your uncle also undressed his trousers and drawers, correctG A3 (e @ust lowered his 'ants u' to his knee R3 After lowering his 'ants u' to his knee, he laid on to' of you correctG A3 (e laid on to' of me R2 After that, ) ) ) what was the ne)t thing that he didG A3 (e inserted his 'enis into my agina. ))))


1=<

R3 ow, AAA, before this incident ha''ened on ecember 0K, 0<

1J?

R3 ow, what ha''ened to your 'anty before your ste'Dfather laid on to' of youG A3 (e lowered my 'anty u' to my thigh. R3 *hen your father lowered your 'anty u' to your thigh and you were com'letely naked, were you lying down on the floor of the room where you were slee'ingG A3 Ses, 4ir, I was lying down. R3 (ow about your ste'Dfather before he laid on to' of you, what kind of clothes did he wearG A3 (e was wearing a @acket and a tDshirt, 4ir. R3 id he remoe his @acket and tDshirtG A3 Ses, 4ir. R3 (ow about his 'ants, did he remoe his 'ants before he laid on to' of youG A3 *hen he laid on to' of me, he @ust lowered his 'ants u' to his knee. R3 id he also lower his drawersG A3 (e also lowered his drawers u' to his knee, 4ir. R3 ow, when he laid on to' of you, what else did he do to you aside from lying on to' of youG A3 (e touched me, 4ir2 he inserted his 'enis into my agina. R3 After he inserted his 'enis into your agina, what else did he doG A3 (e made some 'ush and 'ull moement, 4ir. R3 *hen he made that 'ush and 'ull moement, what did you feelG A3 I felt 'ain, 4ir. R3 *here did you feel that 'ainG A3 In my agina, 4ir. R3 ow, while your father made that 'ush and 'ull moement, what d id you do or sayG A3 I begged him to sto' because it was really 'ainful and after that I urinated and it was really ery 'ainful.


1J0

R3 *here did you feel that 'ain while you were urinatingG A3 In my agina, 4ir.1> #8m'hasis su''lied% +he Court declares that the findings of the 5+C and the CA on the commission of the two counts of statutory ra'e by +eodoro were wellDfounded. AAAs recollections gien in court when she was only eight years old disclosed an unbroken and consistent narration of her ordeals at his hands. 4he thereby reealed details that no child of her ery tender age could hae inented or concocted. +he only rational and natural conclusion to be made by any ob@ectie arbiter is to accord the fullest credence to her. Set, +eodoro would hae us undo his conictions for statutory ra'e, arguing that AAAs descri'tion of his acts in CebuanoD$isayan, the dialect s'oken by AAA, was guihilabtan, not lugos, the former being the dialect term for touching and the latter for ra'e. +eodoros argument is directly belied by the established facts. AAA remained categorical and steadfast about what +eodoro had done to her all throughout her testimony in court, een during her deliery of the su''osed recantation. 4he narrated how he had committed the ra'e in the eening of ecember 0K, 0<

1J1

R3 *hen you told your father or begged your father to sto' because you were feeling 'ain, which 'art of your body did you feel that 'ainG A3 In my agina, 4ir. R3 *hen you begged your father to sto' because there was 'ain on your agina, did your father heed your re!uest to sto'G A3 (e sto''ed, 4ir. R3 Sou mean your father sto''ed his 'ush and 'ull moementG A3 Ses, because after that, I told him. R3 ow, after your father sto''ed his 'ush and 'ull moement, what did you r father do ne)tG A3 (e sto''ed and after that I urinated and I felt 'ain. R3 ow, where did you feel that 'ainG A3 In my agina. R3 *hen you urinated, did your father go to slee'G A3 (e did not go to slee' right away but he @ust lay down on bed. R3 Sou mean to tell this Court that he returned to his 'lace where he was lying down before he ra'ed youG A3 Ses, 4ir. R3 ow, before you urinated, did your father tell you about what to doG A3 (e told me neer to tell the incident that ha''ened because the moment I will tell the truth, he will re'rimand me.1 #8m'hasis su''lied% )))) Moreoer, to beliee +eodoros argument is to belie that AAA e)hibited at the time of her 'hysical e)amination by r. Abrenillo a 'eri'heral erythema, or redness, in her hymen, as well as tenderness and ga'ing in her labia ma@ora and labia minora. r. Abrenillo e)'lained the significance of her 'hysical findings, to wit3 R. 4o, you are telling this (onorable Court that when an erect male 'enis may contact in this 'articular area, that might hae caused the discoloration of the reddish in color of that 'articular area, is that correctG


1J>

A. Ses, because the force of the friction might be that ade!uate to cause the reddish or inflammation that resulted in the discoloration of the normal tissue or structure. )))) R. ow, in your second findings, you said that there is a slightly 6a'ed 8)'osing (ymenal O'ening of the 9abia Ma@ora and Minora, in your e)'ert o'inion as medico legal e)'ert, what might hae caused this 6a'e O'eningG A. Again related to number 0, a friction also mean something can cause the ga'ing or e)'osure of the o'ening and it can be substantiated also that there was 'ain that was e)'erienced by the 'atient. R. ow, you are telling this (onorable Court that when you touched this 'articular area, the 'atient e)'erienced 'ainG A. Ses, 4ir. R. As a medico legal e)'ert, could this 'articular in@ury be caused b y a contact of an erect male organG A. *ell, it is sustain and with a force. R. In this 'articular case because there is a ga'e o'ening of the li's which you said this medico legal term, 9abia Ma@ora and Minora, could this o'ening be caused by a contact of an erect male organG A. Ses, 4ir, because normally, ga'e should not be e)'osing the (ymenal O'ening and the smaller li' should be coered by the bigger one.1= In ob@ectie terms, carnal knowledge, the other essential element in consummated statutory ra'e, does not re!uire full 'enile 'enetration of the female. +he Court has clarified in Peo'le . Cam'uhan1J that the mere touching of the e)ternal genitalia by a 'enis ca'able of consummating the se)ual act is sufficient to constitute carnal knowledge. All that is necessary to reach the consummated stage of ra'e is for the 'enis of the accused ca'able of consummating the se)ual act to come into contact with the li's of the 'udendum of the ictim. +his means that the ra'e is consummated once the 'enis of the accused ca'able of consummating the se)ual act touches either labia of the 'udendum. As the Court has e)'lained in Peo'le . BaliDBalita,1K the touching that constitutes ra'e does not mean mere e'idermal contact, or stroking or gra;ing of organs, or a slight brush or a scra'e of the 'enis on the e)ternal layer of the ictims agina, or the mons 'ubis, but rather the erect 'enis touching the labias or sliding into the female genitalia. Accordingly, the conclusion that touching the labia ma@ora or the labia minora of the 'udendum constitutes consummated ra'e 'roceeds from the 'hysical fact that the labias are 'hysically situated beneath the mons 'ubis or the aginal surface, such that for the 'enis to touch either of them is to attain some degree of 'enetration beneath the surface of the female genitalia. It is


1J7

re!uired, howeer, that this manner of touching of the labias must be sufficiently and conincingly established. (ere, the 'roof of the 'enis of +eodoro touching the labias of AAA was sufficient and conincing. r. Abrenillo found the 'eri'heral erythema in the hymen of AAA and the fact that her labia ma@ora and labia minora were tender and ga'ing, e)'osing the hymenal o'ening. In other words, the touching by +eodoros 'enis had gone beyond the mons 'ubis and had reached the labias of the ictim. 4uch 'hysical findings, cou'led with the narratie of AAA that, one, +eodoro went on to' of her body2 two, he inserted his 'enis into her agina2 three, he made 'ush and 'ull motions thereafter2 and, four, she felt great 'ain inside her during his 'ush and 'ull moements, rendered the findings of ra'e against him unassailable as to the ra'e committed on :ebruary K, 0<

1J

A3 Because he undressed me and he touched my 'riate 'arts. (e touched my agina and I told him to sto' because I felt the need to urinate. *hen I urinated, it was ery 'ainful since the act has @ust been done. )))) R3 AAA, why are you cryingG A3 Because of my 'roblem, sir. R3 *hat is your 'roblem, AAAG A3 *hen my ste'Dfather touched me. R. AAA, you 'ity your ste'Dfather or your uncle because he has been in @ail for a long time and nobody can hel' your mother nowG A. Ses, 4ir. R. Sou want your ste'Dfather to come home, is that correct, to hel' you and your motherG A. Ses, 4ir. )))) CO&5+ R3 *hy are you cryingG A3 Because it is against my will, your honor. R3 *hich one is against your willG A3 *hen my uncle touched me your honor. +hat is why I cried. R3 Sou are no longer with the 4* in Butuan cityG A3 ot any more Sour (onor. )))) R3 Sou informed the Court before when you testified for the 'rosecution that your uncle remoed your 'anty, touched your agina and inserted his 'enis into your agina is it notG A3 +hat is not true, Sour (onor.


1J=

R3 *hat do you mean that is not trueG *hat is your understanding about thatG A3 (e was only touching me, Sour (onor. R3 Okay he touched your aginaG A3 Ses, Sour (onor. R3 (e did not insert his fingers into your aginaG A3 (e did not, Sour (onor.1< #8m'hasis su''lied% 8en during her intended recantation, AAA cried most of the time. 4uch demeanor reflected how much she des'ised what he had done to her twice. As such, her su''osed recantation did not conceal the im'elling motie for it being that her mother and her family still needed the material su''ort of +eodoro. +his was confirmed een by BBB, whose own testimony on AAAs su''osed recantation was as follows3 Court3 But des'ite the fact that your common law husband according to you he is a troublesome 'erson eerytime he gets drank, this case will be dismissed. Sou want to maintain your relationshi' againG A3 ot anymore, Sour (onor. R. *hyG A. I want him to get out from Fail so that I could hae somebody to hel' me and to assist me in rearing my children s'ecially so, Sour (onor, my children are now growing u'. R. Okay, now if you want him to rear or hel' in rearing your children, naturally he used to go home to your house and slee' together with you, do you want him to slee' in another houseG A. (e 'romised to me, Sour (onor, that he will lie in the residence of his em'loyer.>? #8m'hasis su''lied% BBB was then rearing four young children by +eodoro #the youngest being born when he was already detained%,>0 as well as AAA and her fie siblings that BBB had from an earlier relationshi'.>1 4he unabashedly needed the material su''ort of +eodoro2 hence, she 'reailed on AAA to withdraw her charges against him. But a recantation under such insincere circumstances was unacce'table. As a rule, recantation is iewed with disfaor firstly because the reca ntation of her testimony by a ital witness of the 4tate like AAA is e)ceedingly unreliable, and secondly because there is always the 'ossibility that such recantation may later be re'udiated.>> Indeed, to disregard


1JJ

testimony solemnly gien in court sim'ly because the witness recants it ignores the 'ossibility that intimidation or monetary considerations may hae caused the recantation. Court 'roceedings, in which testimony u'on oath or affirmation is re!uired to be truthful under all circumstances, are triiali;ed by the recantation. +he trial in which the recanted testimony was gien is made a mockery, and the inestigation is 'laced at the mercy of an unscru'ulous witness. Before allowing the recantation, therefore, the court must not b e too willing to acce't it, but must test its alue in a 'ublic trial with sufficient o''ortunity gien to the 'arty adersely affected to crosse)amine the recanting witness both u'on the substance of the recantation and the motiations for it.>7 +he recantation, like any other testimony, is sub@ect to the test of credibility based on the releant circumstances, including the demeanor of the recanting witness on the stand. In that res'ect, the finding of the trial court on the credibility of witnesses is entitled to great weight on a''eal unless cogent reasons necessitate its reDe)amination, the reason being that the trial court is in a better 'osition to hear firstDhand and obsere the de'ortment, conduct and attitude of the witnesses.> :inally, we rectify the amounts of the ciil liability of +eodoro.0Yw'hi0 +he 5+C had granted to AAA only the amount of P?,???.?? for each case, or a total of P0??,???.?? for both cases, without stating the character of the award, but the CA modified the award by granting in each case moral damages of P?,???.?? and e)em'lary damages of P1,???.??. Both lower courts thereby erred. +here is no longer any debate that the ictim in statutory ra'e is entitled to a ciil indemnity of P?,???.??, moral damages of P?,???.??, and e)em'lary damages of P>?,???.??. +he award of ciil indemnity of P?,???.?? is mandatory u'on the finding of the fact of ra'e.>= 4imilarly, the award of moral damages of P?,???.?? is mandatory, and made without need of allegation and 'roof other than that of the fact of ra'e,>J for it is logically assumed that the ictim suffered moral in@uries from her ordeal. In addition, e)em'lary damages of P>?,???.?? are @ustified under Article 111< of the Ciil Code>K to set an e)am'le for the 'ublic good and to sere as deterrent to those who abuse the young.>< *(858:O58, we A::I5M the decision 'romulgated on A'ril 17, 1??=, with the MOI:ICA+IO that +OMA4 +8OO5O y A68984 is ordered to 'ay to AAA for each count of ra'e the amounts of P?,???.?? as ciil indemnity, P?,???.?? as moral damages, and P>?,???.?? as e)em'lary damages, 'lus interest of = 'er annum from the finality of this decision. People v. $aog

:or our reiew is the March 10, 1??J ecision0 of the Court of A''eals #CA% in CAD6.5. C5 (C o. ??1>7 which affirmed a''ellants coniction for murder in Criminal Case o. 10=1DMD 1??? and ra'e in Criminal Case o. 1>?KDMD1???. A''ellant Conrado 9aog y 5amin was charged with murder before the 5egional +rial Court #5+C%, Branch 00, of Malolos, Bulacan. +he Information,1 which was docketed as Criminal Case o. 10=1DMD1???, alleged3


1JK

+hat on or about the =th day of Fune, 1???, in the munici'ality of 4an 5afael, 'roince of Bulacan, Phili''ines, and within the @urisdiction of this (onorable Court, the aboeDnamed accused, armed with a lead 'i'e and with intent to kill one Fennifer PatawaranD5osal, did then and there willNfully, unlawfully and feloniously, with eident 'remeditation, abuse of su'erior strength and treachery, attack, assault and hit with the said lead 'i'e the said Fennifer PatawaranD 5osal, thereby inflicting u'on said Fennifer PatawaranD5osal serious 'hysical in@uries which directly caused her death. Contrary to law. (e was likewise charged before the same court with the crime of ra'e of AAA.> +he second Information,7 which was docketed as Criminal Case o. 1>?KDMD1???, alleged3 +hat on or about the =th day of Fune, 1???, in the munici'ality of 4an 5afael, 'roince of Bulacan, Phili''ines, and within the @urisdiction of this (onorable Court, the aboeDnamed accused, with lewd designs, by means of force, iolence and intimidation, that is, by attacking and hitting with a lead 'i'e one AAAN which resulted inN her incurring serious 'hysical in@uries that almost caused her death, and while in such defenseless situation, did then and there hae carnal knowledge of said AAAN against her will and consent. Contrary to law. *hen arraigned, a''ellant 'leaded not guilty to both charges. +he two cases were thereafter tried @ointly because they arose from the same incident. +he 'rosecution 'resented as its 'rinci'al witness AAA, the ra'e ictim who was 0< years old at the time of the incident. (er testimony was corroborated by her grandfather BBB, r. Ian 5ichard $iray, and her neighbor CCC. AAA testified that at around si) oclock in the eening of Fune =, 1???, she and her friend, Fennifer PatawaranD5osal, were walking along the rice 'addies on their way to a''ly for work at a canteen near the ational (ighway in 4am'aloc, 4an 5afael, Bulacan. 4uddenly, a''ellant, who was holding an ice 'ick and a lead 'i'e, waylaid them and forcibly brought them to a grassy area at the back of a concrete wall. *ithout warning, a''ellant struck AAA in the head with the lead 'i'e causing her to feel di;;y and to fall down. *hen Fennifer saw this, she cried out for hel' but a''ellant also hit her on the head with the lead 'i'e, knocking her down. A''ellant stabbed Fennifer seeral times with the ice 'ick and thereafter coered her body with thick grass. A''ellant then turned to AAA. (e hit AAA in the head seeral times more with the lead 'i'e and stabbed her on the face. *hile AAA was in such defenseless 'osition, a''ellant 'ulled down her @ogging 'ants, remoed her 'anty, and 'ulled u' her blouse and bra. (e then went on to' of her, sucked her breasts and inserted his 'enis into her agina. After ra'ing AAA, a''ellant also coered her with grass. At that 'oint, AAA 'assed out.= *hen AAA regained consciousness, it was nighttime and raining hard. 4he crawled until she reached her uncles farm at daybreak on Fune K, 1???.J *hen she saw him, she waed at him for


1J<

hel'. (er uncle, BBB, and a certain ano then brought her to Car'a (os'ital in Baliuag, Bulacan where she stayed for more than three weeks. 4he later learned that Fennifer had died.K uring crossDe)amination, AAA e)'lained that she did not try to run away when a''ellant accosted them because she trusted a''ellant who was her uncle by affinity. 4he said that she neer thought he would harm them.< BBB testified that on Fune K, 1???, at about si) oclock in the morning, he was at his rice field at 4am'aloc, 4an 5afael, Bulacan when he saw a woman waing a hand and then fell down. +he woman was about 1?? meters away from him when he saw her waing to him, and he did not mind her. (oweer, when she was about 0?? meters away from him, he recogni;ed the woman as AAA, his granddaughter. (e immediately a''roached her and saw that her face was swollen, with her hair coering her face, and her clothes all wet. (e asked AAA what ha''ened to her, and AAA uttered, "4i +ata Coni" referring to a''ellant who is his sonDinDlaw.0? *ith the hel' of his neighbor, he brought AAA home.00 AAA was later brought to Car'a (os'ital in Baliuag, Bulacan where she recu'erated for three weeks. CCC, neighbor of AAA and Fennifer, testified that sometime after Fune =, 1???, she isited AAA at the hos'ital and asked AAA about the whereabouts of Fennifer. AAA told her to look for Fennifer somewhere at Buenaista. 4he sought the assistance of Barangay Officials and they went to Buenaista where they found Fennifers cadaer coered with grass and already bloated.01 Meanwhile, r. Ian 5ichard $iray, a medicoDlegal officer of the Proince of Bulacan, conducted the auto'sy on the remains of Fennifer. (is findings are as follows3 Xthe body is in adanced stage of decom'osition2N X eyeballs and tonNgue were 'rotrudNed2 the li's and abdomen are swollen2 X des!uamation and bursting of bullae and denudation of the e'idermis in the head, trunks and on the u''er e)tremities2N fNrothy fluid and maggots coming from the nose, mouth, genital region and at the site of wounds, X three #>% lacerations at the head2N two #1% stab wounds at the submandibular region2N four 7N 'un ctured wounds at the chest of the ictim.N X cause of death of the ictim was hemorrhagic shock as result of stab wounds inN the he ad and trunk.0> +he 'rosecution and the defense also sti'ulated on the testimony of 8li;abeth Patawaran, Fennifers mother, as to the ciil as'ect of Criminal Case o. 10=1DMD1???. It was sti'ulated that she s'ent P1,??? for Fennifers funeral and burial.07 A''ellant, on the other hand, denied the charges against him. A''ellant testified that he was at home cooking dinner around the time the crimes were committed. *ith him were his children, 5onnie, Fay, Olier and Conrado, Fr. and his ne'hew, 5ey 9aog. At around seen oclock, he was arrested by the 'olice officers of 4an 5afael, Bulacan. (e learned that his wife had re'orted him to the 'olice after he "went wild" that same night and struck with a lead 'i'e a man whom he


1K?

saw talking to his wife inside their house. *hen he was already incarcerated, he learned that he was being charged with murder and ra'e.0 A''ellant further testified that AAA and Fennifer fre!uently went to his ni'a hut wheneer they would ask for rice or money. (e claimed that in the eening of Fune , 1???, AAA and Fennifer sle't in his ni'a hut but they left the following morning at around seen oclock. An hour later, he left his house to hae his scythe re'aired. (oweer, he was not able to do so because that was the time when he "went wild" after seeing his wife with another man. (e admitted that his ni'a hut is more or less only 0?? meters away from the scene of the crime.0= +he defense also 'resented a''ellants ne'hew, 5ey 9aog, who testified that he went to a''ellants house on Fune , 1???, at around three oclock in the afternoon, and saw AAA and Fennifer there. (e recalled seeing AAA and Fennifer before at his uncles house about seen times because AAA and his uncle had an illicit affair. (e further testified that a''ellant arried before midnight on Fune , 1??? and sle't with AAA. +he following morning, at around si) oclock, AAA and Fennifer went home. (e and a''ellant meanwhile left the house together. A''ellant was going to 4an 5afael to hae his scythe re'aired while he 'roceeded to his house in Pinak'inakan, 4an 5afael, Bulacan.0J After trial, the 5+C rendered a Foint ecision0K on Fune >?, 1??> finding a''ellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of both crimes. +he dis'ositie 'ortion of the 5+C decision reads3 *(858:O58, in Crim. Case o. 10=1DMD1???, this court finds the accused Conrado 9aog 6&I9+S beyond reasonable doubt of Murder under Art. 17K of the 5eised Penal Code, as amended, and hereby sentences him to suffer the 'enalty of 5eclusion Per'etua and to 'ay the heirs of Fennifer Patawaran, the following sums of money3 a. P=?,???.?? as ciil indemnity2 b. P?,???.?? as moral damages2 c. P>?,???.?? as e)em'lary damages. *(858:O58, in Crim. Case o. 1>?KDMD1???, this Court hereby finds the accused Conrado 9aog 6&I9+S beyond reasonable doubt of 5a'e under Art. 1==DA 'ar. #a% of the 5eised Penal Code, as amended, and hereby sentences him to suffer the 'enalty of 5eclusion Per'etua and to 'ay the 'riate com'lainant the following sums of money. a. P?,???.?? as ciil indemnity2 b. P?,???.?? as moral damages2 c. P>?,???.?? as e)em'lary damages. 4O O5858.0<


