That sometime in the year 1999, in the municipality of Angat, province of Bulacan, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, taking advantage of the tender age and innocence of said AAA,2 then ten (10) years old and with lewd designs, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously kiss, touch the breasts and insert his finger into the private parts of said AAA, thereby endangering her health and safety and badly affecting her emotional and psychological well being and development.3
That sometime in the year 2000, in the municipality of Angat, province of Bulacan, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, armed with a bladed weapon did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously, by means of force, violence and intimidation and with lewd designs, have carnal knowledge with his granddaughter AAA, then eleven (11) years old, against her will and without her consent.4
That sometime in the year 2001, in the Municipality of Angat, province of Bulacan, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, armed with a bladed weapon did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously, by means of force, violence and intimidation and with lewd designs, have carnal knowledge with his granddaughter AAA, then twelve (12) years old, against her will and without her consent.5
That sometime in the first quarter of the year 2002, in the municipality of Angat, province of Bulacan, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, armed with a bladed weapon did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously, by means of force, violence and intimidation and with lewd designs, have carnal knowledge with his granddaughter AAA, then thirteen (13) years old, against her will and without her consent.6
That on or about the 21st day of June 2002, in the municipality of Angat, province of Bulacan, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, armed with a bladed weapon did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously, by means of force, violence and intimidation and with lewd designs, have carnal knowledge with his granddaughter AAA, then thirteen (13) years old and 9 months old, against her will and without her consent.7
In her initial direct examination on March 31, 2003, private complainant testified that she was born on August 22, 1988 (Exh. "A"). Accused whom [she] identified in Court is her grandfather, the father of her mother. On June 21, 2002 at around 12:00 o'clock midnight, she was in their house at Barangay Peri, Sta. Lucia, Angat, Bulacan sleeping with her siblings, accused, her grandmother Damiana, who is the mother of her father, and her grandfather Popeng, who is the father of her father. Her mother lives in Masbate, while her father works in Manila and comes home only on week-ends. While she was sleeping, accused crawled beside her and inserted his penis in her vagina. She pushed the accused but he threatened her with a knife which he poked at her side. He told her not to tell anyone. After inserting his penis in her vagina, [he] touched her breasts. She told the pastor of her church about the incident sometime in June during a church service. She and her pastor thereafter went to the police station to give her statement, which she identified in Court (Exh. "B"). She testified that this was the first time that accused raped her.
Continuing her direct-examination on February 8, 2004, private complainant testified that the June 21, 2002 incident was not the first time that the accused raped her. She could not, however, remember the dates these incidents were committed against her by the accused. She remembers that accused raped her many times, the first time of which was when she was twelve (12) years old. This incident happened in Pacific, Angat, Bulacan at their residence. At this incident, accused inserted his penis in her vagina. This happened in the bedroom of their house while her three (3) siblings were playing outside the house. Accused did not say anything to her before the incident. She resisted with no avail. She reported this incident to her aunt Gloria in 2002 when she was already thirteen (13) years old. It took her three (3) years before she reported the incident because her grandfather told her not to tell anyone about what happened or else he will kill her. After this incident when she was twelve (12) years old, he again raped her sometime in 2002. Aside from the incidents when she was twelve (12) years old, and on June 21, 2002, she was thirteen (13) years old when she was raped again in their house in Peri, Sta. Lucia, Angat, Bulacan. As to how this rape happened, she stated that [it is] "the same", i.e., he inserted his penis in her vagina. Her grandfather raped her many times, almost everyday since she was thirteen (13) years old up to when she was fourteen (14) years old. Even so, she only reported the incident to her aunt in 2002 because she could not bear what accused [w]as doing to her. At that time, aside from accused and her three (3) siblings, her other grandparents and her aunt Gloria were living with her. Her father was then working in Meycauayan, Bulacan while her mother is in Masbate. Aside from her aunt Gloria, she also reported the incident to her pastor, Imelda Loyola. She was with her aunt and pastor when she reported the incident to the police.
