SECOND DIVISION
G.R. No. 206878, August 22, 2016
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MARCELINO CAGA Y FABRE, Accused-Appellant.
D E C I S I O N
DEL CASTILLO, J.:
This is an appeal from the February 14, 2012 Decision1 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-GR. CR-H.C. No. 04248, The CA Decision affirmed the November 13, 2009 Decision2 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila, Branch 26 in Criminal Case No. 06-246762, finding the appellant Marcelino Caga y Fabre (Caga) guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape and sentencing him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua.
Factual Antecedents
Caga was charged with the crime of rape for having carnal knowledge of "AAA"3 after having a drinking spree with her and her boyfriend, viz.:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
That on or about September 17, 2006, in the City of Manila, Philippines, the said accused, with lewd design, and by means of force, violence and intimidation, commit sexual assault upon "AAA", by then and there, while sleeping, placing himself on top of her ("pumatong") and inserting his penis into the vagina of said complainant, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously succeed in having carnal knowledge with the said "AAA," against her will and consent.Arraigned thereon, Caga, assisted by counsel, entered a negative plea. After pre-trial conference, trial on the merits followed.
Contrary to law.4chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
PREMISES CONSIDERED, this Court finds accused MARCELINO CAGA y FABRE, GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Rape under the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines, as charged in the Information. He is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of Reclusion Perpetua there being no aggravating nor mitigating circumstances, with all the accessory penalties provided by law, and to indemnify private complainant "AAA" the sum of Fifty Thousand (P50,000.00) Pesos by way of moral damages.Ruling of the Court of Appeals
Considering that the accused is a detention prisoner, he is hereby credited with the full length of time he has been under detention.
Cost de Oficio.
SO ORDERED.5chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
WHEREFORE, the appeal is DISMISSED, The Decision, dated November 13, 2009, of the Regional Trial Court of Manila, Branch 26, in Criminal Case No. 06-246762, finding accused-appellant Marcelino Caga y Fabre, guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape, is hereby AFFIRMED.Caga filed a Motion for Reconsideration7 of the CA's Decision, but this was denied in a Resolution8 dated August 23, 2012. Undeterred, Caga instituted the instant appeal before this Court.
SO ORDERED.6chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
Caga argues that while the Information alleged that force, violence, and intimidation were employed to consummate the alleged rape, the prosecution's evidence failed to establish the existence thereof. He claims that "AAA" did not offer any resistance against his sexual advances, "because she thought that it was her boyfriend (Randy) who was then making love with her."11chanrobleslawI.
THE COURT OF APPEALS GRAVELY ERRED IN FINDING THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT FOR THE CRIME OF RAPE DESPITE THE PROSECUTION'S FAILURE TO CONVINCINGLY PROVE HIS GUILT.10chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
At the core of almost all rape cases, the credibility of the victim's testimony is crucial in view of Hie intrinsic nature of the crime where only the participants therein can testify to its occurrence, la this regard, a restatement of a consistent ruling is in order. The rule is that 'the findings of fact of the trial court, its calibration of the testimonies of the witnesses and its assessment of the probative weight thereof, as well as its conclusions anchored on said findings, are accorded high respect if not conclusive effect.'Credibility of the Prosecution's Witnesses
The complainant's testimonies and the pieces of evidence, taken together, all point to the accused-appellant's complicity to the crime charged.
There is nothing in the records to render suspicious the evidence put forth by the complainant The accused-appellant is the uncle of her boyfriend. She has no known ill-motive to impute such a grave crime to him and, like the trial court, [w]e did not find any motive why she would fabricate a story that could, in fact, subject herself to public ridicule and humiliation. As settled, no woman would want to go through the process, the trouble and the humiliation of trial for such a debasing offense unless she actually has been a victim of abuse and her motive is but a response to the compelling need to seek and obtain justice.
Rape is a painful experience which is oftentimes not remembered in detail. For such an offense is not analogous to a person's achievement or accomplishment as to be worth recalling or reliving; rather, it is something which causes deep psychological wounds and casts a stigma upon the victim, scarring her psyche for life and which her conscious and subconscious mind would opt to forget.
Where there is no evidence to indicate that the prosecution witnesses were actuated by improper motive, the presumption is that they were not so actuated and that their testimonies are entitled to full faith and credit.
Besides, the records are reflective of the complainant's version that she was initially sleeping at the time she was ravished right after a drinking spree of hard liquor. There is even no dispute that complainant was at such intoxicated condition. Interestingly, not even the accused-appellant has ever put in issue the [level] of intoxication that the complainant might be at the time of the crime.
The complainant's credibility is further strengthened by the subsequent events that transpired. That she immediately reported the matter to the authorities and submitted herself readily to physical examination are indications of the truth of her accusation.
Indeed, the complainant has consistently been resolute in her desire to seek justice for what has been unlawfully done [to] her. This Court, therefore, has no reason to depart from the findings and conclusion of the trial court when it declared that: 'The fact that [the complainant] immediately reported the matter to the authorities which led to the immediate arrest of the accused and the filing of the instant case, sustained more than ever the credibility of the victim's testimony.'
"Viewed under all of these premises, there is no iota of doubt in the mind of this Court that accused-appellant undeniably committed the crime of rape against the complainant.
In his attempt to exculpate himself from this serious charge, ail that the accused-appellant did was to proffer his denial which must fail.
It is a well-settled rule that positive identification of the accused, where categorical and consistent and without any showing of ill motive on the part of the eyewitness testifying on the matter, prevails over alibi and denial which if not substantiated by clear and convincing evidence are negative and self-serving evidence undeserving of weight in law.12chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
During her testimony, the victim appeared to be straightforward, positive and convincing in her testimony. Such personal demeanor of the victim truly persuaded and satisfied this Court that the crime charged was indeed perpetrated by the accused. The victim would not have allowed herself to undergo the ordeal of public trial and expose herself to humiliation and embarrassment if her motive is not to bring to justice the person who sexually abused her.We are shown no reason why this Court ought not to defer to the findings of facts of both the RTC and the CA. Indeed, such findings of facts of both courts bear the hallmark of truth and have the ring of candor and sincerity.
The Court found no motive on the part of the victim to concoct such a false charge. x x x From all indications, she does not appear to have any ill motive to falsely testify against the accused.
The fact that she immediately reported the matter to the authorities, which led to the immediate arrest of the accused and the filing of the instant case, sustained more than ever the credibility of the victim's testimony.14chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
Endnotes:
1 CA rollo, pp. 101-111; penned by Associate Justice Noel G. Tijam and concurred in by Associate Justices Romeo F. Barza and Edwin D. Sorongon.
2 Records, pp. 190-195; penned by Presiding Judge Silvino T. Pampilo, Jr.
3 Pursuant to Republic Act No. 9262, otherwise known as the "Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act of 2004" and its implementing rules, the real name of the victim, as well as that of her/his immediate family members, is withheld and [instead] fictitious initials x x x are used to represent her/him, both to protect their privacy. (People v. Cabalquinto, 533 Phil. 703 [2006]).
4 Records, p. 1.
5 Id. at 195.
6 CA rollo, p. 110.
7 Id. at 116-121.
8 Id. at 128-130.
9Rollo, pp. 29-35.
10 Id. at 29.
11 Id. at 30.
12 CA rollo, pp. 108-110.
13People v. Villanueva, 644 Phil. 175, 188 (2010), citing People v. Valenzuela, 597 Phil. 732, 744 (2009).
14 Records, p. 194.
15People v. Jugueta, G.R. No. 202124, April 5, 2016.