1K0

A''ellant a''ealed his coniction to this Court. But conformably with our 'ronouncement in Peo'le . Mateo,1? the case was referred to the CA for a''ro'riate action and dis'osition. In a ecision dated March 10, 1??J, the CA affirmed with modification the trial courts @udgment. +he dis'ositie 'ortion of the CA decision reads3 *(858:O58, the instant A''eal is I4MI448. +he assailed Foint ecision, dated Fune >?, 1??>, of the 5egional +rial Court of Malolos, Bulacan, Branch 00, in Criminal Case os. 10=1D MD1???  1>?KDMD1???, is hereby A::I5M8 with MOI:ICA+IO. In Criminal Case o.N 10=1DMD1???, AccusedDA''ellant is further ordered to 'ay the heirs of Fennifer Patawaran anN additional P1,???.?? as actual damages. +he e)em'lary damages awarded by the +rial Court in 10=1DMD1???  1>?KDMD1??? are hereby reduced to P1,???.?? each. 4O O5858.10 A''ellant is now before this Court assailing the CAs affirmance of his coniction for both crimes of ra'e and murder. In a 5esolution11 dated August 11, 1??J, we re!uired the ' arties to submit their res'ectie 4u''lemental Briefs, if they so desire. (oweer, the 'arties submitted se'arate Manifestations in lieu of 4u''lemental Briefs, ado'ting the arguments in their res'ectie briefs filed in the CA. A''ellant had raised the following errors allegedly committed by the trial court3 I +(8 +5IA9 CO&5+ 65A$89S 8558 I 6I$I6 C588C8 +O +(8 ICO4I4+8+ A IC58IB98 +84+IMOS O: P5O48C&+IO *I+844 AAAN. II +(8 +5IA9 CO&5+ 65A$89S 8558 I :II6 +(8 ACC&48DAPP899A+ 6&I9+S O: +(8 C5IM84 C(A568 84PI+8 :AI9&58 O: +(8 P5O48C&+IO +O P5O$8 (I4 6&I9+ B8SO 58A4OAB98 O&B+.1> A''ellant asserts that the 'rosecution failed to 'roe his guilt be yond reasonable doubt for the killing of Fennifer PatawaranD5osal and the ra'e of AAA. (e assails AAAs credibility, the 'rosecutions main witness, and 'oints out alleged inconsistencies in her testimony. A''ellant also contends that the 'rosecution failed to establish that h e carefully 'lanned the e)ecution of the crimes charged. According to him, AAAs narration that he waylaid them while walking along the rice 'addies on their way to a''ly for work negates eident 'remeditation since there was no eidence that the said 'ath was their usual route. A''ellant further contends that the trial court and CA erred in a''reciating the !ualifying circumstance of abuse of su'erior strength. (e argues that for abuse of su'erior strength to be a''reciated in the killing of Fennifer, the 'hysical attributes of both the accused and the ictim should hae been shown in order to determine whether the accused had the ca'acity to oercome the ictim 'hysically or whether the ictim was substantially weak and unable to 'ut u' a


1K1

defense. Additionally, he attem'ts to cast doubt u'on AAAs testimony, arguing that it lacked some details on how, after she was ra'ed and stabbed by a''ellant, she was still able to 'ut on her clothes and crawl to her grandfathers farm. +he a''eal lacks merit. A''ellant 'rinci'ally attacks the credibility of 'rosecution witness AAA. Furis'rudence has decreed that the issue of credibility of witnesses is "a !uestion best addressed to the 'roince of the trial court because of its uni!ue 'osition of haing obsered that elusie and incommunicable eidence of the witnesses de'ortment on the stand while testifying which o''ortunity is denied to the a''ellate courts"17 and "absent any substantial reason which would @ustify the reersal of the trial courts assessments and conclusions, the reiewing court is generally bound by the formers findings, 'articularly when no significant facts and circumstances are shown to hae been oerlooked or disregarded which when considered would hae affected the outcome of the case."1 +his rule is een more stringently a''lied if the a''ellate court concurred with the trial court.1= (ere, both the trial and a''ellate courts gae credence and full 'robatie weight to the testimony of AAA, the lone eyewitness to Fennifers killing and was herself brutally attacked by a''ellant who also ra'ed her. A''ellant had not shown any sufficiently weighty reasons for us to disturb the trial courts ealuation of the 'rosecution eyewitness credibility. In 'articular, we defer to the trial courts firsthand obserations on AAAs de'ortment while testifying and its eritable assessment of her credibility, to wit3 :rom the moment AAAN took the stand, this Court has come to discern in her the tre'idations of a woman outraged who is about to recount the ordeal she had gone through. 4he took her oath with trembling hands, her oice low and soft, hardly audible. :ace down, her eyes were constantly fi)ed on the floor as if aoiding an eye contact with the man she was about to testify against. After a few !uestions in direct, the emotion building u' inside her came to the fore and she burst into tears, badly shaken, unfit to continue any further with her testimony. +hus, in deference to her agitated situation, this Court has to defer her directDe)amination. *hen she came back, howeer, to continue with her aborted !uestioning, this time, com'osed and collected, direct and straightforward in her narration, all estiges of doubt on her credibility anished.1J Indeed, records bear out that AAA became so tense and nerous when she took the witness stand for the first time that the trial court had to cut short her initial direct e)amination. (oweer, during the ne)t hearing she was able to narrate her harrowing ordeal in a clear and straightforward manner, describing in detail how a''ellant waylaid them and mercilessly hit and attacked her and Fennifer with a lead 'i'e and ice 'ick before ra'ing her. *e !uote the 'ertinent 'ortions of her testimony3 R3 uring your 'reious testimony, Madam *itness, you said that youre not able to reach your 'lace of work on Fune =, 1???, what is the reason why you did not reach your 'lace of workG A3 *e were waylaid #hinarang% by Conrado 9aog, sir.


1K>

R3 In what manner were you waylaid by Conrado 9aogG A3 Conrado 9aog hit me with the 'i'e on my head, sir. )))) R3 *here were you when you were hitG A3 *e were walking along the rice 'uddies #sic%, Sour (onor. :iscal3 R3 And what ha''ened to you when you were hit with the lead 'i'e by Conrado 9aogG A3 I fell down #nabuwal% because I felt di;;y, sir. R3 ow, what ha''ened ne)t, if anyG A3 I heard Fennifer crying, sir. R3 And you heard Fennifer but did you see herG A3 Ses, sir. R3 *here was Conrado 9aog when you heard Fennifer cryingG A3 (e was beside me, sir. Court3 R3 (ow about Fennifer, where was she when you heard her cryingG A3 4he was standing on the rice 'uddies, #sic%, Sour (onor. :iscal3 R3 And what was Conrado 9aog doingG A3 (e a''roached Fennifer, sir. R3 +hen, what ha''ened ne)tG A3 (e hit Fennifer with the 'i'e, sir. R3 And what ha''ened to FenniferG


1K7

A3 4he fell down, sir. R3 *hat did Conrado 9aog do ne)tG A3 (e stabbed Fennifer, sir. R3 After Conrado 9aog stabbed Fennifer, what ha''ened ne)tG A3 (e coered Fennifer with grasses, sir. R3 And after that, what did Conrado 9aog doG A3 (e came back to me, sir. R3 *hen Conrado 9aog came back to you, what did you do, if anyG A3 (e hit me with the 'i'e seeral times, sir. R3 And what ha''ened to youG A3 And he stabbed me on my face, sir. R3 +hen, what ha''ened to youG A3 After that, he 'ulled down my @ogging 'ants, sir. (e remoed my 'anty and my blouse and my bra. R3 After that, what did he do ne)tG A3 And then, he went on to' of me, sir. R3 +hen, what ha''enedG A3 (e sucked my breast, sir. R3 And after thatG A3 (e was forcing his 'enis into my agina, sir. R3 id he succNeed in 'utting his 'enis into your aginaG A3 Ses, sir. R3 :or how long did the accused Conrado 9aog insert his 'enis into your aginaG


1K

A3 :or !uite sometime, sir. R3 After that, what ha''enedG A3 After that, he stood u', sir. R3 And where did he goG A3 After that, he coered me with grasses, sir. R3 And after that, what did you doG A3 I fell unconscious, sir. R3 ow, if Conrado 9aog is inside the courtroom, will you be able to 'oint to himG Inter'reter3 *itness is 'ointing to a man wearing an inmates uniform and when asked his name, answered3 Conrado 9aog. ) ) ) )1K On the other hand, a''ellant merely inter'osed the defense of denial and alibi. (e claimed that at the time of the incident, he was at his house with his children and ne'hew cooking dinner. (is defense, howeer, cannot 'reail oer the straightforward and credible testimony of AAA who 'ositiely identified him as the 'er'etrator of the murder and ra'e. +ime and again, we hae held that 'ositie identification of the accused, when categorical and consistent and without any showing of ill motie on the 'art of the eyewitness testifying, should 'reail oer the alibi and denial of the a''ellant whose testimony is not substantiated by clear and conincing eidence.1< AAA was firm and unrelenting in 'ointing to a''ellant as the one who attacked her and Fennifer, stabbing the latter to death before ra'ing AAA. It should be noted that AAA knew a''ellant well since they were relaties by affinity. As correctly held by the CA, with AAAs familiarity and 'ro)imity with the a''ellant during the commission of the crime, her identification of a''ellant could not be doubted or mistaken. In fact, AAA, u'on encountering a''ellant, did not run away as she neer thought her own uncle would harm her and her friend. Moreoer, the most natural reaction of ictims of iolence is to strie to see the a''earance of the 'er'etrators of the crime and obsere the manner in which the crime is being committed.>? +here is no eidence to show any im'ro'er motie on the 'art of AAA to testify falsely against a''ellant or to falsely im'licate him in the commission of a crime. +hus, the logical conclusion is that the testimony is worthy of full faith and credence.>0 In Peo'le . ieto,>1 we reiterated that DD It is an established @uris'rudential rule that a mere denial, without an y strong eidence to su''ort it, can scarcely oercome the 'ositie declaration by the ictim of the identity and inolement


1K=

of a''ellant in the crimes attributed to him. +he defense of alibi is likewise unaailing. :irstly, alibi is the weakest of all defenses, because it is easy to concoct and difficult to dis'roe. &nless substantiated by clear and conincing 'roof, such defense is negatie, selfDsering, and undesering of any weight in law. 4econdly, alibi is unacce'table when there is a 'ositie identification of the accused by a credible witness. 9astly, in order that alibi might 'ros'er, it is not enough to 'roe that the accused has been somewhere else during the commission of the crime2 it must also be shown that it would hae been im'ossible for him to be anywhere within the icinity of the crime scene. A''ellant does not dis'ute that he was near the icinity of the crime on the eening of Fune =, 1???. In fact, during his crossDe)amination, a''ellant admitted that his house was more or less only 0?? meters from the crime scene. +hus, his defense of alibi is not worthy of any credit for the added reason that he has not shown that it was 'hysically im'ossible for him to be at the scene of the crime at the time of its commission. In iew of the credible testimony of AAA, a''ellants defenses of denial and alibi desere no consideration. *e stress that these weak defenses cannot stand against the 'ositie identification and categorical testimony of a ra'e ictim.>> A''ellant attem'ts to discredit AAA-s accusation of ra'e by 'ointing out that while she testified on being ery weak that she een 'assed out after she was ra'ed by a''ellant, she neertheless stated that when she crawled her way to her grandfather-s farm she was wearing her clothes. A''ellant also contends that the 'rosecution should hae 'resented the 'hysician who e)amined AAA to 'roe her allegations that she was beaten and ra'ed by a''ellant. *e are not 'ersuaded. Based on AAAs account, a''ellant did not undress her com'letely DD her blouse and bra were merely lifted u' #"nililis"% while her undergarments were @ust 'ulled down, which therefore e)'lains why she still had her clothes on when she crawled to her grandfathers farm. onetheless, this matter raised by a''ellant is a minor detail which had nothing to do with the elements of the crime of ra'e. iscre'ancies referring only to minor details and collateral matters DD not to the central fact of the crime DD do not affect the eracity or detract from the essential credibility of witnesses declarations, as long as these are coherent and intrinsically belieable on the whole.>7 :or a discre'ancy or inconsistency in the testimony of a witness to sere as a basis for ac!uittal, it must establish beyond doubt the innocence of the a''ellant for the crime charged.> It cannot be oerem'hasi;ed that the credibility of a ra'e ictim is not diminished, let alone im'aired, by minor inconsistencies in her testimony.>= As to the fact that the 'hysician who e)amined AAA at the hos'ital did not testify during the trial, we find this not fatal to the 'rosecutions case. It must be underscored that the foremost consideration in the 'rosecution of ra'e is the ictims testimony and not the findings of the medicoDlegal officer. In fact, a medical e)amination of the ictim is not indis'ensable in a 'rosecution for ra'e2 the ictims testimony alone, if credible, is sufficient to conict.>J +hus we hae ruled that a medical e)amination of the ictim, as well as


1KJ

the medical certificate, is merely corroboratie in character and is not an indis'ensable element for coniction in ra'e. *hat is im'ortant is that the testimony of 'riate com'lainant about the incident is clear, une!uiocal and credible,>K as what we find in this case. *hile we concur with the trial courts conclusion that a''ellant indeed was the one who ra'ed AAA and killed Fennifer, we find that a''ellant should not hae been conicted of the se'arate crimes of murder and ra'e. An a''eal in a criminal case o'ens the entire case for reiew on any !uestion, including one not raised by the 'arties.>< +he facts alleged and 'roen clearly show that the crime committed by a''ellant is ra'e with homicide, a s'ecial com'le) crime 'roided under Article 1==DB, 'aragra'h  of the 5eised Penal Code, as amended by 5e'ublic Act #5.A.% o. K>>.7? In Peo'le . 9arraaga,70 this Court e)'lained the conce't of a s'ecial com'le) crime, as follows3 A discussion on the nature of s'ecial com'le) crime is im'eratie. *here the law 'roides a single 'enalty for two or more com'onent offenses, the resulting crime is called a s'ecial com'le) crime. 4ome of the s'ecial com'le) crimes under the 5eised Penal Code are #0% robbery with homicide, #1% robbery with ra'e, #>% kidna''ing with serious 'hysical in@uries, #7% kidna''ing with murder or homicide, and #% ra'e with homicide. In a s'ecial com'le) crime, the 'rosecution must necessarily 'roe each of the com'onent offenses with the same 'recision that would be necessary if they were made the sub@ect of se'arate com'laints. As earlier mentioned, 5.A. o. J=< amended Article 1=J of the 5eised Penal Code by adding thereto this 'roision3 "*hen the ictim is killed or dies as a conse!uence of the detention, or is ra'ed, or is sub@ected to torture or dehumani;ing acts, the ma)imum 'enalty shall be im'osed2"N and that this 'roision gies rise to a s'ecial com'le) crime. In the cases at bar, 'articularly Criminal Case o. CB&D7>?>, the Information s'ecifically alleges that the  ictim Mari@oy was ra'ed "on the occasion and in connection" with her detention and was killed "subse!uent thereto and on the occasion thereof." Considering that the 'rosecution was able to 'roe each of the com'onent offenses, a''ellants should be conicted of the s'ecial com'le) crime of kidna''ing and serious illegal detention with homicide and ra'e. ) ) )71 #8m'hasis su''lied.% A s'ecial com'le) crime, or more 'ro'erly, a com'osite crime, has its own definition and s'ecial 'enalty in the 5eised Penal Code, as amended. Fustice 5egalado, in his 4e'arate O'inion in the case of Peo'le . Barros,7> e)'lained that com'osite crimes are "neither of the same legal basis as nor sub@ect to the rules on com'le) crimes in Article 7K of the 5eised Penal CodeN, since they do not consist of a single act giing rise to two or more grae or less grae felonies com'ound crimesN nor do they inole an offense being a necessary means to commit another com'le) crime 'ro'erN. (oweer, @ust like the regular com'le) crimes and the 'resent case of aggraated illegal 'ossession of firearms, only a single 'enalty is im'osed for ea ch of such com'osite crimes although com'osed of two or more offenses."77 Article 1==DB of the 5eised Penal Code, as amended, 'roides only a single 'enalty for the com'osite acts of ra'e and the killing committed by reason or on the occasion of the ra'e.


1KK

A5+. 1==DB. Penalties. H 5a'e under 'aragra'h 0 of the ne)t 'receding article shall be 'unished by reclusion 'er'etua. *heneer the ra'e is committed with the use of a deadly wea'on or by two or more 'ersons, the 'enalty shall be reclusion 'er'etua to death. *hen by reason or on the occasion of the ra'e, the ictim has become insane, the 'enalty shall be reclusion 'er'etua to death. *hen the ra'e is attem'ted and a homicide is committed by reason or on the occasion thereof, the 'enalty shall be reclusion 'er'etua to death. *hen by reason or on the occasion of the ra'e, homicide is committed, the 'enalty shall be death. ) ) ) ) #8m'hasis su''lied.% Considering that the 'rosecution in this case was able to 'roe both the ra'e of AAA and the killing of Fennifer both 'er'etrated by a''ellant, he is liable for ra'e with homicide under the aboe 'roision. +here is no doubt that a''ellant killed Fennifer to 'reent her from aiding AAA or calling for hel' once she is able to run away, and also to silence her com'letely so she may not witness the ra'e of AAA, the original intent of a''ellant. (is carnal desire haing been satiated, a''ellant 'ur'osely coered AAAs body with grass, as he did earlier with Fennifers body, so that it may not be easily noticed or seen by 'assersby. A''ellant indeed thought that the saage blows he had inflicted on AAA were enough to cause her death as with Fennifer. But AAA suried and a''ellants barbaric deeds were soon enough discoered. +he facts established showed that the constitutie elements of ra'e with homicide were consummated, and it is immaterial that the 'erson killed in this case is someone other than the woman ictim of the ra'e. An analogy may be drawn from our rulings in cases of robbery with homicide, where the com'onent acts of homicide, 'hysical in@uries and other offenses hae been committed by reason or on the occasion of robbery. In Peo'le . e 9eon,7 we e)'ounded on the s'ecial com'le) crime of robbery with homicide, as follows3 In robbery with homicide, the original criminal design of the malefactor is to commit robbery, with homicide 'er'etrated on the occasion or by reason of the robbery. +he intent to commit robbery must 'recede the taking of human life. +he homicide may take 'lace before, during or after the robbery. It is only the result obtained, without reference or distinction as to the circumstances, causes or modes or 'ersons interening in the commission of the crime that has to be taken into consideration. +here is no such felony of robbery with homicide through reckless im'rudence or sim'le negligence. +he constitutie elements of the crime, namely, robbery with homicide, must be consummated. It is immaterial that the death would su'erene by mere accident2 or that the ictim of homicide is other than the ictim of robbery, or that two or more 'ersons are killed, or that aside from the homicide, ra'e, intentional mutilation, or usur'ation of authority, is committed by reason or on


1K<

the occasion of the crime. 9ikewise immaterial is the fact that the ictim of homicide is one of the robbers2 the felony would still be robbery with homicide. Once a homicide is committed by or on the occasion of the robbery, the felony committed is robbery with homicide. All the felonies committed by reason of or on the occasion of the robbery are integrated into one and indiisible felony of robbery with homicide. +he word "homicide" is used in its generic sense. (omicide, thus, includes murder, 'arricide, and infanticide.7= #8m'hasis su''lied.% In the s'ecial com'le) crime of ra'e with homicide, the term "homicide" is to be understood in its generic sense, and includes murder and slight 'hysical in@uries committed by reason or on occasion of the ra'e.7J (ence, een if any or all of the circumstances #treachery, abuse of su'erior strength and eident 'remeditation% alleged in the information hae been duly established by the 'rosecution, the same would not !ualify the killing to murder and the crime committed by a''ellant is still ra'e with homicide. As in the case of robbery with homicide, the aggraating circumstance of treachery is to be considered as a generic aggraating circumstance only. +hus we ruled in Peo'le . Macabales7K :inally, a''ellants contend that the trial court erred in concluding that the aggraating circumstance of treachery is 'resent. +hey aer that treachery a ''lies to crimes against 'ersons and not to crimes against 'ro'erty. (oweer, we find that the trial court in this case correctly characteri;ed treachery as a generic aggraating, rather than !ualifying, circumstance. Miguel was rendered hel'less by a''ellants in defending himself when his arms were held by two of the attackers before he was stabbed with a knife by a''ellant Macabales, as their other com'anions surrounded them. In Peo'le . 4alatierra, we ruled that when aleosia #treachery% obtains in the s'ecial com'le) crime of robbery with homicide, such treachery is to be regarded as a generic aggraating circumstance. 5obbery with homicide is a com'osite crime with its own definition and s'ecial 'enalty in the 5eised Penal Code. +here is no s'ecial com'le) crime of robbery with murder under the 5eised Penal Code. (ere, treachery forms 'art of the circumstances 'roen concerning the actual commission of the com'le) crime. 9ogically it could not !ualify the homicide to murder but, as generic aggraating circumstance, it hel's determine the 'enalty to be im'osed.7< #8m'hasis su''lied.% +he aggraating circumstance of abuse of su'erior strength is considered wheneer there is notorious ine!uality of forces between the ictim and the aggressor that is 'lainly and obiously adantageous to the aggressor and 'ur'osely selected or taken adantage of to facilitate the commission of the crime.? It is taken into account wheneer the aggressor 'ur'osely used e)cessie force that is out of 'ro'ortion to the means of defense aailable to the 'erson attacked.0 In this case, as 'ersonally witnessed by AAA, a''ellant struck Fennifer in the head with a lead 'i'e then stabbed her re'eatedly until she was dead. Clearly, the manner by which a''ellant had brutally slain Fennifer with a lethal wea'on, by first hitting her in the head with a lead 'i'e to render her defenseless and ulnerable before stabbing her re'eatedly, unmistakably showed that a''ellant intentionally used e)cessie force out of 'ro'ortion to the means of defense aailable to his unarmed ictim. As a'tly obsered by the a''ellate court3


1
It has long been established that an attack made by a man with a deadly wea'on u'on an unarmed and defenseless woman constitutes the circumstance of a buse of that su'eriority which his se) and the wea'on used in the act afforded him, and from which the woman was unable to defend herself. &nlike in treachery, where the ictim is not gien the o''ortunity to defend himself or re'el the aggression, taking adantage of su'erior strength does not mean that the ictim was com'letely defenseless. Abuse of su'eriority is determined by the e)cess of the aggressors natural strength oer that of the ictim, considering the momentary 'osition of both and the em'loyment of means weakening the defense, although not annulling it. By deliberately em'loying deadly wea'ons, an ice 'ick and a lead 'i'e, aNccusedDaN''ellant clearly took adantage of the su'eriority which his strength, se) and wea'on gae him oer his unarmed ictim. +he accusedDa''ellants sudden attack caught the ictim offDguard rendering her defenseless.1 Abuse of su'erior strength in this case therefore is merely a gener ic aggraating circumstance to be considered in the im'osition of the 'enalty. +he 'enalty 'roided in Article 1==DB of the 5eised Penal Code, as amended, is death. (oweer, in iew of the 'assage on Fune 17, 1??= of 5.A. o. <>7=, entitled "An Act Prohibiting the Im'osition of the eath Pena lty in the Phili''ines" the Court is mandated to im'ose on the a''ellant the 'enalty of reclusion 'er'etua without eligibility for 'arole.> +he aggraatingU!ualifying circumstances of abuse of su'erior strength and use of deadly wea'on hae greater releance insofar as the ciil as'ect of this case is concerned. *hile the trial court and CA were correct in holding that both the ictim of the killing #Fennifer% and the ra'e ictim #AAA% are entitled to the award of e)em'lary damages, the basis for such award needs further clarification. Articles 111< and 11>? of the Ciil Code 'roide3 Art. 111<. 8)em'lary or correctie damages are im'osed, by way of e)am'le or correction for the 'ublic good, in addition to the moral, tem'erate, li!uidated or com'ensatory damages. Art. 11>?. In criminal offenses, e)em'lary damages as a 'art of the ciil liability may be im'osed when the crime was committed with one or more aggraating circumstances. 4uch damages are se'arate and distinct from fines and shall be 'aid to the offended 'arty. In iew of the 'resence of abuse of su'erior strength in the killing of Fennifer, her heirs are entitled to e)em'lary damages 'ursuant to Article 11>?. *ith res'ect to the ra'e committed against AAA, Article 1==DB of the 5eised Penal Code, as amended, 'roides that a man who shall hae carnal knowledge of a woman through force, threat or intimidation under Article 1==D A #a%, wheneer such ra'e is committed with the use of a deadly wea'on or by two or more 'ersons, the 'enalty shall be reclusion 'er'etua to death. 4ince the use of a deadly wea'on raises the 'enalty for the ra'e, this circumstance would @ustify the award of e)em'lary damages to the offended 'arty #AAA% also in accordance with Article 11>?.