Continuing her direct examination on February 24, 2005, she testified that after reporting the incident to the police, they went to the doctor for examination. She identified accused in court.8
WHEREFORE, premises considered, accused is hereby ACQUITTED in Criminal Case Nos. 3090-M-2002, 3091-M-2002, 3092-M-2002 and 3093-M-2002.
Accused is, however, found GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape in Criminal Case No. 3094-M-2002 and hereby sentence him to suffer the penalty of RECLUSION PERPETUA.
Accused is also ordered to pay private complainant AAA civil indemnity ex-delicto of P50,000.00, exemplary damages of P25,000.00 and moral damages of P50,000.00.10
The trial court, therefore, correctly found appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of one count of qualified rape under par. 3, Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 7659, but erred in imposing the penalty of reclusion perpetua considering that at the time of the promulgation of its Decision on April 20, 2006, the proper penalty for such crime then is death. However, in view of the passage of Republic Act No. 9346 on June 24, 2006, which expressly prohibits the imposition of the death penalty, this Court is now constrained to affirm the imposition of Reclusion Perpetua under Article 266B(1) of the Revised Penal Code, as amended. As shown by her Certificate of Live Birth (Exh. "A", records, p. 103), [AAA] was born on August 22, 1988, and thus was only thirteen years and nine months old when appellant, [her] own grandfather, raped her on June 21, 2002. Both the qualifying circumstances of the victim's minority (below 18 years of age) and her relationship with the offender had been alleged in the Information and duly proved during the hearings. Furthermore, following the ruling in People v. Cabalquinto, G.R. No. 167693, September 19, 2006, the awarded civil indemnity and moral damages must each be increased from P50,000.00 to P75,000.00.
IN VIEW OF ALL THE FOREGOING, the instant appeal is DISMISSED and the challenged decision AFFIRMED, with modification that the civil indemnity and moral damages granted must each be for the amount of P75,000.00. In all other aspects, the lower court's decision stands. Costs against appellant.15
THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN FINDING THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT OF THE CRIME CHARGED DESPITE THE PATENT WEAKNESS OF THE PROSECUTION'S EVIDENCE.16
FISCAL DE GUZMAN: Q: Now, on June 21, 2002 at about 12:00 o'clock midnight, do you remember [your] whereabouts? A: I was in my bed, Ma'am. Q: What were you doing at that time? A: I was sleeping, Ma'am. Q: Who were with you, if any, at that time while you were then sleeping? A: None, Ma'am. Q: And, you were then sleeping in your resident located at Bgy. Peri, Sta. Lucia, Angat, Bulacan, is that correct? A: Yes, Ma'am. Q: This house where you were then sleeping, how many rooms [does] it have? A: There is no room, Ma'am. Q: And it is only a one (1) room house? A: Yes, Ma'am. Q: There is no division whatsoever in the house? A: There is a division, Ma'am. Q: What was that division for in your house? A: It is a place where my siblings is (sic) sleeping, Ma'am. Q: That is a division from your place where you were sleeping and the siblings where they were sleeping? A: Yes, Ma'am. Q: And, what was that division made of? A: It is made of wood, Ma'am. Q: The place where you were then sleeping, it has no door? A: None, Ma'am. Q: And also that place where your siblings were sleeping? A: Yes, Ma'am. Q: So, you mentioned that there was an unusual incident, what was that unusual incident? COURT: What date? FISCAL DE GUZMAN: June 21, 2002, Your Honor. COURT: Okay, answer. WITNESS: A: Ginapang po ako ng lolo ko. FISCAL DE GUZMAN: Q: Who is this lolo you are referring to? A: Lolo Jose, Ma'am. Q: Is he also residing in that same house with you? A: Yes, Ma'am. Q: And, how is he related to your Lola, BBB. A: Mag-balae po. Q: When you say "Balae", what do you mean by Balae? A: My father is the son of BBB and my