1<0

Article 1==DB likewise 'roides for the im'osition of death 'enalty if the crime of ra'e is committed with any of the aggraatingU!ualifying circumstances enumerated therein. Among these circumstances is minority of the ictim and her relationshi' to the offender3 0% *hen the ictim is under eighteen #0K% years of age and the offender is a 'arent, ascendant, ste''arent, guardian, relatie by consanguinity or affinity within the third ciil degree, or the common law s'ouse of the 'arent of the ictim. #8m'hasis su''lied.% AAAs relationshi' to a''ellant, who is his uncle by affinity, was not alleged in the information but admitted by a''ellant when he testified in court3 I58C+ 8AMIA+IO O: CO5AO 9AO6 By3 Atty. 5o!ue3 )))) R o you know a 'erson by the name of AAANG A Ses, sir. R *hy do you know herG A Because she is our neighbor. (er house is @ust ad@acent to ours, sir. R (ow are you related to AAANG A (er mother and my wife are sisters. R 4o she is your nieceDinDlawG A Ses, sir. ) ) ) )7 #8m'hasis su''lied.% +he failure of the 'rosecution to allege in the information AAAs relationshi' to a''ellant will not bar the consideration of the said circumstance in the determination of his ciil liability. In any case, een without the attendance of aggraating circumstances, e)em'lary damages may still be awarded where the circumstances of the case show the "highly re'rehensible or outrageous conduct of the offender." Citing our earlier ruling in the case of Peo'le . Catubig, this Court clarified in Peo'le . alisay=3 Prior to the effectiity of the 5eised 5ules of Criminal Procedure, courts generally awarded e)em'lary damages in criminal cases when an aggraating circumstance, whether ordinary or


1<1

!ualifying, had been 'roen to hae attended the commission of the crime, een if the same was not alleged in the information. +his is in accordance with the aforesaid Article 11>?. (oweer, with the 'romulgation of the 5eised 5ules, courts no longer consider the aggraating circumstances not alleged and 'roen in the determination of the 'enalty and in the award of damages. +hus, een if an aggraating circumstance has been 'roen, but was not alleged, courts will not award e)em'lary damages. Pertinent are the following sections of 5ule 00?3 )))) eertheless, Peo'le . Catubig laid down the 'rinci'le that courts may still award e)em'lary damages based on the aforementioned Article 11>?, een if the aggraating circumstance has not been alleged, so long as it has been 'roen, in criminal cases instituted before the effectiity of the 5eised 5ules which remained 'ending thereafter. Catubig reasoned that the retroactie a''lication of the 5eised 5ules should not adersely affect the ested rights of the 'riate offended 'arty. +hus, we find, in our body of @uris'rudence, criminal cases, es'ecially those inoling ra'e, dichotomi;ed3 one awarding e)em'lary damages, een if an aggraating circumstance attending the commission of the crime had not been sufficiently alleged but was conse!uently 'roen in the light of Catubig2 and another awarding e)em'lary damages only if an aggraating circumstance has both been alleged and 'roen following the 5eised 5ules. Among those in the first set are Peo'le . 9aciste, Peo'le . $ictor, Peo'le . Orilla, Peo'le . Calongui, Peo'le . Magbanua, Peo'le of the Phili''ines . (eracleo Abello y :ortada, Peo'le of the Phili''ines . Faime Cadag Fimene;, and Peo'le of the Phili''ines . Fulio Manalili. And in the second set are Peo'le . 9lae, Peo'le of the Phili''ines . ante 6ragasin y Par, and Peo'le of the Phili''ines . 8dwin Me@ia. Again, the difference between the two sets rests on when the criminal case was instituted, either before or after the effectiity of the 5eised 5ules. )))) eertheless, by focusing only on Article 11>? as the legal basis for the grant of e)em'lary damagestaking into account sim'ly the attendance of an aggraating circumstance in the commission of a crime, courts hae lost sight of the ery reason why e)em'lary damages are awarded. Catubig is enlightening on this 'oint, thus Also known as "'unitie" or "indictie" damages, e)em'lary or correctie damages are intended to sere as a deterrent to serious wrong doings, and as a indication of undue sufferings and wanton inasion of the rights of an in@ured or a 'unishment for those guilty of outrageous conduct. +hese terms are generally, but not always, used interchangeably. In common law, there is 'reference in the use of e)em'lary damages when the award is to account for in@ury to feelings and for the sense of indignity and humiliation suffered by a 'erson as a result of an in@ury that has been maliciously and wantonly inflicted, the theory being that there should be com'ensation for the hurt caused by the highly re'rehensible conduct of the defendantassociated with such circumstances as willfulness, wantonness, malice, gross negligence or recklessness, o''ression, insult or fraud or gross fraudthat intensifies the in@ury. +he terms 'unitie or indictie damages are often used to refer to those s'ecies of damages that may be awarded against a


1<>

'erson to 'unish him for his outrageous conduct. In either case, these damages are intended in good measure to deter the wrongdoer and others like him from similar conduct in the future. Being correctie in nature, e)em'lary damages, therefore, can be awarded, not only in the 'resence of an aggraating circumstance, but also where the circumstances of the case show the highly re'rehensible or outrageous conduct of the offender. In much the same way as Article 11>? 'rescribes an instance when e)em'lary damages may be awarded, Article 111<, the main 'roision, lays down the ery basis of the award. +hus, in Peo'le . Matrimonio, the Court im'osed e)em'lary damages to deter other fathers with 'ererse tendencies or aberrant se)ual behaior from se)ually abusing their own daughters. Also, in Peo'le . Cristobal, the Court awarded e)em'lary damages on account of the moral corru'tion, 'erersity and wickedness of the accused in se)ually assaulting a 'regnant married woman. 5ecently, in Peo'le of the Phili''ines . Cristino Caada, Peo'le of the Phili''ines . Pe'ito eerio and +he Peo'le of the Phili''ines . 9oren;o 9ayco, 4r., the Court awarded e)em'lary damages to set a 'ublic e)am'le, to sere as deterrent to elders who abuse and corru't the youth, and to 'rotect the latter from se)ual abuse. It must be noted that, in the said cases, the Court used as basis Article 111<, rather than Article 11>?, to @ustify the award of e)em'lary damages. Indeed, to borrow Fustice Car'io Morales words in her se'arate o'inion in Peo'le of the Phili''ines . ante 6ragasin y Par, "tNhe a''lication of Article 11>? of the Ciil Code strictissimi @uris in such cases, as in the 'resent one, defeats the underlying 'ublic 'olicy behind the award of e)em'lary damagesto set a 'ublic e)am'le or correction for the 'ublic good."J #8m'hasis su''lied.%0a'hi0 In this case, the brutal manner by which a''ellant carried out his lustful design against his nieceD inDlaw who neer had an inkling that her own uncle would do any harm to her and her friend, @ustified the award of e)em'lary damages. A''ellants sudden and fierce attack on AAA DD hitting her seeral times on the head with a lead 'i'e before stabbing her face until she fell down, hurriedly lifting her bra and blouse and 'ulling down her undergarments, ra'ing her while she was in such a defenseless 'osition, coering her body with grasses and abandoning her to die in a grassy field DD was truly des'icable and outrageous. 4uch icious assault was made een more re'rehensible as it also ictimi;ed Fennifer, who sustained more stab wounds and beatings, causing her iolent death. Article 111< of the Ciil Code allows the award of e)em'lary damages in order to deter the commission of similar acts and to allow the courts to forestall behaior that would 'ose grae and deleterious conse!uences to society.K In line with current @uris'rudence, the amount of P>?,??? each for AAA and the heirs of Fennifer as e)em'lary damages was correctly awarded by the trial court. *e also affirm the trial court and CA in ordering a''ellant to 'ay the heirs of Fennifer PatawaranD5osal the amounts of P?,??? as moral damages. In cases of murder and homicide, the award of moral damages is mandatory, without need of allegation and 'roof other than the death of the ictim.< Anent the award of ciil indemnity, the same is increased to PJ,??? to conform with recent @uris'rudence.=? As to e)'enses incurred for the funeral and burial of Fennifer, the CA correctly awarded her heirs the amount of P1,??? as actual damages, said amount haing been sti'ulated by the 'arties during the trial.


1<7

9astly, we affirm the award of P?,??? to AAA as ciil indemnity for the crime of ra'e, as well as the award of P?,??? as moral damages. Ciil indemnity e) delicto is mandatory u'on a finding of the fact of ra'e while moral damages are awarded u'on such finding without need of further 'roof, because it is assumed that a ra'e ictim has actually suffered moral in@uries entitling the ictim to such award.=0 *(858:O58, the a''eal is I4MI448 for lack of merit. +he March 10, 1??J ecision of the Court of A''eals in CAD6.5. C5 (C o. ??1>7 is A::I5M8 with MOI:ICA+IO4. AccusedDa''ellant Conrado 9aog y 5amin is hereby found 6&I9+S beyond reasonable doubt of 5a'e *ith (omicide under Article 1==DB of the 5eised Penal Code, as amended by 5.A. o. K>>, and is accordingly sentenced to suffer the 'enalty of reclusion 'er'etua without eligibility for 'arole. AccusedDa''ellant is hereby ordered to 'ay the heirs of Fennifer PatawaranD5osal PJ,??? as ciil indemnity e) delicto, P?,??? as moral damages, P1,??? as actual damages and P>?,??? as e)em'lary damages. (e is further ordered to 'ay to the ictim AAA the sums of P?,??? as ciil indemnity e) delicto, P?,??? as moral damages and P>?,??? as e)em'lary damages. People v. 0arranco )octrine: 5a'e is a crime which is not normally committed in the 'resence of witnesses, hence,

courts merely rely on the credibility of the com'lainants testimony as weighed against the credibility of accused. Ang isang karaniwang kasabihan ay "ang karangalan ng isang tao ay katumbas ng kanyang buhay," lalo na at kung ang 'agDuusa'an ay ang karangalan, dangal o 'uri ng isang babae. Eaya nga sa batas, ang 'agsira ng 'uri ng isang babae ay mabigat na kasalanan at kung ito ay ginawa ng sa'ilitan ang 'arusang katumbas ay mabilanggo habang buhay. Ano 'a at kung ang 'agD gahasa ay ginamitan ng sandatang nakamamatay o ginawa ng dalawa o higit 'ang kalalakihan, o ang 'inagsamantalahan ay namatay o nasiraan ng bait, ang 'ataw na 'arusa sa batas ay bitay. 0 6anoon 'a man sa ating saligang batas ay i'inagbabawal na ila'at ang 'arusang ito. 1 Ito ang 'aksa ng 'aghahabol na ito. 4i 5osalia Barranco ay isang dalagang labingDsiyam na taong gulang lamang. 4iya ang 'anganay sa 'itong anak ng magasawang Faime at Aurora Barranco. +uwing araw ng 4abado, ang magkaka'atid maliban kay 5osalia ay tumutulong sa kanilang mga magulang sa 'agsasaka sa kanilang bukid sa Abanay, may layong tatlong kilometro sa kanilang tirahan sa Madong, Faniuay, Iloilo. aiiwang magDisa si 5osalia sa bahay u'ang siya ay tumingin sa alagang baboy at magsilbing bantay ng kanilang tahanan. 4i Bartolome Barranco ay mayDasawa at limang anak. 4iya ay 'insang makalawa ng ama ni 5osalia at 'inakamala'it na ka'itbahay ng 'amilyang Barranco sa Baranggay Madong. Ang 'agitan ng dalawang tirahan ay humigit kumulang lamang sa isang daang #0??% metro. 4i 5osalia ay kumare ng asawa ni Bartolome. ang katanghalian ng ikaD0? ng Pebrero, 0

1<

Bartolome na hubot hubad sa kanyang ibabaw. Eung sa 'a'aanong 'araan naka'asok sa kanilang bahay ang nasabing tao ay hindi niya mawari. ang makita niya ang mukha ni Bartolome akala niya na ang mga 'angyayari ay isang masamang 'anagini' lamang subalit siya ay nagitla nang itinutok ni Bartolome ang isang 'atalim #butcher-s knife% sa kan yang leeg. Binalaan siya nito na kung siya ay magtatangkang gumalaw o sumigaw ay 'a'atayin siya nito. (indi makagalaw sa sindak si 5osalia. Itinaas ni Bartolome ang kanyang 'alda at biglang binatak ang kanyang 'anti. 4a'agkat magkadikit ang mga hita ni 5osalia, iniutos ni Bartolome na ibuka niya ang mga ito. (indi siya sumunod kaya siya ay binantaang muli na 'a'atayin ni Bartolome ka'ag hindi niya ibinuka ang kanyang mga hita. 9along nanigas sa takot si 5osalia. (inawi ni Bartolome ang mga hita ni 5osalia, at tinangka nitong i'asok ang kanyang ari sa ari ng dalaga. Mata'os ang dalawang ulit na sa'ilitang 'agtatangka ay nagtagum'ay si Bartolome na mai'asok ang kanyang ari at tuluyang hinalay si 5osalia. aramdaman ni 5osalia ang matinding ha'di sa bungad ng kanyang ari. Pagkata'os nito, nag'ahinga si Bartolome ng mga limang minuto habang ang kanyang ari ay nakababad sa ari ni 5osalia. I'inag'atuloy niya ang kanyang makamundong 'agnanasa. At habang ginagahasa ni Bartolome si 5osalia hawak niya ang 'atalim na nakatutok sa leeg ni 5osalia. Bago tuluyang umalis si Bartolome, binalaan niya ang dalaga na huwag magsusumbong sa kanyang mga magulang kung ayaw niyang mamatay. 4umusulak ang kalooban ni 5osalia sa tindi ng galit bunga ng 'agkalugso ng kaniyang 'uri, subalit hindi siya makakibo dahil sa malaking takot na baka siya ay 'atayin ni Bartolome oras na isiwalat niya ang nangyari. Eaya-t minabuti na lamang niya na itikom ang kanyang bibig at tiisin ang masakla' na ka'alaran. oon ikaD0< ng Marso, 0

1<=

oong ikaD> ng Abril, 0 ng (ulyo,0% hindi siya da'at utusan na kilalaning anak niya ang naging su'ling ni 5osalia. Mata'os na suriin ang mga katibayang inihara', walang makitang sa'at na dahilan ang (ukumang ito u'ang baguhin ang 'asiya ng mababang hukuman. Ang kasalanang 'anggagahasa ay totoong mahira' 'atunayan sa'agkat ang karaniwang nakakaalam lamang nito ay ang 'inagsamantalahan at ang nagsamantala. 4amakatuwid, hindi maaasahan na mayroon 'ang ibang maka'ag'a'ahayag ng 'angyayari. (indi 'angkaraniwan na ang salang ito ay nagagana' na may saksi. 4a ganitong dahilan ang hukuman ay umaasa sa kata'atan ng 'ahayag ng nagsusumbong at tinitimbang ito laban sa 'agtanggi o 'ag'a'asinungaling ng inuusig. 4inasabi ng nasasakdal na hindi da'at 'aniwalaan ang mga 'ahayag ng nagsasakdal dahil sa hindi 'agkakatugma nito. &na, diDumano ay nag'ahayag ang nagsasakdal na siya ay natakot kaya siya ay sumunod sa utos ng nasasakdal na ibuka ang kanyang mga hita. 4ubalit nang tanungin siyang muli ng manananggol ng nasasakdal ang naging kasagutan niya ay ang nasasakdal ang siyang humawi ng kanyang mga hita. *alang saliwa sa mga 'ahayag na ito. Malinaw na dah il sa tindi ng takot ni 5osalia, ibinuka niya ang kanyang mga hita at hinayaang mahawi ng nasasakdal ang kanyang mga hita. Ikalawa, sinabi raw ng naghahabla na binunot ng nahahabla ang kanyang ari 'agkata'os siyang gamitin nito at i'inasok lamang ito nang muli siyang inabuso. oong siya ay tanungin ng manananggol ng nasasakdal ukol sa bagay na ito, ng sabi niya ay nag'ahinga ang nahahabla na ang kanyang ari ay nakababad sa loob ng kanyang ari. a'at alalahanin na ang naghahabla ay isang dalaga na noon lamang nakaranas ng bagay na ito. akaramdam siya ng matinding sakit sa kanyang ari at bukod 'a rito ay ang malaking takot na sumagila sa kanya. (indi maaasahan na malaman 'a niya kung binunot nga o hindi ng nasasakdal ang kanyang ari. Maaaring sinabi niyang nakababad 'a rin ang ari ng inuusig sa kanya kung 'agkata'os ng 'aggalaw nito ang nasasakdal ay hindi umalis sa 'agkakadagan sa kanya habang ito ay sandaling nag'ahinga.


1
Ikatlo, diDumano, tiwali ang 'ahayag ng naghahabla na noong ikaD0< ng Marso nang tinangkang halayin siyang muli ng nasasakdal ay 'inalo niya ito ng kahoy sa ulo, at sinabi rin niya na kung ang nahahabla ay lala'it, siya ay lalabas at hihingi ng saklolo. *alang lisya dito. Maliwanag na sinabi ng nagsasakdal na 'inalo niya sa ulo ang nasasakdal kaya nabitawan siya nito. At malinaw rin na ang nagsasakdal ay lumabas at sinabing hihiyaw siya ka'ag nag'atuloy sa masamang tangka ang nasasakdal. 6anoon 'a man, kung mayroon mang hindi 'agkakatugma ang 'ahayag ng naghahabla, ito ay sa mga maliliit na bahagi lamang at ito ay hindi sa'at na dahilan u'ang hindi 'aniwalaan ng hukuman ang kabuuan ng kanyang i'inahayag. Ang totoo nito, dahil sa na'akasakla' na naranasan ng nagsasakdal hindi maaasahan na matatandaan 'a niya ang 'inakamaliliit na bahagi ng 'angyayari. Ang isang saksi na ang 'ahayag ay mayroong kaunting 'agkakamali ang karaniwang nagsasabi ng katotohanan. 4a kabilang dako, hindi ka'aniD'aniwala ang 'ahayag ng nasasakdal na hindi niya 'inilit ang nagsasakdal noong ikaD0? ng Pebrero. EusangDloob daw ang kanilang 'agtatalik at may isang taon nang may 'agkakaugnayan sila bago 'a man dumating ang nasabing araw. Ito ay na'asinungalingan ng kinalabasan ng 'agsusuri ng manggagamot ng BI sa ari ni 5osalia, gaya ng sumusunod3 labia ma@ora and minora coa'tated. :ourchette tense estibular moncoss ilacious. (ymen fleshy, 'resence of su'erficial laceration at < o-clock 'osition according to face of a watch. 8dges fairly coa'table and congested. (ymenal orifice originally angular and adnidts glass tube three cms. diameter with moderate resistance. Ito ang karaniwang kalagayan ng ari ng babaeng donselya mata'os ang kanyang unang karanasan. 4amakatuwid, walang katotohanan ang salaysay ng nahahabla na may isang taon na silang nagtatabi ng nagsasakdal bago 'a noong ikaD0? ng Pebrero. 4inabi rin ng nasasakdal na ang nagsasakdal ang tumukso sa kanya kaya sila nagkaroon ng kaugnayan. Pinangalawahan ito ng kaniyang asawa na si 4alacion 4arno na nag'ahayag na ang nagsasakdal ang hayagang umakit sa kanyang asawa at sa hara' niya ay ikinaskas 'a ang suso nito sa asawa niya. ang sinaway niya ito, ang sagot diDumano sa kanya ay "wala kang 'akialam sa'agkat ako ay 'utaQ. (indi ka'ani'aniwalaQ *alang anumang katibayan na inihara' ang nasasakdal na ang nagsasakdal ay malandi at malaswang babae. Eahit na ang isang masamang babae ay hindi i'agsisiksikan ang kanyang katawan sa isang lalaki laluna-t kung nakahara' ang asawa nito. At lalo nang mahira' 'aniwalaan kung magkumare sila. At kung totoo man na ginawa ito ng nagsasakdal sa hara'an ng asawa ng nasasakdal, bakit hindi man lamang nagalit itoG a ang nasasakdal ay naglulubid lamang ng buhangin ay na'ansin din ng mababa ng hukuman samantalang siya ay nag'a'ahayag dito. ang sinasabi niyang sila ng nagsasakdal ay mayroong kaugnayan, na'ansin ng hukom na matagal at atubili siya sa 'agsagot sa mga tanong. ang usisain ng hukom kung bakit hindi siya agad maka'agsalita ang sagot niya ay siya ay natatakot,


1
subalit hindi niya masabi kung ano ang kaniyang kinatatakutan. > Maliwanag na ang kinatatakutan niya ay ang malaking kasinungalingan na hinahabi niya u'ang makaligtas siya sa kaniyang mabigat na sala. I'inagdidiinan ng nasasakdal na ang sumbong laban sa kanya ay 'agbabangongD'uri lamang ng nagsasakdal sa dahilang ito ay nagdadalangDtao. Bakit kinakailangan 'ang i'aghayagan ang ka'alaran ng nagsasakdal sa hukuman kung hindi ito ang katotohananG Eung sila man ay nagkaroon ng 'inagdaanan hindi kaya higit na mamara'atin 'a ng nagsasakdal ang tiisin na lamang ang kanyang sina'it na kalagayan sa hali' na magdala ng malaking kahihiyan sa kanyang angkanG Ang nakikitang dahilan ng (ukuman ay sa'agkat nais ng nagsasakdal na maibangon ang kanyang nilugsong 'uri at mai'ataw ang kaukulang 'arusa sa nasasakdal. I'inagtatalo ng nahahabla kung bakit hindi agad nagsumbong ang naghahabla sa kanyang mga magulang2 na hindi agad siya nag'asuri sa manggagamot2 na hindi siya humingi ng saklolo nang siya ay ginagahasa2 na walang anumang sugat o gasgas sa kaniyang katawan2 na hindi na'unit ang kanyang 'anti o damit2 at bakit inireklamo sa ina ang tangka noong ikaD0< ng Marso subalit hindi naman inireklamo ang 'agkagahasa noong ikaD0? ng Pebrero. Ang sagot ay sim'le lamang. Malaki ang naging takot ng naghahabla. naghahab la. +iniis +iniis niya ang ma'ait na karanasan at ito ang dahilan kaya hindi siya agad nagsumbong sa kaniyang mga magulang, hindi siya kaagad nag'unta sa manggagamot, at hindi siya nakasigaw ng saklolo. ahil sa kanyang takot, nahubaran siya ng malaya at na'agsamantalahan ng nasasakdal. Eaya wala siyang gasgas sa katawan. *ala *ala siyang na'unit na damit o 'anti. 4ubalit mata'os ang higit sa isang buwang buwan g 'agtitiis, at dahil sa muling 'agtatangka sa kanyang 'url, nag'utok na ang kalooban ng nagsasakdal. 9abis na ito. 4obra na. a'at ng kalusin. inam'ot niya ang isang 'utol ng kahoy at i'inuk'ok sa ulo ang nasasakdal. At nang tangkaing ituloy ang masamang hangarin, sinabi ng nagsasakdal na lalabas siya at hihiyaw ng saklolo. Ang kanyang matinding galit ay nangibabaw sa kanyang takot. 4aka lamang natigil ang maitim na hangarin ng nasasakdal. 4a'at na ito. Ang salang ginawa ng nahahabla ay malinaw. (inalay niya ang karangalan ng isang dalaga na naiwang nagusa sa kanilang bahay. aturingan 'a namang kamagDanak ang nahahabla ng nagD uusig at 'inakamala'it na ka'itbahay na da'at asahan na magmamalasakit ngunit siya 'a ang nagsamantala dito. a'at siyang managot manago t sa kanyang nakaririmarim na ginawa. Ang 'url ng isang dilag ay kanyang buhay. b uhay. *asto *asto ang 'arusa na mabilanggo ng 'anghabangDbuhay 'anghab angDbuhay ang nasasakdal. 4ubalit mayroong 'agkakamali ang mababang hukuman ng i'agD utos nito na kilalanin ng nahahabla bilang anak ang bunga ng kanyang kasalanan. Ang nahahabla ay mayDasawa. (indi maaari na kilalanin ang batang bunga ng kasalanan na anak ng isang mayDasawa. 7 4ubalit may katungkulan siyang sustentuhan ang bata ayon sa batas.  Bukod 'a dito da'at 'agbayarin ang nahahabla ang malaking 'insala na ginawa niya kay 5osalia Barranco ng halagang P >?,???. ??. A(I9 I+O, ang 'aghahabol ni Bartolome Barranco ay 'inawawalang bisa at ang hatol ng mababang hukuman ay 'inagtitibay ng walang anumang 'agbabago maliban na siya ay inuutusan na sustentohan ang naging bunga ng kanyang kasalanan sa halaga at 'anahon na


1<<

'a'asiyahan ng mababang hukuman sa 'agbasa ng hatol na ito at baba yaran niya ang nagsasakdal ng P >?,???.??. People v "angalino )octrine: +he ictim being of a tender age, the 'enetration could only go as dee' asthe labia.

:or ra'e to be committed, full 'enetration is not re!uired. It is enough that there is 'roof of entrance of the male organ within the labia or the 'udendum of the female organ. Facts: 4emion Mangalino inserted his finger and later on forcibly introducedhis se)ual organ

into Marichelles, Marichelles, si) yr old, undeelo'ed genitalia. Physicale)am in BI concluded that bruises b ruises on Marichelles agina3 caused by a hardob@ect like an erected 'enis and an indication of an unsuccessful 'enetration. +hey discounted the 'robability of an accident since there was no contusionon the labia. 4emion denied the charges and argued that bruises may beselfDinflicted. 4he was constantly running and might hae bum'ed her 'elisagainst a chair which e)'lained the absence of contusions on the labia. 'eld: (e is guilty of statutory ra'e. :or ra'e to be committed, full'enetration is not re!uired. It

is enough that there is 'roof of entrance of themale organ within the labia or 'udendum of the female organ. 8en theslightest 'enetration is sufficient to consummate the crime of ra'e. Accordingto the BI re'ort, ra'e could hae h ae been 'er'etrated. r. 6arcia certified thee)istence of indications of recent genital trauma. $estibular $estibular mucosa was darkred and normally, it was su''osed to be 'inkish. +he forcible attem't of anerected 'enis caused the >. cm contusion 'rior to the hymen. +he 'enileDaginal contact without 'enetration was due to 0 cm diameter o'ening of Marichelles hymen. +he ictim being young, the 'enetration could onl y go asdee' as the labia. Offender and ictim being neighbors e)'lain the absenceof isible signs of 'hysical in@uries. +he reason why Marichelle did not crywas that she did not feel any 'ain during du ring the attem'ted se)ual intercourse. People v. 0albuena D P)F )(2*/, People v. Castro

+his is an a''eal inter'osed by the accused, elfin Castro y 9o;ada, from the decision of the 5egional +rial Court of Pasay City, Branch 00?, im'osing u'on him the 'enalty of reclusion rec lusion 'er'etua for statutory ra'e defined under Art. Art. >>, 'aragra'h > of the 5eised Penal Code. On the witness stand, si) #=% year old iana 5ose Castro narrated how, while 'laying with a neighbor sometime on 7 October 0

>??

home, she refused to hae her 'riate 'art washed by her Auntie Alice because it was hurting and 'ainful. 0 Mrs. Facinta Castro, iana-s grandmother, testified that on = October 0
*as the there re any anyth thin ingg unus unusual ual that that ha'' ha''en ened ed on on Oct. Oct. = 'art 'artic icul ular arly ly in in your your house houseGG

A

On Oct. Oct. = I was was dow downs nsta tair irss and and ther theree was was a cal calll by by my my hus husba band nd..

)))

)))

)))

)))

)))

:I4CA93 ))) R

ow ow, what what was was the the reas reason on why why your your husb husban andd call called ed youG youG

A (e aske askedd me me to to fin finee out out why why my my gra grandd nddau aught ghter er does does not not want want to to eat eat and and @ust @ust kee's kee's on crying. R

And And what what did did you you do do wen wen #si #sic% c% your your husb husban andd told told you you to to see see your your gran grandda ddaug ught hter erGG

A

I went went u's u'sta tair irss and and found found out out what what was was wrin wringg #sic #sic%% wit withh her her whet whethe herr she she has has feer feer..

R

And what did you find out

A At fir first st she she sai saidd she she was was com' com'la laini ining ng that that her her 'ri 'riat atee 'ro' 'ro'ert ertyy was was 'ain 'ainfu full and and when when I inestigated I discoered that it swollen #sic%. R +hen +hen wha whatt ha''e ha''ene nedd afte afterr you you found found out out that that the the 'ri 'riat atee 'ro' 'ro'er erty ty of of your your gra grandd nddau aught ghter er was swollenG A

I asked her why.

R

#si #sic%. c%. And And what what did did you yourr gra grand ndda daug ught hter er tell ell you youGG

A

At first rst she she tol told me me tha thatt "na "nassabi abit sa sa hiy hiyer ero. o.""

R

And what did you do after thatG

)))

)))

)))


>?0

A *hat *hat I did did was was to e)am e)amin inee her her care carefu full llyy her her 'ri 'riat atee 'art2 'art2 I lift lifted ed her her two two #1% #1% legs legs and I discoered that her 'riate 'ro'erty was reddened as swollen. R

id id you you ask ask her her agai againn wha whatt ha' ha''e 'ene nedd to to her her 'ri 'riat atee 'ro 'ro'e 'ert rtyyG

A

Ses, sir sir,, she she tol toldd me that that she she was was ini inite tedd by her her Euy Euyaa elf elfin in to to the the bat bathr hroo oom. m.

R

And what else did she tell youG

A 4he told told me me that that she she was was asked asked by her Euya Euya to to stan standd on to' to' of of the the toi toile lett bow bowll and and he he remoed her 'anty and his #sic% Euya elfin also remoed his 'ants. R

*hat else did she tell youG

A

4he told told me that that his his #si #sic% c% Euya Euya el elfi finn had had se)ua se)uall int inter erco cour urse se with with her. her.

CO&5+3 R

id id you you ask ask ian ianee Cast Castro ro how how el elfi finn alle allege gedly dly had had se) se)ual ual inte interc rcour ourse se wit withh herG herG

A

Ses, Sour (onor.

R

*hat did she answerG

A

4he was was sta stand ndin ingg and and she she was was made made to lean lean on the the wal wall, l, Sour (onor (onor.. . .

Because of iana-s reelation, the grandmother brought brough t her to the ational Bureau of Inestigation for e)amination on K October 0 r. 5oberto 6arcia, the BI medicoDlegal, had this e)'lanation3 )))

)))

)))

A &nder &nder the the singl singlee headi heading ng of "gen "genit ital al e)am e)amin inat atio ion" n" the the more more insig insigni nifi fica cant nt fin findi ding ngss will will be the contused or bruised etibular #sic% meaning the area a rea inside the genital organ of the sub@ect 'erson2 the hymen of the sub@ect 'erson was noted to be bruised or contused . . . R ow ow what what do do you you mean mean when when you you say say tha thatt the the geni genita tall 'art 'artss you you ment mentio ione nedd were were cont contus used ed or bruisedG A +he +he area area was was not noted ed to to be 'ur'l 'ur'lis ishh or red red dark darker er tha thann the the norm normal al a'' a''ear earanc ancee of the the said said 'ortion being bruised or contused it would mean that this 'articular 'ortion was sub@ect to to some amount of force or it could hae come in contact with a hard ob@ect, the contract must hae been done with a certain amount of force.


>?1

R &nder &nder o. o. 1 of the the con concl clus usio ionn of thi thiss re'or re'ortt it reads reads" "si sign gnss of rec recent ent geni genita tall traum trauma, a, 'resent, consistent with the alleged date of infliction." *ould *ould you e)'lain thisG +his witness meant that the a''earance of the genital or 'rior of those mentioned was seen by this witness which brought about the trauma and that it has to be recent, meaning it could hae been sustained by the sub@ect 'erson in a matter of days 'rior to the date of the e)amination. A

ow ow, was was the hym hymen of the sub@e ub@ect ct lacer acerat ated edGG

A

o, sir.

R ow ow this this geni genita tall trau trauma ma whi which ch you you sai saidd to ha haee been been suf suffe fere redd by the the sub sub@e @ect ct fro from m what what could this in@ury or trauman #sic%, what was the causeG A

Any Any har hardd ob@ ob@ec ectt wou would ld hae hae 'rod 'roduc uced ed this this brui bruise se or cont contus usio ion. n.

R ow, ow, this this is is a case case of of ra'e, ra'e, oct octor or,, wou would ld you you ent entur uree to sta state te fro from m what what ob@ ob@ec ectt this this could hae been inflictedG A &nder &nder the the norm normal al course course of eents eents in@uri in@uries es of this this natu nature re inol inoling ing this this 'art 'articu icular lar 'orti 'ortion on of the body of a female or woman is 'roduced by b y the insertion of a male organ. 7 )))

)))

)))

A sworn com'laint for ra'e was filed against elfin Castro y 9o;ada. It charged as follows3 +hat on or about the 7th day of October, 0 October 0? J took a @ee' 'lying the PasayD+aftD 9uneta route, arried in school #Adamson &niersity% at K30 in the morning. (e 'roceeded 'roceed ed to see olores 5iera, a godsister who worked in the


>?>

treasurer-s office of the uniersity to ask the latter to ty'e a term 'a'e r which was due that day. da y. After submitting the term 'a'er, he treated his godsister to lunch. Around 03?? o-clock in the afternoon, he went home. Mrs. +eresita +eresita Castro-s testimony doetails with her son elfin-s saying that at around 013>? P.M. P.M. on 7 October 0
)))

)))


>?7

:rom the said decision sentencing him to suffer the 'enalty of reclusion 'er'etua and indemnify the ictim in the amount of P1?,???.?? by way of damages, the accused a''ealed to this Court 'ointing out the following alleged errors3 0.

there is no ra'e because 

a.

the hym hymen of of the the ictim wa was no not la lacerated ated..

b.

the ictim was allegedly standing while the crime was being committed.

c.

the ictim is still a irgin.

1.

reli relian ance ce on on the the conf confli lict ctin ingg test testim imony ony of the the ict ictim im and not not that that of the the acc accus used ed..

A recent decision of this Court in a case of statutory ra'e obsered that, u sually, the aerage adult-s hymen measures 1.K to > centimeters in diameter, making it com'atible with, or easily 'enetrable by an aerage si;e 'enis. +he ictim being of tender age, the 'enetration of the male organ could go only as dee' as the labia. In any case, for ra'e to be committed, full 'enetration is not re!uired. It is enough that there is 'roof of entrance of the male organ o rgan within the labia or 'udendum of the female organ. 8en the slightest 'enetration is sufficient sufficient to consummate the crime of ra'e. 01 Perfect 'enetration, ru'ture of the hymen or o r laceration of the agina are not n ot essential for the offense of consummated ra'e. 8ntry, to the least e)tent, of the labia or li's of the female o rgan is sufficient. 0> iana-s remaining a irgin does not negate ra'e. 4e)ual intercourse in a standing 'osition, while 'erha's uncomfortable, is not im'robable. +he 5+C 5+C decision e)'lained3 . . . :or her account that she was made to stand on the toilet bowl made it easy for the accused to do the act as she was too small and their 'riate 'arts would not align unless she was eleated to a higher 'osition. +he suggestion of the defense counsel co unsel that a finger could hae been used is absurd. :or if it were only a finger there would hae been no need to let iana stand on the toilet bowl.. . . 07 +he 4olicitor 6eneral-s brief, in turn, asserts that the 'osition iana was forced to take, made it easier for a''ellant to accom'lish insertion of his organ than if iana had been made to lie down. 0 8)'erience has shown that unfounded charges of ra'e hae fre!uently been 'roffered by women actuated by some sinister, ulterior or undisclosed motie. Conictions in such cases should not be sustained without clear and conincing 'roof of guilt, 0= considering the graity of the offense and the 'enalty it carries.


>?

On the alleged sinister motie of iana-s grandmother engend ered by eny, we find this incredulous. :or, what grandmother would e)act engeance on her enemies at the 'er'etual humiliation and disre'ute of her si) #=% year old granddaughterG :inally, the issue of credibility. *ho among the contending 'arties is telling the truthG +he 'rosecution-s eidence is sim'le and straightforward. A''ellant-s alibi must fall. Claims of his scholastic achieements, assuming they are releant, were unsubstantiated. (is counsel did not een formally offer the e)hibits attesting to his enrollment at Adamson &niersity where he was su''osed to hae submitted in the morning of 7 October 0?,???.?? in line with 'reailing @uris'rudence. People v. Atento

Asked how she felt while she was being ra'ed, the com'lainant re'lied3 "Masara'." +he trial @udge belieed her but @ust the same conicted the accusedDa''ellant. +he case is now before us. +he com'lainant is 6lenda Aringo, who was si)teen years old at the time of the alleged offense. 4he is the neighbor of Cesar Atento, the herein accusedDa''ellant, a >

>?=

6lenda s'eaks of four other times when he ra'ed her. It was later #'resumably because her hymen had healed% that she felt tickled by his manhood and described the act of coitus as "masara'."0 +he girl says she neer told anybody about Atento-s attacks on her because he had threatened her life. But she could not conceal her condition for long and after fie months had to admit she was 'regnant. 4he reealed the accusedDa''ellant as the father of the foetus in her womb. +he child was deliered on ecember 1J, 0> of the 5eised Penal Code 'roides3


>?J

Art. >>. *hen and how ra'e committed. HH 5a'e is committed by haing carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances3 0.


1.

*hen the woman is de'ried of reason or otherwise unconscious and

>. *hen the woman is under twele years of age, een though neither of the circumstances mentioned in the two ne)t 'receding 'aragra'hs shall be 'resent. )))

)))

)))

It has not been clearly established that Atento em'loyed force or threat against 6lenda to make her submit to his lust. eertheless, there is no !uestion that Atento is guilty of ra'e u'on 6lenda under 'aragra'h 1, because the girl was de'ried of reason. Alternatiely, he is liable under 'aragra'h >, because his ictim had the mentality of a girl less than twele years old at the time she was ra'ed. In Peo'le . Atutubo,> this Court held3 It is not necessary under Article >> for the cul'rit to actually de'rie the ictim of reason 'rior to the ra'e, as by the administration of drugs or by some other illicit method. Ms 'roision also a''lies to cases where the woman has been earlier de'ried of reason by other causes, as when she is congenitally retarded or has 'reiously suffered some traumatic e)'erience that has lowered her mental ca'acity. In such situations, the ictim is in the same category as a child below 01 years of age for lacking the necessary will to ob@ect to the attacker-s lewd intentions. In Peo'le . Palma,7 where a 07Dyear old mental retardate was an other ra'e ictim, we held that3 +he crime committed by Palma is ra'e under Article >>#1% of the 5eised Penal Code.0Yw'hi0 Co'ulation with a woman known to be mentally inca'able of giing een an im'erfect consent is ra'e. Physical intimidation need not 'recede se)ual intercourse considering the age, mental abnormality and deficiency of the com'lainant. 4o also in Peo'le . 4unga, where the offended 'arty was 1> years old with the mentality of a child about K to < years of age3 Because of her mental condition, com'lainant is inca'able of giing consent to the se)ual intercourse. 4he is in the same class as a woman de'ried of reason or otherwise unconscious. A''ellant therefore committed ra'e in haing se)ual intercourse with her. In his authoritatie work on Criminal 9aw, Chief Fustice A!uino e)'lains Paragra'h 1 as follows.=


>?K

. . . in the ra'e of a woman de'ried of reason or unconscious, the ictim has no will. +he absence of will determines the e)istence of the ra'e. 4uch lack of will may e)ist not only when the ictim is unconscious or totally de'ried of reason, but also when she is suffering some mental deficiency im'airing her reason or free will. In that case, it is not necessary that she should offer real o''osition or constant resistance to the se)ual intercourse. Carnal knowledge of a woman so weak in intellect as to be inca'able of legal consent constitutes ra'e. *here the offended woman was feebleDminded, sickly and almost an idiot, se)ual intercourse with her is ra'e. (er failure to offer resistance to the act did not mean consent for she was inca'able of giing any rational consent. +he de'riation of reason need not be com'lete. Mental abnormality or deficiency is enough. Cohabitation with a feebleDminded, idiotic woman is ra'e. +he trial court, howeer, held Atento guilty of ra'e under Paragra'h >, citing Peo'le . Asturias,J where it was held3 Assuming that com'lainant $ilma Ortega oluntarily submitted herself to the bestial desire of a''ellant still the crime committed is ra'e under 'aragra'h > of Article >> of the 5eised Penal Code. +his is so een if the circumstances of force and intimidation, or of the ictim being de'ried of reason or otherwise unconscious are absent. +he ictim has the mentality of a child below seen years old. If se)ual intercourse with a ictim under twele years of age is ra'e, then it should follow that carnal knowledge with a seenteenDyear old girl whose mental ca'acity is that of a seen year old child would constitute ra'e. In coming to his conclusion, Fudge 6regorio A. Consulta declared3 . . . 6ien the low I.R. of 6lenda, it is im'ossible to beliee that she could hae fabricated her charges against the accused. 4he lacks the gift of articulation and inentieness. 4he could not een e)'lain with ease the meaning of ra'e, a term which she learned in the community. 8en with intensie coaching, assuming that ha''ened, on the witness stand where she was alone, it would show with her testimony falling into irretrieable 'ieces. But that did n ot ha''en. 4he 'roceeded, though with much difficulty, with childlike innocence. A smart and 'ers'icacious 'erson would hesitate to describe to the Court her se)ual e)'eriences as "tickling" and "masara'" for that would only elicit disdain and laughter. Only a sim'leDminded artless child would do it. And 6lenda falls within the leel of a of Article >> of the 5eised Penal Code, the accusedDa''ellant deseres to be 'unished for the ra'e of 6lenda A;ingo. +he trial court found the accusedDa''ellant guilty of ra'e as charged, meaning that he ra'ed the ictim fie times, but we do not agree that the other four ra'es hae been conclusiely 'roen. Otherwise, he would hae to be 'unished for fie se'arate ra'es. 8)ce't for this and the ciil indemnity, which is increased from P1?,???.?? to P>?,???.??, we agree with the sentence


>?<

im'osing on him the 'enalty of reclusion 'er'etua, the obligation to acknowledge and su''ort (ubert Buendia Aringo as his own s'urious child, and to 'ay the costs. *(858:O58, the a''ealed @udgment is A::I5M8 as aboe modified. People v. 2allo

+he 'enalty of death im'osed u'on accusedDa''ellant 5omeo 6allo y Igloso by the 5egional +rial Court, Branch =K, of Binangonan, 5i;al, after finding him gu ilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of !ualified ra'e, was affirmed by this Court in its decision 'romulgated on 11 Fanuary 0< year old girl, Marites 6allo y 4egoia. > +he aboe indictment has not s'ecifically alleged that accusedDa''ellant is the ictim-s father2 accordingly, accusedDa''ellant-s relationshi' to the ictim, although 'roen during the trial, cannot be considered to be a !ualifying circumstance. 7 +he ne)t crucial 'oint is whether the Court must now a''ly retroactiely the 6arcia doctrine to the coniction of accusedDa''ellant. +he Court has had the o''ortunity to declare in a long line of cases that the tribunal retains control oer a case until the full satisfaction of the final @udgment conformably with established legal 'rocesses. It has the authority to sus'end the e)ecution of a final @udgment or to cause a modification thereof as and when it becomes im'eratie in the higher interest of @ustice or when su'erening eents warrant it. 