mother is the daughter of Jose. Q: So, for clarification, Madame Witness, you are living in the same house with the accused in this case, with your lola BBB and your siblings? A: Yes, Ma'am. x x x x Q: Now, you mentioned that "Ginapang ka ni lolo Jose," after that what happened? A: He inserted his penis to my vagina, Ma'am. Q: What did you feel when he inserted his penis on your vagina? A: It hurts, Ma'am. Q: What did you do? A: I was pushing him, Ma'am. Q: What happened while you were pushing him? A: He was fight (sic) back, Ma'am. Q: How was he fighting back? A: He was threatening me with a knife, Ma'am. Q: Was he telling you anything? A: Not to tell anyone, Ma'am. Q: How was he holding that knife? A: Like this, Ma'am. INTERPRETER: Witness is demonstrating through her right hand. FISCAL DE GUZMAN: Q: On what part of the body was the knife poked? A: On my side, Ma'am. Q: While he was inserting his penis on (sic) your vagina, where was that knife? A: He was holding the knife, Ma'am. Q: What else happen (sic) after he inserted his penis on your vagina and you try (sic) to struggle? A: He touched me, Ma'am. Q; On what part of your body? A; My breast, Ma'am. Q: What else happen (sic) after that? A: No more, Ma'am. Q: How about your lolo, what did you do after touching your breast? A: None, Ma'am. Q: Did he leave you in the house? A: Yes, Ma'am. Q: He went out of the house that night? A: Yes, Ma'am. Q: Did you report that incident [to] anyone? A: Yes, to our pastor, Ma'am. Q: When did you report that incident? A: June, Ma'am. Q: Could you still remember how many days after that incident happened? A: I cannot remember, Ma'am. Q: Where did you report that incident to your pastora? A: At our church, Ma'am. Q: During a service? A: Yes, Ma'am. Q: Why did you report that incident to your pastora? A: Because I cannot bear it anymore, Ma'am. Q: Was it the first time the incident happened to you? A: Yes, Ma'am. Q: I am referring to the raping incident, was that the first time that the accused Jose Galvez raped you? A: Yes, Ma'am. Q: What did the pastora do when you reported the incident to her? A: We went to the police station, Ma'am. Q: What did you do at the police station? A: We gave our statement, Ma'am. Q: I am showing to you a Sinumpaang Salaysay, is this statement you are referring to? A: Yes, Ma'am.20
Further, the medical findings of Dr. Obedoza are indicative of rape. It is not indispensable that marks of external bodily injuries should appear on the victim of rape. Considering that in the commission of the first, second and third rapes, appellant threatened the victim with a knife, it is logical that no external injuries would appear on her body. What is more telling is that the victim, at her young age, sustained lacerations in her genitalia. We have ruled that lacerations, whether healed or fresh, are the best physical evidence of forcible defloration.24
Endnotes:
1 Rollo, pp. 2-16; penned by then Associate Justice Conrado M. Vasquez, Jr. with Associate Justices Edgardo F. Sundiam and Monina Arevalo-Zenarosa, concurring.
2 Under Republic Act No. 9262 also known as "Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act of 2004" and its implementing rules, the real name of the victim and those of her immediate family members are withheld and fictitious initials are instead used to protect the victim's privacy.
3 Records, p. 1.
4 Id. at 8.
5 Id. at 11.
6 Id. at 13.
7 Id. at 15.
8 CA rollo, pp. 12-14.
9 Records, p. 4.
10 CA rollo, p. 30.
11 Id. at 17-18.
12 Id. at 18.
13 Id. at 23.
14 Rollo, p. 6.
15 Id. at 14-15.
16 CA rollo, p. 48.
17 People v. Paredes, 332 Phil. 633, 638-639 (1996); People v. Jalosjos, 421 Phil. 43, 68 (2001).
18 People v. Julian, 337 Phil. 411, 426-427 (1997); People v. Masapol, 463 Phil. 25, 33 (2003).
19 Id.
20 TSN, March 31, 2003, pp. 4-10.
21 CA rollo, p. 104.
22 People v. Lusa, 351 Phil. 537, 545 (1998).
23 405 Phil. 173 (2001).
24 Id. at 185.
25 People v. Orillosa, G.R. Nos. 148716-18, July 7, 2004, 433 SCRA 689, 698.
26 People v. Sarcia, G.R. No. 169641, September 10, 2009, 599 SCRA 20, 46.