>0?

+he doctrine declared in Peo'le s. 6arcia, and its reiteration in Peo'le s. 5amos, = Peo'le s. Ilao, J and Peo'le s. Medina, K came only after almost a year from the 'romulgation of the instant case. +he Office of the 4olicitor 6eneral, when re!uested to comment on the aforesaid 17th August 0<<< motion of accusedDa''ellant, had this to state3 Fudicial decisions a''lying or inter'reting the law or the Constitution shall form 'art of the legal system of the land #Article K, Ciil Code of the Phili''ines%. Medina, which has the force and effect of law, forms 'art of our 'enal statutes and assumes retroactie effect, being as it is, faorable to an accused who is not a habitual criminal, and notwithstanding that final sentence has already been 'ronounced against him #Article 11, 5eised Penal Code%. Indeed, by o'eration of law, a''ellant is rightfully entitled to the beneficial a''lication of Medina. Accordingly, the Office of the 4olicitor 6eneral hereby @oins a''ellant-s 'rayer for reduction of his sentence from death to reclusion 'er'etua. +he Court agrees with the Office of the 4olicitor 6eneral in its aboe obserations and sees merit in its stand to @oin accusedDa''ellant in 'raying for a modification of the sentence from death to reclusion 'er'etua. *(858:O58, the motion to reDo'en the case is 65A+8 and the decision sought to be reconsidered is MOI:I8 by im'osing on accusedDa''ellant the ' enalty of reclusion 'er'etua in lieu of the death 'enalty and ordering him to indemnify the ictim the amount of P?,???.??. People v. 0erana

In this sordid tale of defloration, a man is saed from the gallows for failure of the 'rosecution to adduce clear and 'ositie 'roof of his relationshi' with the com'lainant. Before us on automatic reiew is a decision rendered by the 5egional +rial Court of aga City, Branch 1, im'osing the su'reme 'enalty of death on herein accusedDa''ellant, 5aul Berana y 6uearra for the crime of ra'e. 0 +he facts of the case are as follows3 On Fune 1, 0<<7 at around 13?? o-clock in the morning, 07Dyear old Maria 8lena Farcia was slee'ing with her fourDyear old niece in one of the two rooms in a house her family was renting at Bayawas 4treet, aga City when she was awakened by her brotherDinDlaw, herein accusedD a''ellant, 5aul Berana. Com'lainant recogni;ed him because light was filtering in from a nearby window. Berana 'ointed a "buntot 'age" at her neck and warned her not to make any noise, otherwise she would be killed.0Yw'hi0.nZt +he terrified girl was made to lie down while accusedDa''ellant raised her duster and 'roceeded to remoe her shorts and her underwear, after which he mashed her breasts and lay on to' of her.


>00

+he ha'less girl was again threatened not to make any noise otherwise he would kill her. Com'lainant tried to coer her breasts with her arms but accusedDa''ellant 'ushed her arms aside. As he inserted his organ into her womanhood, 8lena felt e)cruciating 'ain. (e began kissing her and made seeral 'ush and 'ull moements, after which, the ictim felt something li!uid in her organ. AccusedDa''ellant sat down and warned her not to talk to anyone about the incident. (is bestial lust not haing been satisfied, accusedDa''ellant lay o n to' of her for the second time, fondled her breasts and made 'ush and 'ull moements. At around 13>? o-clock in the morning, accusedDa''ellant left after warning her that only the two of them must know about the incident. uring the entire time that the accusedDa''ellant was ra'ing her, the 'oor girl was wee'ing and trembling with fear because he re'eated his threats to kill her should she make any noise. Com'lainant, before haing identified in court 8)hibit A as the "buntot 'age" used by accusedD a''ellant, described it as "long with some 'rotruding 'arts and with long and 'ointed ti'." 1 After the accusedDa''ellant left, 8lena 'ut on her clothes and went to the ad@acent room to re'ort the incident to her sister, Ma. Ana. *hen Ana heard the grim story, she lost no time in hurrying to Camaligan, Camarines 4ur where their 'arents, haing been inited to a birthday 'arty of a relatie, had stayed oernight. On the same day, their mother fetched 8lena and accom'anied her to the Proincial (os'ital for medical e)amination. +he medical e)amination conducted reealed the following findings3 P.8. $agina admits one finger #% (ymenal 9aceration at =3?? o-clock and < o-clock 'ositions 6ram 4taining 5esult3  gram #% bacilli \ many  'us cells \ few  e'ithelial cells \ many O+836ram stains smear shows 'resence of s'ermato;oa > After haing been e)amined, 8lena and her mother 'roceeded to the 4abang Police station in aga City to re'ort the incident. +hereafter, accusedDa''ellant a''rehended by the 'olice. On Fune >, 0<<7, an information was filed before the 5egional +rial Court of aga City, Branch 1, against accusedDa''ellant for the crime of ra'e, allegedly committed as follows3 +hat on or about Fune 1, 0<<7, in the city of aga, Phili''ines, and within the @urisdiction of this (onorable Court, the aboenamed accused by means of force, did then and there willfully,


>01

unlawfully and feloniously, hae se)ual intercourse with the herein com'laining witness, MA5IA 898A FA5CIA S 89O4 MA5+I8V, a minor, 07 years of age. CO+5A5S +O 9A*. On Fune =, 0<<7, an amended information was filed against accusedDa''ellant which reads3 +hat on or about Fune 1, 0<<7, in the City of aga, Phili''ines and within the @urisdiction of this (onorable Court, the aboenamed accused, a relatie of the offended 'arty within the third ciil degree, by means of force and intimidation, did there and then, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously hae se)ual intercourse with herein com'laining witness MA5IA 898A FA5CIA S 8 9O4 MA5+I8V, a minor, 07 years of age, to her damage and 're@udice. CO+5A5S +O 9A*. &'on arraignment, accusedDa''ellant entered a 'lea of not guilty. On October 01, 0<<7, the 'rosecution again sought the amendment of the information filed in accordance with the mandate of 4ection , 5ule 00? of the 5eised 5ules on Criminal Procedure relating to de oficio offenses which re!uire the offended 'arty-s e)'ress conformity to the filing of the information. On October 0J, 0<<7, accusedDa''ellant entered a 'lea of not guilty to the reDamended information. AccusedDa''ellant does not deny haing se)ual intercourse with the com'lainant but, howeer, maintains that 8lena consented to it. According to accusedDa''ellant, at around 0 3>? o-clock in the morning of Fune 1, 0<<7, he had difficulty slee'ing, so he took a walk and decided to isit his daughter at the house in Bayawas 4treet. *hen he arried at the said 'lace, he sat on the stairs at the rear of the house. *hile seated, he heard someone calling, "Mama." (e recogni;ed the oice as 8lena-s so he answered, "+his is not your mama, this is your manoy," 7 On hearing these words, com'lainant o'ened the door and a''roached accusedDa''ellant to ask him where her mother was, whereu'on, accusedDa''ellant told her that her 'arents might not return home because her father got drunk at a birthday 'arty of a relatie in Camaligan. (e then asked 8lena if his daughter was already aslee'. &'on haing been informed that his daughter had @ust fallen aslee', accusedDa''ellant bade 8lena goodbye but the girl, inited him to stay for the night so that he could kee' watch oer her and his daughter. AccusedDa''ellant acce'ted her initation since he was ery tired. *hen he entered the room, 8lena followed him and locked the door. 4eeing his daughter slee'ing soundly on a mat, he 'icked her u' and moed her away from the middle to the left side so as not to disturb her. 8lena turned off the light from the gas lam' and lifted the mos!uito net to 're'are for bed. At this 'oint, she reminded the accusedDa''ellant of the sum of money which she had been asking him some time. *hen told that he had no money, com'lainant allegedly started to caress and embrace accusedDa''ellant while at the same time insisting that he gie her the money. *hen he reiterated that he had no money, com'lainant took hold of his hand and 'laced it on her


>0>

breast. Com'lainant allegedly was wearing only an undershirt and 'anty at the time. AccusedD a''ellant, feeling "hot", decided, and succeeded in haing se) with her. uring the se)ual intercourse, 8lena told him, "It is 'ainful, manoy." but accusedDa''ellant tried to assuage the 'ain, saying that it is 'ainful only during the first time.  Afterwards, accusedDa''ellant sat beside 8lena and engaged her in conersation. 8lena allegedly asked him to hel' her when she com'letes high school. *hen accusedDa''ellant 'romised to hel' h er on condition that she will be serious in her studies, 8lena rose from her lying 'osition and embraced him. (e kissed her on the li's, touched her breasts and asked her again for se). Com'lainant allegedly smiled and told him, "+o my sister, you could do it only one #sic% but to me you will make it two," = +hey had se) for the second time in the early morning of Fune 1, 0<<7. AccusedDa''ellant left the room at around 13>? o-clock in the morning. *hile answering a call of nature near a santol tree outside the house, he heard Ma. Ana ask 8lena, "*hat did your manoy do to youG", to which the latter answered, "one, none." AccusedDa''ellant heard nothing more as he decided to go on his way. J AccusedDa''ellant narrated that 'rior to the incident, or s'ecifically on ecember 0<<>, he was alone in the same room, reading an adult maga;ine when 8lena arried. 4he saw what he was reading and remarked that she had read the same maga;ine also. 8mbarassed, accusedDa''ellant turned away and went near the window to continue his reading. Com'lainant, in the meantime, remoed her school uniform leaing only her "sando" and her 'anty on. 4he a''roached accusedDa''ellant and told him of the interesting 'arts in the maga;ine. *hen he told her that he had already seen them and was @ust reiewing the maga;ine, she told him, "Manoy, there are 'arts there which are beautiful." (e then showed her the adult maga;ine and asked her to 'oint out where these were. 8lena 'laced her arms on his shoulders as she obliged him. *hen she embraced him, accusedDa''ellant res'onded by embracing her back. (e felt "hot" and 'laced his hand on her cheek then began touching her breast also. (oweer, she turned her li's away so he ended kissing her cheek instead. 8lena res'onded by kissing his cheek in turn. AccusedD a''ellant, this time, kissed her li's and touched her breasts. +hey moed away from the window to aoid unwitting oyeurs. 4omebody soon arried and interru'ted them so 8lena became flustered and accusedDa''ellant left. +hey maintained no relationshi' after the incident. +he trial court did not gie credence to the testimony of accusedDa''ellant and on oember 1J, 0<<, rendered a decision, the dis'ositie 'ortion of which reads as follows3 P58MI484 CO4I858, this court finds accusedDa''ellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of ra'e defined and 'unishable under the 'roisions of Article >> of the 5eised Penal Code, as amended by 5e'ublic Act o. J=< which 'roides3 +he death 'enalty shall be im'osed when the crime of ra'e is committed with any of the following circumstances3 0. *hen the ictim is under eighteen #0K% years of age and the offender is a . . . relatie by consanguinity or affinity within the third ciil degree. +he accused being the husband of the ictim-s sister, is related by affinity to his ictim within the third ciil degree, the court hereby im'oses u'on 5aul Berana 6uearra to suffer 8A+(


>07

P8A9+S, to 'ay Ma. 8lena M. Farcia, the amount of P?,???.?? by way of damages and to 'ay the costs. In this automatic reiew of the decision rendered b y the trial court, accusedDa''ellant raises the following issues3 I. +he trial court erred when it conicted herein accusedDa''ellant des'ite the absence of any clear and conincing eidence demonstrating the alleged use of force. II. +he trial court erred when it conicted herein accusedDa''ellant des'ite serious la'ses and material inconsistencies in the testimony of the 'riate com'lainant. III. +he trial court erred when it conicted herein accusedDa''ellant des'ite the 'rosecution-s failure to adduce clear 'roof of all the attendant !ualifying circumstances of the crime charged. I$. +he trial court erred when it conicted herein accusedDa''ellant based on a mis'laced conclusion that herein accusedDa''ellant allegedly admitted committing the offense charged. *e shall deal with the issues raised seriatim. 5egarding the first issue, accusedDa''ellant contends that the trial court-s finding that he had forcible se)ual intercourse with the com'lainant was based solely on the results of the medical e)amination conducted by the 'rosecution-s witness, r. (umilde Fanaban on 8lena. In su''ort of his contention, a''ellant cites the following e)cer't from the trial court-s decision3 A careful 'erusal of the eidence adduced during the trials conducted in this case, show that the medical certificate of Fune 1, 0<<7 which was identified by ra. Ma. (umilde B. Fanaban, showing that the ictim, 'riate com'lainant Ma. 8lena M. Farcia suffered "(ymenal laceration at =3?? o-clock and <3?? o-clock 'ositions in her 'riate 'art which could hae been caused by se)ual intercourse andUor by the interention of a blunt ob@ect by thrusting and then 'ulling then thrusting again of a hard blunt ob@ect and the 'resence of s'ermato;oa confirms the testimony of Ma. 8lena Farcia that she was se)ually molested makes such testimony credible. +o the mind of the court this sicN findings are significant to the effect that se)ual intercourse was inoluntary or through threat and duress. +he absence of any kind of e)ternal in@ury in the body of the ictim other than those found in her organ is of no conse!uence. AccusedDa''ellant alleges that 8lena encouraged his adances and the se)ual intercourse was consensual. (e asserts that while the hymenal laceration and the 'resence of s'ermato;oa 'roe the fact of se)ual intercourse, they do not i'so facto 'roe that such act was committed by means of force, in line with our 'ronouncement in Peo'le s. 6odoy K that, "8en granting e) gratia argumenti that the medical re'ort and the laceration corroborated the com'lainant-s assertion that there was se)ual intercourse, of course the same cannot be said as to the alleged use of force. It has been held that such corroboratie eidence is not considered sufficient, since 'roof of facts constituting one element of the crime is not corroboratie 'roof of facts necessary to constitute another e!ually im'ortant element of the crime.


>0

AccusedDa''ellant-s contention is mis'laced. +he trial court-s finding of ra'e in the case at bar, was not based solely on the medical findings showing hymenal laceration and the 'resence of s'ermato;oa in the ictim-s organ. *hile the e)cer't !uoted by the accusedDa''ellant from the !uestioned decision gies the im'ression that the trial court considered the hymenal laceration and the 'resence of s'ermato;oa in the ictim-s organ as 'roof of forcible se)ual intercourse, the decision read in its entirety shows otherwise. +he trial court merely considered the medical findings as corroboratie eidence for the com'lainant-s testimony that ac cusedDa''ellant had se)ual intercourse with her. Com'lainant was forced to accede to accusedDa''ellant-s adances because he 'oked a "buntot 'age" at her neck and threatened to kill her should she make any noise. *ith such re'eated threats, the ha'less girl eentually broke down and cried. AccusedDa''ellant maintains, howeer, that com'lainant-s testimony is too full of material inconsistencies to desere belief. :or instance, although com'lainant a lleged that she bled after the coitus, the medical e)amination reealed otherwise2 com'lainant-s testimony in court that accusedDa''ellant asked her for se) a second time belies her allegation that accusedDa''ellant forced himself on her2 com'lainant- s statement in her affidait that accusedDa''ellant was armed with a blunt instrument is materially different from her testimony in court that accusedDa''ellant carried with him a "buntot 'age". AccusedDa''ellant-s assertion that the medical record is bereft of any 'roofUcorroborating com'lainant-s testimony that she bled after she was ra'ed hardly merits consideration. +he underwear of the com'lainant which was 'resented and admitted in court as eidence bore traces of blood. < Moreoer, the absence of any sign of 'hysical bleeding on the 'art of the com'lainant does not necessarily mean there was no forcible se)ual intercourse. :or one thing, com'lainant was threatened with a "buntot 'age" 'oked at her neck at that time. +hen too, accusedDa''ellant-s threat was sufficient enough to intimidate a young girl of 07 to force her to submit to his baser instincts. It must be noted that 'roof of e)ternal in@uries inflicted on the com'lainant is not indis'ensable in a 'rosecution for ra'e committed with force or iolence. +he law does not im'ose u'on a ra'e ictim the burden of 'roing resistance. Physical resistance need not be established in ra'e cases when intimidation is e)ercised u'on her and she submits herself against her will to the ra'ist-s lust because of fear for life and 'ersonal safety. 0? *hen a woman testifies that she was ra'ed, she says in effect all that is necessary to show that said crime has been committed. AccusedDa''ellant, howeer, would hae us beliee that the se)ual intercourse was consensual since com'lainant herself testified during trial that he asked her for se) a second time during the night in !uestion. *hile com'lainant did state during trial that, "After the first incident, he sat down and he again asked me to gie him for the second time," 00 com'lainant also stated that she was then crying and trembling with fear. Considering the continuing threat on her life if she makes an outcry, com'lainant had no choice but to accede to the desire of accusedDa''ellant. +hat he asked her for se) does not necessarily im'ly that she gae her consent when he succeeded in raishing her again. It is indeed 're'osterous that a young woman, untrained in the ways of the world and of men would initiate and encourage his adances, as accusedDa''ellant claims, considering es'ecially that he is the husband of her older sister.


>0=

AccusedDa''ellant neertheless insists that com'lainant-s testimony does not merit credence because of inconsistencies in her statement regarding the wea'on used by the accusedDa''ellant to threaten her on the night of the incident. *e are not unaware that com'lainant stated in her affidait that accusedDa''ellant was armed with a blunt instrument in contrast with her testimony in court that accusedDa''ellant was armed with a "buntot 'age." It must be borne in mind, howeer, that discre'ancies between an affidait and testimony in court occur more often than not since an affidait is not 're'ared by the affiant herself but by another who uses his own language in writing the affiant-s statement. It might not be amiss to note, at this 'oint, that the instrument which was submitted by com'lainant to the 'olice and later identified in court as the "buntot 'age" used by the accusedDa''ellant was described by the Chief of Police in his letter to the 'rosecutor as "one #0% blunt instrument with black handle. 01 In the case of Peo'le s. 8m'leo 0>, we had occasion to state that, "the contradiction between the affidait and the testimony of the witness may be e)'lained by the fact that an affidait will not always disclose all the facts and will oftentimes and without design incorrectly describe, without the de'onent detecting it, some of the occurrences narrated." *e find merit, howeer, in accusedDa''ellant-s contention that the 'rosecution failed to adduce clear and 'ositie 'roof of the !ualifying circumstance of relationshi' between accusedDa''ellant and com'lainant. It should be noted that the relationshi' between accusedDa''ellant and the com'lainant !ualifies the crime from ra'e 'unishable by reclusion 'er'etua to ra'e 'unishable by death under 5e'ublic Act o. J=<. &nder Article >> of the 5eised Penal Code as amended by 5.A. o. J=<, the death 'enalty shall be im'osed if the crime of ra'e is committed with any of the following attendant circumstances3 )))

)))

)))

0. *hen the ictim is under eighteen #0K% years of age and the offender is a 'arent, ascendant, ste'D'arent, guardian, relatie by consanguinity or affinity within the third ciil degree, or the common law s'ouse of the 'arent of the ictim. Affinity is defined as "the relation which one s'ouse because of marriage has to blood relaties of the other. +he connection e)isting, in conse!uence of marriage between each of the married 'ersons and the kindred of the other. +he doctrine of affinity grows out of the canonical ma)im that marriage makes husband and wife one. +he husband has the same relation by affinity to his wife-s blood relaties as she has by consanguinity and ice ersa. 07 Conse!uently, to effectiely 'rosecute accuseDa''ellant for the crime of ra'e committed by a relatie by affinity within the third ciil degree, it must be established that a% h e is legally married to com'lainant-s sister and b% com'lainant and accusedDa''ellant-s wife are full or half blood siblings. +he 'rosecution tried to established the relationshi' of accusedDa''ellant to the com'lainant by asking her the following during trial3 )))

)))

)))


>0J

R3

By the way, do you know the accused in this case by the name of 5aulG

A3

Ses, I know him, sir.

R3

*hy do you know himG

A3

(e is the husband of my sister. 0

Com'lainant- s mother also testified3 )))

)))

)))

R3

o you know the accused in this case, 5aul Berana y 6uearraG

A3

Ses, I know him, sir.

R3

*hy do you know himG

A3

Because he is the husband of my daughter.

R3

*hose name is thatG

A3

5osa Farcia, sir. 0=

Based on aboementioned testimonies, as well as accusedDa''ellant-s letter to the com'lainant-s 'arent-s addressing them as "mama at 'a'a" and his use of 'hrase, "ang inyong manugang, 5aul" 0J the trial court conicted him of the crime of ra'e committed by a relatie by affinity within the third ciil degree, under the 'roisions of Article >> of the 5eised Penal Code, as amended by 5e'ublic Act. o. J=<. Considering that the relationshi' of accusedDa''ellant to com'lainant !ualifies the crime of ra'e 'unishable by reclusion 'er'etua to ra'e 'unishable by death, it is but 'ro'er that a more stringent 'roof of relationshi' between the offender and the offended 'arty must be established by the 'rosecution. Corollarily, a clearer 'roof of relationshi' between the com'lainant and the s'ouse of accusedDa''ellant must be 'resented. +he relationshi' of ac cusedDa''ellant and the com'lainant is not ade!uately substantiated since it is merely based on testimony of the com'lainant, her mother-s testimony and the accusedDa''ellant-s use of the words, "mama at 'a'a" in his letters. eedless to say, the eidence 'resented are not sufficient to dis'el doubts about the true relationshi' of accusedDa''ellant and the com'lainant, to the benefit of which the accused is entitled. *here the life of an accusedDa''ellant hangs in the balance, a more e)acting 'roof must be adduced. AccusedDa''ellant, in his last submission, insists that the trial court erred in conicting him based solely on a mis'laced conclusion that he admitted the offense charged based on the four #7% letters he sent to the 'arents of the com'lainant, one of which states3


>0K

Ma, Pa, 'atawarin niyo na ako, alam ko na hindi niyo bastaDbasta ma'a'atawad ang nagawa ko 'ero 'aano naman 'o ang kinabukasan nang mga a'o at anak ko. 0K AccusedDa''ellant asserts that the letters, in no way, indicate an admission of guilt on his 'art. In su''ort of his contention, accusedDa''ellant cites the case of &nited 4tates s. Ma!ui 0< where it was held that an accused may show that an offer of com'romise on his 'art was not made under a consciousness of guilt but merely to aoid the inconenience of im'risonment or for some other reason which would @ustify a claim by the accused that an offer to com'romise was not in truth an admission of his guilt and an attem't to aoid the legal conse!uences which would ordinarily therefrom. *e are not coninced. +he tenor of the letters sent by the accusedDa''ellant to the 'arents of the com'lainant, while not e)'licitly admitting the forcible se)ual intercourse, could hardly be considered an admission made merely to aoid the inconenience of im'risonment. Consider the following e)cer'ts3 Mama at Pa'a, Masakit man sa inyo ang nagawa ko. Pero nagsasabi ako sa inyo ng totoo. ang magana' ang insidenteng iyon. *ala ako sa sarili kong 'agkatao. At wala akong matandaan sa nangyari #sic% 1? And )))

)))

)))

Ma, 'a, hindi ko kayo sinusumbatan. ahil wala naman 'o akong da'at isumbat sa inyo. a'akabait niyo sa kain. 8wan ko nga lang kung bakit ko nagawa iyon. Eun g totoo talagang ako nasa sarili kong 'agkatao. 10 es'ite his claim that com'lainant initiated and consented to the se)ual intercourse, accusedD a''ellant in his letters neer made mention of this fact but has, instead, unceasingly asked for forgieness from the 'arents of the com'lainant, short of admitting categorically the offense charged. Clearly, the unsolicited letters of the accusedDa''ellant cannot be construed as an offer of com'romise to aoid the inconenience of im'risonment but a 'lea of mercy to sae him from the gallows. In iew of the fact that relationshi' between accusedDa''ellant and the com'lainant was not 'ro'erly established, we are constrained to reduce the 'enalty im'osed by the lower court from death to reclusion 'er'etua. AccusedDa''ellant is, howeer, ordered to 'ay ciil indemnity e) delicto in the amount of P?,??? and the P?,??? im'osed by the lower court shall constitute moral damages. +he fact that the com'lainant has suffered the trauma of mental, 'hysical and 'sychological suffering which constitutes the bases for moral damages is too obious to still re!uire the recital thereof at the trial by the ictim since the court itself assumes and een acknowledges such agony on her 'art as gauge of her credibility. 11


>0<

*(858:O58, the decision of the 5egional +rial Court of aga City, Branch 1, finding accusedDa''ellant 5aul Berana y 6uearra guilty beyond reasonable doubt of ra'e is A::I5M8 with the modification that accusedDa''ellant is sentenced to suffer the 'enalty of reclusion 'er'etua. AccusedDa''ellant is ordered to 'ay com'lainant Ma. 8lena M. Farcia the sum of P?,??? by way of ciil indemnity and P?,??? as moral damages. People v. Optana

7 information for the iolation of the sec.  5AJ=0? #4'ecial Protection of Children against Child Abuse% and 7 informations for ra'e were filed against the accused. '*$): +he 4C affirms the decision of the trial court conicting the accused for one incident of

ra'e, sentencing him to reclusion 'er'etua and one charge iolating 5A J=0?, sentencing him to suffer Kyrs and 0 day of 'rison mayor as minimum to 0J yrs. and 7mos of reclusion tem'oral as ma)imum. +he other informations failed to be 'roen beyond reasonable doubt. 9ikewise, charging the accused with two different offenses for the same act committed on the same date against the same ictim is erroneous and illegal e)ce't where the law itself so allows. +his is not allowed by 5AJ=0?. It s'ecifically 'roides that in instances where the ictim is under 01, the case should fall under art. >> of the 5PC, thus only cases where the ictim is oer 01 but under 0K can fall under this law. In the case at bar, where the accused was charged for seeral occasions of ra'e and abuse the coniction or ac!uittal on the informations was based on the age of the child, the conce't of nonDmulti'licity of suits, and the eidence 'resented. +hus, only one ra'e case 'ros'ered #incident when the child was below 01% and one iolation of 5AJ=0? #when the child was aboe 01 but below 0K%. Original: &'on a sworn com'laint filed by Maria 5i;alina Onciano on oember 1K, 0<<, four

#7% Informations for iolation of 4ection  of 5e'ublic Act o. J=0?, or known as the 4'ecial Protection of Children Against Child Abuse and four #7% Informations for 5a'e were filed against herein accusedDa''ellant eolito O'tana committed as follows3 0. Criminal Case o. 7K1D< for ra'e3 +hat on or about the 1Kth day of October, 0<< at 4itio aan augsul, Brgy. Mangan $aca, in the Munici'ality of 4ubic, Proince of Vambales, Phili''ines, and within the @urisdiction of this (onorable Court, the said accused, actuated by lust and by means of force, intimidation and threats, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously, hae carnal knowledge with his ste'daughter one 5i;alina Onsiano, a girl of 0> years old and ten #0?% months, against her will and consent, to the damage and 're@udice of the latter. 1. Criminal Case o. 7K>D< for ra'e3 +hat on or about and during the month of October 0<<>, at 4itio aan augsol, Brgy. Mangan $aca, in the Munici'ality of 4ubic, Proince of Vambales, Phili''ines, and within the @urisdiction of this (onorable Court, the said accused, actuated by lust and by means of force, intimidation and threats, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously, hae carnal


>1?

knowledge with his ste'daughter one 5i;alina Onsiano, a girl of 00 years old and ten #0?% months, against her will and consent, to the damage and 're@udice of the latter. >. Criminal Case o. 7K7D< for ra'e3 +hat on or about the month of 4e'tember, 0<< at 4itio aan augsul, Brgy. Mangan $aca, in the Munici'ality of 4ubic, Proince of Vambales, Phili''ines, and within the @urisdiction of this (onorable Court, the said accused, actuated by lust and by means of force, intimidation and threats, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously, hae carnal knowledge with his ste'daughter one 5i;alina Onsiano, a girl of 0> years old and nine #<% months, against her will and consent, to the damage and 're@udice of the latter. Criminal Case o.7KD< for ra'e3 +hat on or about and during the month of 4e'tember 0<<>, at 4itio aan augsol, Brgy. Mangan $aca, in the Munici'ality of 4ubic. Proince of Vambales, Phili''ines, and within the @urisdiction of this (onorable Court, the said accused, actuated by lust and by means of force, intimidation and threats, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously hae carnal knowledge with his ste'daughter one 5i;alina Onsiano, a girl of 00 years old and nine #<% months, against her will and consent, to the damage and 're@udice of the latter. . Criminal Case o. 7K=D< for $iol. Of 4ec. #b% A5+. III of 5e'ublic Act J=0? #Child Abuse%3 +hat on or about and during the month of 4e'tember, 0<<>, at 4itio aan augsol, Brgy. Mangan $aca, in the Munici'ality of 4ubic, Proince of Vambales. Phili''ines and within the @urisdiction of this (onorable Court, the said accused with lewd design, and by means of intimidation, coercion, influence and other consideration #sic%, did then and there willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously hae se)ual intercourse with his ste'daughter one 5i;alina Onsiano, a minor of 00 years old and nine #<% months, to the damage and 're@udice of said 5i;alina Onsiano. =. Criminal Case o. 7KJD< for $iol. Of 4ec. #b% Art. III of 5e'ublic Act J=0? #Child Abuse%3 +hat on or about the 1Kth day of October, 0<< at 4itio aan augsol, Brgy. Mangan $aca, in the Munici'ality of 4ubic, Proince of Vambales, Phili''ines, and within the @urisdiction of this (onorable Court, the said accused with lewd design, and by means of intimidation, coercion, influence and other consideration, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously hae se)ual intercourse with his ste'daughter one 5i;alina Onsiano, a minor of 0> years old and ten #0?% months, to the damage and 're@udice of said 5i;alina Onsiano. J. Criminal Case o. 7KKD< for $iol. Of 4ec. #b% Art. III of 5e'ublic Act J=0? #Child Abuse%3 +hat on or about the month of 4e'tember, 0<< at 4itio aan augsol, Brgy. Mangan $aca, in the Munici'ality of 4ubic, Proince of Vambales, Phili''ines and within the @urisdiction of this (onorable Court, the said accused with lewd design, and by means of intimidation, coercion,


>10

influence and other consideration, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously hae se)ual intercourse with his ste'daughter one 5i;alina Onsiano. K. Criminal Case o. 7K at 4itio aan augsol, Brgy . Mangan $aca, in the Munici'ality of 4ubic, Proince #sic% of Vambales, Phili''ines and within the @urisdiction of this (onorable Court, the said accused with lewd design, and by means of intimidation, coercion, influence and other consideration, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously hae se)ual intercourse with his ste'daughter one 5i;alina Onsiano, a minor of 00 years old and ten #0?% months, to the damage and 're@udice of said 5i;alina Onsiano.0 &'on arraignment, accusedDa''ellant 'leaded not guilty to each of the aboe informations. +he facts are as follows3 Maria 5i;alina Onciano is the daughter of ida A. Onciano who was born on ecember 0>, 0 +hey decided to lie together in 0, Maria 5i;alina was 'laying in the yard with her brothers and sisters when her ste'father called for her to come u' to the room. (er mother was out of the house at that time. &'on entering the room, Maria 5i;alina was ordered to undress but she refused. +he accusedDa''ellant sla''ed her face twice on her cheeks and threatened to bo) her. (e finally succeeded in remoing her clothes. +he accusedDa''ellant kissed Maria 5i;alina on the mouth, on her breast, and on her 'riate 'arts. +hereafter, accusedDa''ellant remoed his shorts, held both hands of Maria 5i;alina and went on to' of her while she was lying on the wooden bed. AccusedDa''ellant inserted his 'enis into the agina of Maria 5i;alina. +he latter felt 'ain in her 'riate 'art and shouted "masakit 'o." AccusedDa''ellant stayed on to' of Maria 5i;alina for about ten #0?% minutes making "downward and u'ward moement" or "'um'ing." AccusedD a''ellant stood u', took a 'iece of cloth from the bed #'amunas% and wi'ed the blood in his se) organ. Afterwhich, he gae the rag to Maria 5i;alina and told her to wi'e her 'riate 'art because there was blood on it. (e told her to dress u' !uickly since Maria 5i;alina- s mother


>11

would arrie shortly. Maria 5i;alina did not tell her mother what ha''ened to her because she was afraid of the accusedDa''ellant. 4he was threatened to be killed once she re'orts the incident. Maria 5i;alina was twele #01% years old at that time of this fateful day. On seeral occasions, wheneer ida Onciano was out of the house since she was busy selling wares in the market, accusedDa''ellant ra'ed Maria 5i;alina. +he ictim could no longer remember how many times she was ra'ed but she 'articularly recalled that on October 1K, 0<<, the accusedDa''ellant ra'ed her inside the room where she and her brothers and sisters were slee'ing. +his was the last time that accusedDa''ellant touched her.= It was on oember 17, 0<< when ida Onciano noticed that Maria 5i;alina-s tummy was !uite 'rotruding while the latter was slee'ing on the floor. Maria 5i;alina at first refused to answer her mother-s in!uisitions but finally reealed that the accusedDa''ellant ra'ed her. +he ne)t day, ida Onciano asked her sister, 8elyn allos to accom'any Maria 5i;alina to the doctor to hae her e)amined. At the Olonga'o City 6eneral (os'ital, r. 9aila Patricio of the Obstetrics and 6ynecology e'artment found Maria 5i;alina to be =DJ months 'regnant. Maria 5i;alina told her that her ste'father re'eatedly ra'ed her. +he Medical 5e'ort reealed the following3 Medical Certification oember 1J, 0<< +O *(OM I+ MA S COC853 +his is to certify that 5IVA9IA O4IAO 07 yUo, of aangbakal, aan augsog 4ubic, Vambales was e)amined and treatedUconfined in this hos'ital onUfrom oember 1, 0<< ))) with the following findings andUor diagnosis3 B58A4+ D 8nlarged, areola >. ) >. cm, no fissures nor hematoma. ABOM8 D :( 10. cm, :(+ DU>=U min. 59R  (ymen not intact, agina admits 1 fingers with ease, Ceri) closed, uneffaced, floating ce'halic.  Pregnancy uterine =DJ months by si;e, not in labor. #46.% 9AI9A 4. PA+5ICIO, M.. Attending PhysicianJ After Maria 5i;alina-s statement was taken at the 'olice station, a formal com'laint was filed against the accusedDa''ellant on oember 1J, 0<<. Considering Maria 5i;alina - s minor age, she was referred to the Munici'al 4ocial *elfare and eelo'ment Office for assistance. Initial interiews reealed that Maria 5i;alina was so confused considering that her mother was 'ressuring her to withdraw the com'laint against the ste'father. It was then recommended that


>1>

Maria 5i;alina be committed to the e'artment of 4ocial *elfare and eelo'ment for 'rotectie custody and 'laced under the care of the 4ubstitute (ome for *omen in 8s'ecially ifficult Circumstances D 4au' 9ugud Center, 4an Ignacio 4ubdiision, Pandan, Angeles City.K On :ebruary 1>, 0<<=, Maria 5i;alina deliered a baby boy at the "(os'ital ing Angeles" in Angeles City whom she named 5ichard Onciano. +he name of the father was not indicated. At the 4au' 9ugud Center, Maria 5i;alina manifested signs of de'ression and iolence to the e)tent of killing herself. 4he was committed to the ational Center for Mental (ealth for treatment and rehabilitation. +he accused, on the other hand, denied haing ra'ed his ste'daughter. (e testified that his ste'daughter was always out of the house with her barkadas. In fact, her mother, ida *as always com'laining that she s'ent so much time looking for her. (e testified further that Maria 5i;alina was always absent from school. (e only learned about the com'laint for ra'e filed against him when he was a''rehended by the 'olice. eolito O'tana testified that he met ida Onciano in 0> of the 5eised Penal Code and for iolation of 4ection #b% of 5e'ublic Act J=0?, @udgment is rendered in the following manner3 0. In Criminal Case o.7KD< for ra'e, the accused is sentenced to suffer the 'enalty of reclusion 'er'etua with all the accessory 'enalties attached thereto and to indemnify the minor Ma. 5i;alina Onciano the amount of P?,???.??, moral damages in the amount of P0??,???.??, and e)em'lary damages of P0??,???.??. 1. In Criminal Case o. 7KJD<, for iolation of 4ection  #b% 5.A. J=0?, the said accused is sentenced to suffer an indeterminate 'rison term of eight #K% years and one #0% day of 'rision mayor as minimum to seenteen #0J% years and four #7% months of reclusion tem'oral as ma)imum with all the accessory 'enalties attached thereto and to indemnify Ma. 5i;alina


>17

Onciano the amount of P?,???.??, 'lus moral damages in the amount of P0??,???.?? and e)em'lary damages in the amount of P0??,???.??. >. +he accused shall su''ort Ma. 5i;alina Onciano-s child 5ichard Onciano. 7. +he accused is ac!uitted of the crimes charged in Criminal Case os. 7K1D<, 7K>D<, 7K7D<, 7K=D<, 7KKD<, 7K

>1

*e agree with the trial court-s decision. 0Yw'hi0.nZt +he ictim, Maria 5i;alina, first took the witness stand on August J, 0<<=. 4he was, howeer, obsered to be 'sychologically and emotionally un're'ared to testify at that time so the trial court decided to 'ost'one her testimony to a later date after her com'lete rehabilitation at the ational Center for Mental (ealth.00 On Fanuary 11, 0<
ow, Ms. Onsiano, did you go to school sometime in 4e'tember 0<<>G

a

Ses, sir.

))) !

*hat school were you enrolled in 0<<>G

a

Manggahan 8lementary 4chool, sir.

!

4chool in 0<<>G

a

6rade I$, sir.

!

And who was su''orting your educationG

a

My mother, sir.

! And aside from your mother, who else, if any, was hel'ing your mother in 'roiding your educational e)'ensesG a

eolito O'tana, sir, my ste'father.

!

If eolito O'tana is inside the courtroom, will you be able to 'oint him out to the courtG

a

Ses, sir.

CO&5+ Point him out. ))) a. +hat-s him, sir. )))


>1=

! ow, how long hae you been liing with your mother together with your ste'father eolito O'tana at Barangay Mangaaca, 4ubic, Vambales, 'rior to 4e'tember 0<<>G a

4ince I was in 6rade 0, sir.

! ow, in 4e'tember 0<<>, do you recall if eolito O'tana was still liing with your mother in your house at Mangaaca, 4ubic, VambalesG a

Ses, sir.

! ow, do you recall sometime in the afternoon or noontime of 4e'tember 0<<> while you were in your house at Manganaca, 4ubic, Vambales, if any unusual incident that ha''ened to youG ))) a

Ses, sir.

P5O4. :9O584+A ! Could you 'lease tell this (onorable Court what is that unusual incident that ha''ened in your house at 4ubic sometime in 4e'tember 0<<>G a

I was ra'ed, sir.

!

By whomG

a

By my ste'father, sir.

CO&5+ !

And who is your ste'fatherG

a

eolito O'tana, sir.

!

Is eolito O'tana married to your motherG

a

o, sir.

!

4o, he is a lieDin 'artner of your motherG

a

Ses, sir.

)))


>1J

P5O4 :9O584+A !

And how did eolito O'tana ra'ed #sic% youG

a

(e was forcing me, sir.

!

o you still recall what dress were you wearing at that timeG

a

o, sir.

!

But you hae clothes on your bodyG

a

Ses, sir.

!

And do you know what did the accused eolito O'tana do with your clothesG

a

(e was forcing me to undress or to remoe my clothes, sir.

!

And was he able to make you undressG

a

o, sir.

!

And when eolito O'tana failed to force you to undress, what did he do, if anyG

a

(e was hurting me, sir.

CO&5+ !

(ow was he hurting youG

a (e was sla''ing me on my face, and sometimes he would threaten me that he would bo) me, sir. ))) P5O4 :9O584+A !

And what did you do when eolito O'tana was hurting you by sla''ing you on your faceG

a

I was scared, sir.

CO&5+ !

(ow many times were you sla''ed on the faceG

a

+wice, sir.


>1K

!

And what ha''ened to you wen you were sla''ed on the faceG

a

My cheeks were 'ainful, sir.

))) P5O4 :9O584+A !

And after you were sla''ed by the accused, what else ha''ened, if anyG

a

(e was forcing me to undress and then, he re'eatedly kissed me, sir.

!

*hat 'art of your body was kissed by the accusedG

a

My mouth, my breast and my 'riate 'art, sir.

!

And after the accused kissed your 'riate 'art, what did the accused do, if anyG

a

And afterwards, he was forcing to insert his 'enis into my agina, sir .

!

And do you still recall what the accused was wearing at that timeG

a

Ses, sir.

!

Could you 'lease tell us what was he wearing at that timeG

a

Ses, sir, shorts.

!

And what did he do with his shortsG

a

(e remoed his shorts, sir.

!

And then after remoing his shorts, what did the accused do, if anyG

a After remoing his shorts and underwear, he held both of my hands and went on to' of me, sir. !

And after he was able to moe on to' of you, what else did he doG

a

(e re'eatedly kissed me and then, he was forcing to insert his 'enis into my agina, sir.

CO&5+ !

*as he able to insert his 'enis into your aginaG


>1<

a

Ses, sir.

!

*hat did you feelG

a

It was 'ainful, sir.

CO&5+ Continue. P5O4 :9O584+A ! And what did you do when #sic% felt 'ain in your body after the accused had inserted his 'enisG a

I shouted, sir.

CO&5+ !

*hat did you shoutG

a

I said MA4AEI+ PO, sir.

!

+o whom did you address thatG

a

+o the accused, sir.

!

Sou are referring to the accused eolito O'tanaG

a

Ses, sir.

!

*ere you alone at that timeG

a

My brother and sister were there, sir.

!

And how many brothers do you haeG

a

+wo, sir.

!

*here were theyG

a

ownstairs, sir.

!

(ow many sisters do you haeG

a

One, sir.


>>?

!

*here was she at that timeG

a

ownstairs, also, sir.

!

(ow about your motherG

a

4he was not around sir.

!

*here was sheG

a

4he left the house at that time, and I do not know where she went, sir.

!

(ow long did the accused stayed on to' of youG

a

More or less, ten minutes, sir.

!

*hat did you do during that 'eriod when he was on to' of youG

a

(e was making a downward and u'ward moement, sir. (e was 'um'ing.

))) P5O4. :9O584+A !

ow, after making those downward and forward moement, what ha''enedG

a

At first, he was trembling, sir.

!

And then after that, what did the accused doG

a

(e stood u' and he got a PAM&A4, sir.

CO&5+ !

*hy would he hae to take a wi'eG

a

It was because there was blood on his se), sir.

!

(ow about in your 'riate 'artG

a

Ses, sir, I was haing blood in my 'riate 'art.

!

*hat else did you found #sic% out in your 'riate PartG

a

It was 'ainful, sir.


>>0

!

*hy was it 'ainfulG

a

Because of his 'riate 'art, I sustained a wound in my 'riate 'art, sir.

))) P5O4. :9O584+A !

ow, after the accused stood u', and got a 'iece of cloth and. . .

CO&5+ !

*as he able to get this 'iece of clothG

a

Ses, sir.

!

*hereG

a

On the (I6AA, sir.

!

*hat did he do with thisG

a

(e used it in wi'ing his face, sir.

!

*hat else did he doG

a After wi'ing his face, and gae the 'iece of cloth to me in order to wi'e my agina, and he told me to do it faster, sir. ))) P5O4. :9O584+A !

And why did the accused in this case told #sic% you to act fasterG

a

Because my mother was about to arrie, sir.

!

4o what did you do when the accused told you to wi'e your 'riate 'art fastG

a

I followed him because I was afraid of him, sir.

! And what else did the accused do after you wi'ed your 'riate 'art with the cloth he gae to youG a

(e instructed me to dress u' !uickly because my mother would arrie, sir.


>>1

!

And did you follow himG

a

Ses2 sir.

!

And did your mother arrie homeG

a

Ses, sir.

!

And when your mother arried home, what did you doG

a I did not do anything because I was instructed not to tell my mother. 4o I did not do anything because I was afraid, sir. CO&5+ !

*hy were you afraid #sic% of your ste'fatherG

a

Because he would kill me if I re'ort the incident, sir.

!

(ow did you knowG

a

Because he told me, sir.

!

*hen was it when he told you thatG

a

After he ra'ed me, sir.

))) P5O4. :9O584+A ! ow, after the accused ra'ed you sometime in 4e'tember 0<<>, do you know if this incident was re'eated by the accusedG CO&5+ ! Before you go to that +his incident that you hae described, where in the house did this ha''enG a

&'stairs, sir.

!

In what roomG

a

In their room, sir.


>>>

!

*hen you said +(8S, to whom do you referG

a

My mother, sir.

!

Sou were lying downG

a

Ses, sir.

!

On whatG

a

On the bed, sir.

!

*hat kind of bedG

a

*ooden bed, sir.

!

(ow many rooms were there u'stairsG

a

+wo, sir.

!

+he other room is for whomG

a

:or us, sir, my brothers and sisters.

))) P5O4. :9O584+A !

After this incident, was there any other incident that ha''ened to youG

a

Ses, sir.

!

*hen was thatG

a I could no longer recall when but eerytime my mother was out, he would do the same thing to me, sir. ! Could you still recall how many weeks or days hae 'assed from the first incident in 4e'tember 0<<> when the last incident ha''enedG a

I could no longer count because it ha''ened seeral times, sir.

!

And how many times, more #or% less does this incident ha''ened to yourG

a

4eeral times, sir.


>>7

!

ow, in the month of 4e'tember 0<<>, do you recall how many timesG

a

I cannot, sir.

! ow, you said that eerytime that your mother is out, out of the house, your ste'father used to ra'e you, could you 'lease tell us what is the reason why your mother is always out of your houseG a

4ometimes she would go to the market and sometimes she would sell some things, sir.

!

o you know the occu'ation of your ste'father eolito O'tana in 0<<>G

a

(e was a waiter, sir.

))) !

And in what grade were you at the time this first incident ha''enedG

a

6rade I$, sir.

!

(ow old were you thenG

a

01 years old, sir.

!

*hat is your birth dayG

a

0> ecember 0
!

(ow did you know that your birth is 0> ecember 0
a

:rom my mother, sir.

))) P5O4. :9O584+A ! ow, in 0<<, do you still recall if the accused is still liing in your house in Manganaca, 4ubic, Vambales with you and your motherG a

o more, sir.

! ow, do you know the reason why he was no longer residing in the house of your mother in 0<<G a

(e was already detained at that time, sir.


>>

))) P5O4. :9O584+A !

*hen was the last incidentG

*I+844 a

1K October 0<<, sir.

P5O4. :9O584+A !

And where did this 1K October 0<< ra'e ha''enedG

a

In our house, sir.

!

In the same room u'stairsG

a

In our room, sir.

CO&5+ !

Sou mean in the room where your brothers and sisters were slee'ingG

a

Ses, sir.

) ) )01 ! uring the last hearing, you testified that after you were first ra'ed by the accused in 4e'tember, 0<<>, the accused re'eated the act of haing ra'ed you. ow could you 'lease tell this honorable court how did the accused ra'ed #sic% you after 4e'tember, 0<<>G a

(e was forcing me, sir.

!

And how did the accused forced #sic% you . . . to hae ra'ed youG

CO&5+ !

(e was forcing you to whatG

a

(e was forcing me to undress, sir.

!

*hereG

a

In our house, sir.


>>=

!

*here in your houseG

a

In the room, sir.

))) P5O4. :9O584+A !

Is that the room, the same room, where the first incident took 'laceG

a

It ha''ens sometime in our room and sometimes in their room, sir.

! Could you still recall the month after the first incident that ha''ened to you when the accused forced you to undress inside his roomG a +he incident started in 4e'tember 0<<>, but he would always ra'e me when my mother was out, sir. #6IA6A9A* ISA AEO +&*I6 *A9A A6 MAMA EO.% ! 4o, when you say that since 4e'tember 0<<> u' to October 1K, 0<<, the accused had been 6IA6A9A* you, is that correct, Ms. OnsianoG a

Ses, sir.

!

*hat do you mean by 6IA6A9A*G

a

(e was using me, sir.

CO&5+ !

(ow did he use youG

a

(e was forcing his 'enis into my agina, sir.

))) ! *hy did you not re'ort this or why did you re'ort your ste'father, the accused in this case, to anyone of what he did to youG a I was afraid because he threatened me that he would kill me if I re'ort the matter to anyone, sir. !

But do you remember haing re'orted this incident to your motherG

a Ses, sir, on 17 oember 0<<. +hat was the time when I told my mother about the incident.


>>J

!

And what did your mother do when you re'orted the matter to herG

a 4he summoned my Aunt in order to accom'any me to the munici'al hall to re'ort the matter, sir. After that, I was inestigated by the 'oliceman and then, my ste'father was a''rehended, sir. ))) !

*hat ha''ened to you when you were ra'ed by your ste'fatherG

a

I was hurt and I got 'regnant, sir.

!

*hen did you get 'regnantG

a

I cannot say what month, sir.

!

But what ha''ened to your 'regnancyG

a

I gae birth to a child, sir.

!

*henG

a

1> :ebruary 0<<=. 4ir.

!

*hereG

a

At a hos'ital in Angeles, sir.

))) !

And what name did you gie your childG

a

5ichard Onsiano, sir.

CO&5+ *ho is the father as a''earing in the documentG P5O4. :9O584+A &nknown because this is out of wedlock, your (onor. ! Sou made the registration of the child with the Office of the 9ocal Ciil 5egistrar of Angeles CityG


>>K

a

+he 4ocial *orker, sir.

! ow, you mentioned awhile ago that when you re'orted this incident to your mother sometime in oember 0<<, your mother called for your Aunt 8elyn allosG a

Ses, sir.

!

:or what 'ur'oseG

a

In order to accom'any me to the Munici'al (all, sir.

!

And were you and your Aunt 8elyn allos able to go to the Munici'al (allG

a

Ses, sir.

CO&5+ !

*hat is the name of the auntG 8elyn allosG

a

Ses, your (onor.

!

And what did you do at the Munici'al (allG

a

A com'laint was filed against my ste'father, sir.

!

And to whom did you com'lainG

a

Police officer, sir.

!

And what did the 'olice officer do when you com'lained to himG.

a

eolito O'tana, my ste'father, was a''rehended.

))) P5O4. :9O584+A ! Could you still recall what month in 0<<, 'rior to 1K October 0<< when you were ra'ed by the accused in this caseG a

I could no longer recall the e)act date because he has been using me seeral times, sir.

! Could you still recall how many times in a month the accused has been using you since 4e'tember 0<<> u' to 1K October 0<<G


>><

a 4eeral times, sir. I could no longer count because he would always use me each time my mother was out, sir. ))) ! id you hae any se)ual intercourse with any other men before you gae birth to your childG a

Ses, sir, my ste'father.

!

Sou are referring to the accusedG

a

Ses, sir.

! Aside from the accused, was there any other men who had se)ual intercourse with you 'rior to October 0<<G a

one, sir, he was the only one.

! Prior to the birth of your child, it was only your ste'father who had se)ual intercourse with youG a

Ses, sir.

))) !

o you hae any boyfriendG

a

one, sir.

) ) )0> Mindful of the wellDsettled rule that findings of facts of the trial court are accorde d great res'ect considering that the trial @udge has obsered the demeanor of the witnesses, the Court does not find any cogent reason to de'art from such rule. +he trial @udge had these obserations about the witness3 5i;alina was already 07 years old when she testified in Court. At the time she testified she was succinct in her declaration and a''eared to the Court to be truthful. 4he had no reason to fabricate a story against the accused who su''orted her in her daily needs and s'ent for her education until she finished 6rade =. Ingratitude is not a trait common to a 'roincial child still innocent of the icissitudes of life.07 A witness who testifies in a categorical, straightforward, s'ontaneous and frank mann er and remains consistent is a credible witness.0 4ince the trial court found Maria 5i;alina- s testimony to be credible and trustworthy, it was More than sufficient to sustain the accusedDa''ellant-s


>7?

coniction.0= +he fact that the accusedDa''ellant bad carnal knowledge with the young ictim is corroborated by the findings of r. 9aila Patricio, who u'on e)amination on oember, 0<< found Maria 5i;alina to be =DJ months 'regnant already. Maria 5i;alina confided to her that her ste'father ra'ed her.0J +his accusation was re'eated when she was inestigated by 4PO> Cesar Antolin at the 4ubic Police 4tation, 4ubic, Vambales,0K and when she was interiewed by 4ocial *elfare Officer II, Ana 8cle of the 4*, Iba, Vambales.0< *hen the accusedDa''ellant was courting ida Onciano, he was ery aware that she had a daughter. Before they agreed to lie together, he was made to understand that he had to acce't and treat Maria 5i;alina as his own daughter, tooDcaring for her and 'roiding for her education.1? 4ince Maria 5i;alina did not hae a father, she regarded the accusedDa''ellant as such. 8en at her young age, she recogni;ed the 'arental authority the accusedDa''ellant had oer her and in return, she gae the reerence and res'ect due him as a father. &ndeniably, there was moral ascendancy on the 'art of the accusedDa''ellant oer the ictim.10 In a ra'e committed by a father against the daughter, the former-s moral ascendancy and influence oer the latter substitutes for iolence and intimidation. +he e)'erience has certainly caused great trauma on Maria 5i;alina that she had to be committed to the ational Center for Mental (ealth, Mandaluyong City to undergo 'sychological and medical treatment for seere de'ression.11 +he testimony of r. i@amco, a 'sychiatrist at the ational Center for Mental (ealth is !uite reealing3 A After haing gathered all the informations we hae conceded and collated the data and we hae agreed to come u' with an im'ression as stated m the 'rotocol or ma@or de'ression, sir, and that it was adised that the 'atient be gien medication and to undergo regular 'sycho thera'y, 4ir. )))1> R ow, in your honest o'inion, what could hae been the cause of your findings that the 'atient 5i;alina Onsiano suffered from ma@or de'ressie #sic% disorderG A After haing a thorough study of the 'atient-s case. *e could only conclude that it was the abuser and the trauma that she underwent which led to her de''ression #sic%, her ma@or and seere de''ression #sic%, sir. ! By the way, was she able to disclose to you on your initial interiew with the 'atient 5i;alina Onciano regarding the se)ual abuse committed in her 'ersonG A Initially, sir, she had difficulty, she would cry, she would re!uest that we change the to'ic, howeer, she was consistent in identifying the 'er'etrator of the crime, sir, or the accused. R ow, in your honest o'inion as a 'sychiatrist, is it normal for a child not to tell or recall the se)ual abuse committed on her 'ersonG


>70

A An abuse is a trauma in itself. 4o, for a child not to remember is !uite im'ossible. 4o, abuse es'ecially if these abuses hae taken !uite a number of times or it ha''ened seeral times, sir. R

But is it normal for a child not to tell the details of the abuse committed in her 'ersonG

A +here is a 'ossibility, sir, es'ecially when a threat comes along or for seeral reasons, sir, but it is 'ossible does not disclose immediately that she has been se)ually abused by some other 'eo'le, sir. R *ould you be able to gie an e)am'le of what other factors that would 'reent the child from disclosing or tell the abuse committed on her 'ersonG A 4ir, based on my obserations and the cases I hae handled for one it would be shame and the guilt since the 'atient underwent such trauma they feel that they are to be blamed that-s why they don-t tell, they feel that they hae a 'art in the crime that-s why they don-t tell. :or another reason, an im'ortant reason for not disclosing is the threat the 'er'etrator im'oses on the ictim. +he threat to life, the threat to 'ro'erty, the threat to steal. Basically, those are the ma@or reasons why a child or adolescent would not disclose immediately that she has been se)ually molested. R *ould you say the influence of the mother for being uncoo'eratie with her in her fighting for her right, is one of the factor that would 'reent the child from disclosingG A +here is a 'ossibility, sir, since wheneer a child is abused, it is not the child or the ictim which is @ust affected. It is the entire family, the brothers, the sisters, the mother, the father, the entire family. 4ince their child is affected, so, the mother and the other relaties may hae stayed in the child not disclosing about the attem'ts or the abuse, sir. R ow, in the case of 5i;alina Onsiano, while she was 'resented by this re'resentation, when this re'resentation was about to ask her of the actual abuse committed on her 'erson, she broke down and refused to talk. Is it normal, is that a normal behaior of 5i;alina OnsianoG A Basically, 'rior to the commission of the crime, 5i;alina was an u'Dgrown child. (aing undergone abuse for !uite sometime, it is not easy for one to fully disclose what she underwent. +here are times when the 'atient will be able to identify him @ust about that. ow, in 5i;alina-s case, I don-t think it was normal. Basically, it is a normal 'art wherein she would not automatically disclosed what ha''ened. It would take time 'rior to full disclosure of such trauma, sir. R ow, later on, after she was discharged from the ational Center for Mental (ealth s'ecifally #sic% on Fanuary 1>, 0<

>71

against her ste'father. +he course she is undergoing right now is the effect of the treatment she has undergone at our Center. )))17 AccusedDa''ellant denies haing ra'ed his ste'daughter alleging that it was !uite im'ossible for him to hae committed the crime "in broad daylight, in a small house, abundant with o'en windows and doors, 'eo'led by si) or seen mischieous and o'enDeyed curious souls keen with eery unusual scenarios of members inoling kins and idols like their fathers."1 +he Court sees no im'ossibility for the commission of this abominable act on the ictim under the alleged circumstances. Many cases attest to the unfortunate fact that ra'e can be committed een in 'laces where 'eo'le congregate3 in 'arks, along the roadside, within school 'remises and een inside a house where there are occu'ants. 9ust is no res'ecter of time or 'lace.1= :urthermore, accusedDa''ellant 'oints to his sisterDinDlaw, 8elyn allos as the 'erson who allegedly 'ressured his ste'daughter to file the charges of ra'e against him considering an old grudge e)isting between the two of them. It can be recalled that. 8elyn allos took care of two of their children who, unfortunately, died under her care, one died of meningitis and 'neumonia and the other by drowning in a flood. +o the defense, the deaths were 'lainly due to 8elyn-s negligence.1J 4ince then, their relationshi' was estranged. +his contention deseres scant consideration. Ill motie is neer an essential element of a crime. It becomes inconse!uential in a case where there are affirmatie, nay, categorical declarations towards the accusedDa''ellant-s accountability for the felony.1K Maria 5i;alina-s straightforward and consistent testimony belies any claim of being 'ressured by her aunt to concoct a story of defloration against the ste'father. &'on cross e)amination, she was !uick to deny that h er +ita 8elyn 'rom'ted her to re'ort to the authorities about her 'hysical condition and the 'erson res'onsible thereof.1< +o the accusedDa''ellant, it strains credulity why the ictim neer said anything about the incidents until the discoery by the mother on oember 17, 0<<7 when she reealed that it was her ste'father who was res'onsible for her 'regnancy. elay in re'orting the crime is understandable. It is not uncommon for young girls to conceal for some time the assaults on their irtue because of the ra'ist-s threat on their lies.>? +he case at bar is no e)ce'tion to these wellDfounded rule. Maria 5i;alina neer said anything to her mother of the many times the accusedDa''ellant had se)ually abused her for fear of her life. 4he was definitely afraid of her ste'father who threatened to kill her o nce she re'orts the matter to her mother.>0 either was there any medical im'ossibility to the commission of the crime as accusedDa''ellant argues3 6ranting "en gratia arguendo" that accusedDa''ellant did the act com'lained of in 4e'tember 0<<>, or the last act on October 1K, 0<<, it is medically im'ossible and contrary to the natural


>7>

laws and religious belief And, the medical books and hos'ital records is in dearth or 'aucity of four #7% months 'remature births. ))) ))) the turning 'oint when the 'regnancy became a''arent and noticeable was a clear s'an or intereggnum #sic% of one #0% year and fie #% months from the month and year sub@ect matter of this reiew #oember 17, 0<<% which logically coincides with the months that com'lainant gallianted with the "barkada", but is offDtangent and is irreconcilable and medically and naturally im'ossible with the alleged commission of ra'e of 4e'tember 0 <<>.>1 +his defense is unaailing. Maria 5i;alina gae birth on :ebruary 1>, 0<<=. 4he testified that she was ra'ed seeral times by her ste'father. *hile she could hardly remember the e)act dates of these instances, she only remembered the first time she was ra'ed which was in 4e'tember, 0<<> when she was only 01 years old and was in 6rade I$>> and the last time was on October 1K, 0<<. Obiously, she could not hae conceied in 4e'tember, 0<<> because as she testified, she was not yet menstruating at that time. 4he started to hae her menstruation when she was in 6rade $>7 or in 0<<7. 4he denies going home late after school and is not fond of being out with friends.> 4ince she maintained that her ste'father ra'ed her seeral times, the child was definitely conceied as a result of the ra'e between 4e'tember, 0<<> and October 1K, 0<<. 6ien all these facts and circumstances, we rule with moral certainty that the accusedDa''ellant is indeed guilty of the crimes. AccusedDa''ellant was charged for iolation of 4ection #b% of 5.A. J=0? and Article >> of the 5eised Penal Code for ra'e which read as follows3 4ection . Child Prostitution and Other 4e)ual Abuse. D Children, whether male or female, who for money, 'rofit, or any other consideration or due to the coercion or influence of any adult, syndicate or grou', indulge in se)ual intercourse or lasciious conduct, are deemed to be children e)'loited in 'rostitution and other se)ual abuse. +he 'enalty of reclusion tem'oral in its medium 'eriod to reclusion 'er'etua shall be im'osed u'on the following3 "))) "#b% +hose who commit the act of se)ual intercourse or lasciious conduct with a child e)'loited in 'rostitution or sub@ected to other se)ual abuse3 Proided, that when the ictim is under twele #01% years of age, the 'er'etrators shall be 'rosecuted under Article >>, 'aragra'h >, for ra'e and Article >>= of Act o. >K0, as amended, the 5eised Penal Code, for ra'e or lasciious conduct, as the case may be3 Proided,


>77

+hat the 'enalty for lasciious conduct when the ictim is under twele #01% years of age shall be reclusion tem'oral in its medium'eriod2">= ))) A5+. >> *hen and how ra'e is committed. D 5a'e is committed by haing carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances3 "0. By using force or intimidation2 "1. *hen the woman is de'ried of D reason or otherwise unconscious2 and ">. *hen the woman is under twele years of age, een though neither of the circumstances mentioned in the two ne)t 'receding 'aragra'hs shall be 'resent. "+he crime of ra'e shall be 'unished by reclusion Per'etua." ))) Anent the numerous informations filed, the trial court corrected the erroneous filing of these informations as it e)'lained3 It will be noted, howeer, that for the same act committed on the same date by the accused on the same offended 'arty, the accused stands charged with two offenses3 for iolation of 4ection , 'aragra'h #b% of 5e'ublic Act J=0? and for ra'e committed through force and intimidation. +hus3 #0% in Criminal Case os. 7K1D< and 7KJD<, the accused was charged with ra'e and iolation of 4ection  'aragra'h #b% of 5e'ublic Act J=0?, res'ectiely, committed on the same date, October 0<<, when the ictim was 0> years old and < months2 #1% in Criminal Case os. 7K7D< and 7KKD<, the Informations charged ra'e and iolation of the same s'ecial law, res'ectiely, committed on the same date, "4e'tember 0<<, when the ictim was 0> years and < months old2 #>% in Criminal Case os. 7K>D< and 7K when the ictim was 00 years and < months old. Charging the accused with two different offenses for the same act committed on the same date against the said ictim is erroneous as it is illegal, e)ce't where the law itself so allows. 4ection  #b% 5e'ublic Act J=0?, howeer, does not so allow. +he said law in fact 'roides that if the child is below 01 years old, the accused must be 'rosecuted under Article >> of the 5eised Penal Code. Conersely, if the child is aboe 01 years old but below 0K years old, then the accused must be 'rosecuted under 5e'ublic Act J=0? for the so called "child abuse.>J +he trial court correctly conicted the accused for 5a'e under Article >> of the 5PC in Criminal Case o. 7KD< for it was clearly 'roen that the accused had carnal knowledge with the ictim through force and intimidation on that fateful day in 4e'tember, 0<<>. +his was the


>7

first time the accused ra'ed Maria 5i;alina who was able to gie a detailed account of this traumatic e)'erience. 4he was below 01 years old at that time. *hile Maria 5i;alina also testified that she was ra'ed seeral times after 4e'tember, 0<<>, the 'rosecution, howeer, failed to establish the material details as to the time, 'lace, and manner by which these offenses were committed. +here is still a need for 'roof beyond reasonable doubt that the offenses alleged in the informations were indeed committed.>K +hus, the trial court ac!uitted the accused under Criminal Case os. 7K1D<, 7K>D<, 7K7D<, 7K=D<, 7KKD<, 7K< the Court has e)'lained that the elements of the offense 'enali;ed under this 'roision are as follows2 0. +he accused commits the act of se)ual intercourse or lasciious conduct. 1. +he said act is 'erformed with a child e)'loited in 'rostitution or sub@ected to other se)ual abuse. >. +he child, whether male or female, is below 0K years of age. A child is deemed e)'loited in 'rostitution or sub@ected to other se)ual abuse, when the child indulges in se)ual intercourse or lasciious conduct #a% for mone y, 'rofit, or any other consideration2 or #b% under the coercion or influence of any adult, syndicate or grou'. &nder 5A J=0?, children are "'ersons below eighteen years of age or those unable to fully take care of themseles or 'rotect themseles from abuse, neglect, cruelty, e)'loitation or discrimination because of their age or mental disability or condition." It must be noted that the law coers not only a situation in which a child is abused for 'rofit, but also one in which a child, through coercion or intimidation, engages in any lasciious conduct. (ence, the foregoing 'roision 'enali;es not only child 'rostitution, the essence of which is 'rofit, but also other forms of se)ual abuse of children. +his is clear from the deliberations of the 4enate. :rom the aboe dis!uisition, the accused is certainly guilty for se)ual abuse committed on his ste'daughter, using his moral ascendancy in intimidating the ictim to engage in se)ual intercourse with him. +he amount of damages must, howeer, be modified. In each of the cases, the trial court awarded the amount of P?,??? as ciil indemnity. P0??,??? for moral damages and another P0??,??? as e)em'lary damages. In line with recent @uris'rudence, the award of P?,??? as ciil indemnity is


>7=

in order regardless of 'roof In addition to ciil indemnity, moral damages may, likewise, be awarded without the need for 'roing the same in the amount not e)ceeding P?,???.7? +he award of e)em'lary damages must be deleted for lack of legal basis.70 *(858:O58, the ecision dated March , 0<
se)ual abuse under the Child Abuse 9aw committed against his ste' daughter, AAA. +he following information for ra'e was filed against the a''ellant3 #note there are three Informations filed, one for ra'e and two for se)ual assault%. 0. +hat on or about the Kth day of Fuly 0<?, 0<3?? a.m, Abello again mashed the breast of AAA under the same situation while the latter was slee'ing. In these two occasions AAA was able to recogni;e Abello because of the light coming from outside. +hen on Fuly K, 0<
0. *o the a''ellant shall be ac!uitted due to the difference between the modes of commission 'roided for in the Information for ra'e and that 'roen at the trial. 1. *o a''ellant is guilty of se)ual abuse under the Child Abuse 9aw. If hes not, if he can be liable for an offense other than that stated in the information. >. *o the alternatie circumstance of ste'fatherDste'daughter relationshi' should be considered as an aggraating circumstance.


>7J

7. *o aggraating circumstances not mentioned in the Information can be considered to increase the 'enalty. 'eld:

0. O, ariance in the mode of commission of the offense is binding u'on the accused if he fails to ob@ect to eidence showing that the crime was committed in a different manner than what was alleged. +he Information alleges force and intimidation/ as the mode of commission. (oweer, AAA testified during the trial that she was aslee' at the time it ha''ened and only awoke to find Abellos male organ inside her mouth. +his ariance is not fatal to Abellos coniction for ra'e by se)ual assault. A ariance in the mode of commission of the offense is binding u'on the accused if he fails to ob@ect to eidence showing that the crime was committed in a different manner than what was alleged. In the 'resent case, Abello did not ob@ect to the 'resentation of eidenc e showing that the crime charged was committed in a different manner than what was stated in the Information. +hus, the ariance is not a bar to Abellos coniction of the crime charged in the Information. 1. O, a''ellant cannot be held guilty under the Child Abuse 9aw but he can be held for Acts of 9asciiousness. AAA cannot be considered a child under 4ection >#a% of 5.A. o. J=0? which states that Children/ refers to 'erson below 0K years of age or those oer but are unable to fully take care of themseles or 'rotect themseles from abuse, neglect, cruelty, e)'loitation or discrimination because of a 'hysical or mental disability or condition. AAA was neither below 0K nor was she fully unable to take care of herself. +hough Abello cannot be held liable under 5A J=0?, he is still liable for acts of lasciiousness under Article >>= of the 5PC. +he character of the crime is not determined by the ca'tion or 'reamble of the information or from the s'ecification of the 'roision of law alleged to hae been iolated2 the crime committed is determined by the recital of the ultimate facts and circumstances in the com'laint or information. In the 'resent case, although the two Informations wrongly designated 5.A. o. J=0? as the law iolated2 the allegations therein sufficiently constitute acts 'unishable und er Article >>= of the 5PC whose elements are3 a. +hat the offender commits any act of lasciiousness2 b. +hat the offended 'arty is another 'erson of either se)2 and c. +hat it is done under any of the following circumstances3 i. By using force or intimidation2 or ii. *hen the offended 'arty is de'ried of reason or otherwise unconscious2 or iii. *hen the offended 'arty is under 01 years of age or is demented. >. O, the relationshi' should not be considered as an aggraating circumstance. +hough the three Informations all alleged the ste'fatherste'daughter relationshi' between AAA and Abello, this modifying circumstance, was not duly 'roen in the 'resent case. +he 'rosecution failed to 'resent the marriage contract between Abello and AAAs mother. If the fact of marriage came out in the eidence at all, it was only ia an admission by Abello of his marriage to AAAs mother. +his admission is inconclusie. +he court is


>7K

strict on considering relationshi' as an aggraating circumstance because it increases the im'osable 'enalty, and hence must be 'roen by com'etent eidence. 7. O, the aggraating circumstances of dwelling and knowledge of disability cannot be considered. Although not alleged in the information, the aggraating circumstance of dwelling was 'roen during the trial. Additionally, Article 1==B #'enalties for ra'e% of the 5PC recogni;es knowledge by the offender of the mental disability, emotional disorder andUor 'hysical handica' of the offended 'arty at the time of the commission of the crime/ as a !ualifying circumstance. +his knowledge by Abello of AAAs 'olio was also 'roen during the trial but not alleged in the Information. +hough these aggraating and !ualifying circumstances of dwelling and Abellos knowledge of AAAs 'hysical disability were not considered in im'osing the 'enalty, they may be a''reciated in awarding e)em'lary damages. +herefore, a''ellant is found guilty of ra'e by se)ual assault and acts of lasciiousness. 0% :or the crime of ra'e, he is sentenced him to suffer an indeterminate 'rison term of si) years of 'rision correccional, as minimum, to ten years of 'rision mayor, as ma)imum. (e is ordered to 'ay P>?,???.?? as ciil liability2 P>?,???.?? as moral damages and P1,???.?? as e)em'lary damages2 1% :or each count of acts of lasciiousness, he is sentenced to an indeterminate 'rison term of si) months of arresto mayor, as minimum, to four years and two months of 'rision correccional, as ma)imum. (e is further ordered to 'ay AAA the amounts of P1?,???.?? as ciil indemnity2 P>?,???.?? as moral damages and P1,???.?? as e)em'lary damages, in each case. "alto v People Facts: 4ometime during the month of oember 0<
a minor, to indulge in se)ual intercourse seeral times with him. Prior to the incident, 'etitioner and AAA had a mutual understanding/ and became sweethearts. Pressured and afraid of the 'etitioners threat to end their relationshi', AAA succumbed and both had se)ual intercourse. &'on discoery of what AAA underwent, BBB, AAAs mother lodged a com'laint in the Office of the City Prosecutor of Pasay City which led to the filing of Criminal Case o. ??D?=<0. +he 'etitioner did not make a 'lea when arraigned. (ence, the trial court entered for him a 'lea of not guilty./ +he trial court found the eidence for the 'rosecution sufficient to sustain 'etitioners coniction. +he trail court rendered a decision finding 'etitioner guilty and sentenced him to reclusion tem'oral and to 'ay an indemnity of Ph'. J,??? and damages of Ph'. ?,???. Petitioner !uestioned the trial courts decision in the CA. +he CA modified the decision of the trial court. +he a''ellate court affirmed his coniction and ruled that the trial court erred in awarding Ph'. J,??? ciil indemnity in faor of AAA as it was 'ro'er only in a coniction for ra'e committed under the circumstances under which the death 'enalty was authori;ed by law.


>7<

(ssue: *hether the CA erred in sustaining 'etitioners coniction on the grounds that there was

no ra'e committed since their se)ual intercourse was consensual by reason of their sweetheart/ relationshi' 'eld: #o. +he sweetheart theory/ cannot be inoked for 'ur'oses of se)ual intercourse and

lasciious conduct in child abuse cases under 5A J=0?. Consent is immaterial because the mere act of haing se)ual intercourse or committing lasciious conduct with a child who is sub@ected to se)ual abuse constitutes the offense. Moreoer, a child is 'resumed by law to be inca'able of giing rational consent to any lasciious act or se)ual intercourse. A+uino v. Acosta Facts: On oember 10, 1???, she re'orted for work after her acation in the &.4., bringing

gifts for the three @udges of the C+A, including res'ondent. In the afternoon of the same da y, he entered her room and greeted her by shaking her hand. 4uddenly, he 'ulled her towards him and kissed her on her cheek. On ecember 1K, 1???, while res'ondent was on official leae, he called com'lainant by 'hone, saying he will get something in her office. 4hortly thereafter, he entered her room, shook her hand and greeted her, "Merry Christmas." +hereu'on, he embraced her and kissed her. 4he was able to free herself by slightly 'ushing him away. On the first working day in Fanuary, 1??0, res'ondent 'honed com'lainant, asking if she could see him in his chambers in order to discuss some matters. *hen com'lainant arried there, res'ondent tried to kiss her but she was able to eade his se)ual attem't. *eeks later, after the 4enate a''roed the 'ro'osed bill e)'anding the @urisdiction of the C+A, while com'lainant and her com'anions were congratulating and kissing each other, res'ondent suddenly 'laced his arms around her shoulders and kissed her. In the morning of :ebruary 07, 1??0, res'ondent called com'lainant, re!uesting her to go to his office. 4he then asked 5uby 9anu;a, a clerk in the 5ecords 4ection, to accom'any her. :ortunately, when they reached his chambers, res'ondent had left. +he last incident ha''ened the ne)t day. At around K3>? a.m., res'ondent called com'lainant and asked her to see him in his office to discuss the 4enate bill on the C+A. 4he again re!uested 5uby to accom'any her. +he latter agreed but suggested that they should act as if they met by accident in res'ondents office. 5uby then a''roached the secretarys table which was se'arated from res'ondents office by a trans'arent glass. :or her 'art, com'lainant sat in front of res'ondent-s table and asked him what he wanted to know about the 4enate bill. 5es'ondent seemed to be at a loss for words and ke't glancing at 5uby who was searching for something at the secretary-s desk. :orthwith, res'ondent a''roached 5ub y, asked her what she was looking for and ste''ed out of the office. *hen he returned, 5uby said she found what she was looking for and left. 5es'ondent then a''roached com'lainant saying, me gusto akong gawin sa iyo kaha'on


>?

'a. +hereu'on, he tried to grab her. Com'lainant instinctiely raised her hands to 'rotect herself but res'ondent held her arms tightly, 'ulled her towards him and kissed her. 4he 'ushed him away, then slum'ed on a chair trembling. Meantime, res'ondent sat on his chair an d coered his face with his hands. +hereafter, com'lainant left crying and locked herself inside a comfort room. After that incident, res'ondent went to her office and tossed a note stating, sorry, it wont ha''en again. (ssue: *hether or not Fudge Acosta is guilty of se)ually harassment 'eld: o, Fudge Acosta is not guilty of se)ual harassment. (e is e)onerated of the charges

against him and is adised to be more circums'ect in his de'ortment. A mere casual buss on the cheek is not a se)ual conduct or faor and does not fall within the 'uriew of se)ual harassment under 5.A. o. JKJJ. 4ection > #a% thereof 'roides, to wit3 -4ec. >. *ork, 8ducation or +raining D related 4e)ual (arassment efined. D *ork, education or trainingDrelated se)ual harassment is committed by an em'loyer, em'loyee, manager, su'erisor, agent of the em'loyer, teacher, instructor, 'rofessor, coach, trainor, or any other 'erson who, haing authority, influence or moral ascendancy oer another in a work or training or education enironment, demands, re!uests or otherwise re!uires any se)ual faor from the other, regardless of whether the demand, re!uest or re!uirement for submission is acce'ted by the ob@ect of said Act. a%

In a workDrelated or em'loyment enironment, se)ual harassment is committed when3

0% +he se)ual faor is made as a condition in the hiring or in the em'loyment, reD em'loyment or continued em'loyment of said indiidual, or in granting said indiidual faorable com'ensation, terms, conditions, 'romotions or 'riileges2 or the refusal to grant se)ual faor results in limiting, segregating or classifying the em'loyee which in anyway would discriminate, de'rie or diminish em'loyment o''ortunities or otherwise adersely affect said em'loyees2 1% +he aboe acts would im'air the em'loyee-s right or 'riileges under e)isting labor laws2 or >% +he aboe acts would result in an intimidating, hostile, or offensie enironment for the em'loyee."Clearly, under the foregoing 'roisions, the elements of se)ual harassment are as follows3 0% +he em'loyer, em'loyee, manager, su'erisor, agent of the em'loyer, teacher, instructor, 'rofessor, coach, trainor, or any other 'erson has authority, influence or moral ascendancy oer another2 1%

+he authority, influence or moral ascendancy e)ists in a working enironment2


>0

>% +he em'loyer, em'loyee, manager, su'erisor, agent of the em'loyer, teacher, instructor, 'rofessor, coach, or any other 'erson haing authority, influence or moral ascendancy makes a demand, re!uest or re!uirement of a se)ual faor./ Indeed, from the records on hand, there is no showing that res'ondent @udge demanded, re!uested or re!uired any se)ual faor from com'lainant in e)change for faorable com'ensation, terms, conditions, 'romotion or 'riileges s'ecified under 4ection > of 5.A. JKJJ. or did he, by his actuations, iolate the Canons of Fudicial 8thics or the Code of Professional 5es'onsibility. / v. Ancheta

9ate in the night of May 1= of last year when Fuana Martires was slee'ing in her home in the confines of the 'ueblo of Amulung, she was awakened by the oice of her husband, $entura Ruinto, who called her to come to the door of the house with a light because certain indiiduals were there who had arrested him. But when Fuana a''eared at said door with a light one of the men ordered her to e)tinguish it or the Americans with them would kill her. 4he then noticed that her husband had been bound and heard one of the strangers say to him that by order of the American garrison at Alcala they were to conduct him to Pea Blanca in connection with some affair concerning one Bada@o. 4he recogni;ed icolas Ancheta as one of the three men who kidna''ed her husband  the ery one who threatened her  by his oice, height, and walk. +hey had their faces coered with their handkerchiefs. 4ome were armed with daggers and bolos. +errified, she fled from the house and hid herself at some distance away. &'on her return the following morning she did not find her husband at home and at once re'orted the occurrence to the authorities. *hen the munici'al 'resident, who was also @ustice of the 'eace of that townshi', made the necessary inestigation, the seen defendants were taken into custody and before the @ustice of the 'eace, his secretary, the commanding military officer of Alcala, and other 'ersons, they confessed that they had conducted the kidna''ed man, $entura Ruinto, to a 'lace called 5ada', within the confines of the same townshi', and that there, by order of icolas Ancheta and 4ebastian ayag, he was killed by :austino Pascual, aniel $erson, and Aniceto Faier. +he latter held an end of the cord with which $entura was bound and secured, while icolas Ancheta, 4ebastian ayag, Claro Ancheta, and Ma)imo $erson 'osted themseles at some distance to watch for the a''roach of anyone, in order to 'reent the discoery of the crime. +he local authorities found the body of the deceased in a hole some 1 meters dee', near 5ada', at the 'lace designated by the accused. +he body was in a state of com'lete decom'osition and hence the 'ractitioner who made the e)amination was unable to determine the number of the wounds, although he noted that both elbows were tied from behind with stri's of rattan and that the abdomen had been ri''ed o'en. In addition to this the dagger and bolo were discoered in the 'lace 'ointed out by the defendants icolas and :austino. All these facts were confirmed by the defendants in their testimony. A com'laint haing been filed by the 'ublic 'rosecutor and the defendants arraigned they 'leaded "not guilty." At the trial the munici'al 'resident testified that in his o'inion $entura


>1

Ruinto was killed as an act of engeance on the 'art of ayag, who had been ill treated the year before by the deceased. :urthermore he belieed that the defendants bore resentment against the deceased because the latter, by order of the witness, had arrested the bandit Fose Bada@o, who was sus'ected of belonging to the defendants- band. +wo e)'ert armorers testified that they were unable to ascertain if the s'ots noted on the dagger and bolo were or were not of blood2 and that the dagger was of a kind whose use was 'rohibited, but not the bolo. +he foregoing facts, fully 'roed at the trial by ocular ins'ection, e)'ert testimony, the declarations of credible witnesses, and by grae and conclusie circumstantial eidence, constitute the crime of murder, 'rohibited and 'enali;ed in article 7?> of the Penal Code. +he e)ecution of the crime was attended with the !ualificatie circumstance of treachery #aleosia%, in that the defendants, in killing $entura Ruinto while he was bound elbow to elbow, em'loyed means tending directly and 'articularly to insure the consummation of the crime without risk to the aggressors, inasmuch as thus bound and disarmed the ictim could not defend himself in any manner against the seen men who kidna''ed him or een against the three who actiely 'artici'ated in his killing. +he criminal res'onsibility of the defendants as 'er'etrators of the murder which is here 'rosecuted is beyond !uestion, inasmuch as all of them by 'reiously concerted action met together and witnessed the ca'ture and later the iolent killing of $entura Ruinto. 4ome took a direct 'art in the actual commission of the crime, others were the determined instigators who induced the former to commit it, while the remainder coo'erated in the same by their 'resence and by means of acts without which the crime would not hae been 'er'etrated. It must be taken into account that this murder was committed by a gang #cuadrilla% of seen 'ersons, the greater 'art of whom were armed, and it does not a''ear that any of those 'resent who were not actie 'artici'ants in the crime made any effort to 'reent it. +his latter conclusion is not affected by the unfounded allegations made by the defendants, since they incul'ate each other mutually in confessing their 'artici'ation and coo'eration in the said murder and since it is 'roen that all of the four who were not the actual 'er'etrators thereof witnessed the commission of the crime, lending to the murderers their moral su''ort, all are thus directly res'onsible for the conse!uences and incidents of the same. In the commission of this murder there is to be considered, according to the facts adduced at the trial, the 'resence of the fifteenth aggraating circumstance of article 0? of the Code, affecting all seen of the defendants in that they committed the crime at night, in an uninhabited 'lace, and in a band #en cuadrilla%. +hese three incidents are considered, according to the decisions of the courts, as one single circumstance for the 'ur'ose of increasing the 'enalty for the crime. 9ikewise there is to be considered the 'resence of the seenth circumstance of the same article 0? as a''licable to the defendants icolas Ancheta and 4ebastian ayag for the reason that these two conceied the idea and 'remeditated the killing of Ruinto, induced the others to kidna' him in order that he might be 'ut to death, and ordered the three to kill him. In addition, we must consider the 'resence of the eighth aggraating circumstance of said article of the Code as a''licable to :austino Pascual, aniel $erson, Aniceto Faier, and said icolas Ancheta for the reason that they em'loyed both disguise and fraud, coering their faces with handkerchiefs while effecting the ca'ture of their ictim to aoid being recogni;ed and making him beliee by deceit that they would conduct him to another 'lace at the order of the commander of the American


>>

detachment at Alcala. *ith res'ect to all the defendants th e only mitigating circumstance in their faor which can be a''lied to offset the first aggraating circumstance is that es'ecially established in article 00 of the Penal Code, which, in iew of the class to which the defendants belong, may be a''lied in their faor for the reduction of the 'enalty. It follows that een regarding the fifteenth aggraating circumstance as com'ensated b y the mitigating circumstance of article 00, still circumstances J and K of article 0? of the Code must be a''lied, and to them we must add the twentyDfourth of the same article, because the murderers made use of a dagger  a wea'on 'rohibited by the regulations. +he crime here 'rosecuted being thus defined by the circumstances already enumerated, it is a''arent that the 'enalty 'rescribed in article 7?> of the Penal Code should be im'osed u'on the fie defendants, icolas Ancheta, 4ebastian ayag, :austino Pascual, aniel $erson, and Aniceto Faier in its ma)imum grade, and u'on the remaining two, Claro Ancheta and Ma)imo $erson, in its medium grade, with the corres'onding accessory 'enalties. :urthermore, in iew of the nature and circumstances of the murder for which this cause is 'rosecuted it is eident that the fact that the deceased was ca'tured in his house and taken by the defendants to an uninhabited 'lace selected by them for the 'ur'ose of killing him there, does not constitute the crime of illegal detention, since it does not a''ear that it was the 'ur'ose of the accused to commit this offense. On the contrary they sei;ed the unfortunate Ruinto in his house with the sole ob@ect of carrying him away to a suitable 'lace, which they subse!uently 'ointed out to the authorities, and of there murdering him. Concerning the 'etition for the annulment of the @udgment reiewed 'resented on a''eal by the 4olicitorD6eneral, and based on the ground that the same was made by a @udge who should hae retire on Fune 0=, 0

>7

April 30 Crim Digests

Recommend Documents