SECOND DIVISION
G.R. No. 225059, July 23, 2018
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. XXX*, Accused-Appellant.
D E C I S I O N
CAGUIOA, J.:
This is an appeal1 filed under Section 13(c), Rule 124 of the Rules of Court from the Decision2 dated July 24, 2015(questioned Decision) of the Court of Appeals, Eleventh Division (CA), in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 05783, which affirmed the Joint Decision3 dated July 10, 2012 (RTC Decision) of the Regional Trial Court of Valenzuela City, Branch 270 (RTC) in Criminal Case Nos. 671-V-10, 672-V-10, 673-V-10, and 674-V-10, convicting herein accused-appellant XXX for the crimes charged therein.
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 671-V-10Upon arraignment, XXX pleaded "not guilty" to all charges.9 Trial on the merits ensued thereafter.
The undersigned State Prosecutor accuses [XXX] of the crime of Rape under Article 266-A, par. 1 in relation to Art. 266-B, 2nd Par. of the RPC, committed as follows:
That on or about May 18, 2010 in Valenzuela City and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, being then the father of the complainant, with lewd design, by means of force and intimidation employed upon the person of one "BBB", did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously have sexual intercourse with the said complainant, against her will and without her consent.
CONTRARY TO LAW.5
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 672-V-10
The undersigned State Prosecutor accuses [XXX] of the crime of Rape under Article 266-A, par. 1 in relation to Art. 266-B, 2nd Par. of the RPC, committed as follows:
That sometime in the year 2005 in Valenzuela City and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, being then the father of the complainant, with lewd design, by means of force and intimidation employed upon the person of one "BBB", then 15 years old, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously have sexual intercourse for the second time, the first happened when "BBB" was 14 years old, with the said complainant, against her will and without her consent, thereby subjecting the said minor to sexual abuse which debased, degraded and demeaned her intrinsic worth and dignity as a human being.
CONTRARY TO LAW.6
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 673-V-10
The undersigned State Prosecutor accuses [XXX] of the crime of Rape under Article 266-A, par. 1 in relation to Art. 266-B, 2nd Par. of the RPC, committed as follows:
That sometime in the year 2005 in Valenzuela City and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, being then the father of the complainant, with lewd design, by means of force and intimidation employed upon the person of one "BBB", then 15 years old, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously have sexual intercourse for the third time, against her will and without her consent, thereby subjecting the said minor to sexual abuse which debased, degraded and demeaned her intrinsic worth and dignity as a human being.
CONTRARY TO LAW.7
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 674-V-10
The undersigned State Prosecutor accuses [XXX] of the crime of Rape under Article 266-A, par. 1 in relation to Art. 266-B, 2nd Par. of the RPC, committed as follows:
That sometime in the year 2004 in Valenzuela City and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, being then the father of the complainant, with lewd design, by means of force and intimidation employed upon the person of one "BBB", then 14 years old, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously have sexual intercourse with the said complainant thereby subjecting the said minor to sexual abuse which debased, degraded and demeaned her intrinsic worth and dignity as a human being.
CONTRARY TO LAW.8
THE VERSION OF THE PROSECUTIONRuling of the RTC
"BBB" is the daughter of the accused, [XXX]. She is the only girl in the brood of three. Her mother is a manicurist while the accused is a pedicab driver. She recounted that on four different occasions, her father ravished her, inside their residence located at xxx, Valenzuela City.
It was in 2004 when she was still fourteen (14) years old that her very own father, the accused did the first horrid act of ravishing her. It was her narration that she arrived home from school and her mother and two brothers were not around. Her father went inside her room and began to undress her and made her lie down. He was naked and he went on top of her, inserted his penis to her vagina, caressed her thigh and made a pumping motion. She accounted that her father was then holding a knife and told her that if she would report what he did to her, he would kill her mother. She felt not only pain. She was afraid and angry at the same time. She felt so afraid that she was not able to fight back or even to shout for help.
The same bestial act of the accused towards her was repeated for the second time in 2005 at around 10:00 o'clock in the evening. Her father came home drunk. She was then left alone in their house watching TV. He instructed her to turn off the TV. He undressed himself and told her to remover hers too. He was at that time holding a knife compelling her to succumb to his desire out of fear. He told her to lie down. He initially sat beside her, caressed her thighs, then, went on top of her, and inserted his penis to her vagina while doing a pumping motion. He stopped when he heard someone knocking at the door.
About four (4) months had lapsed and she recalled that it was "holy week" in 2005 that she suffered the same fate in the hands of her father, the accused, once more. Her mother and siblings went to a birthday party that fateful night. She was sick then and was not able to come along in the said birthday party. Her father just drove her mother and siblings and went back home drunk. He again went near her. She began to cry. But her father told her not to be noisy as he would do something to her and pulled a knife from his back pocket. He removed her blanket and while showing a knife began to undress her. He removed his clothing too. He told her to lie face down. He caressed her buttocks and thighs and inserted his penis to (sic) her vagina from behind. He did a pumping motion and when he stopped she was able to touch a sticky white substance slathered on her thighs.
On May 18, 2010, the accused repeated the same horrid act to her. Her father had a drinking session with his friend, a fellow pedicab driver. He came home very drunk and sent her cousin and brother to do an errand. She assisted her father in going to bed and gave him a sponge bath. After she had given him a sponge bath, he stood up and got a knife in a small box and started caressing her. With the use of the knife he tore down the shirt she was wearing, pulled down her shorts. For himself, he removed his underwear and stayed on top of her, inserted his penis, pumped for a while and left her alone.
She attested that it took her a while before she was able to muster enough courage to reveal to others her ordeal in the hands of her own father. She kept in silence for a long time, not revealing to anyone [what her] father had been doing to her, afraid that if she would tell anyone, her father would make good his threat to kill her mother and her family would be saddled with problems.
It was in 2010 that she decided not to go home anymore. She opted to stay in the house of a friend, "CCC". After a week and she was no longer coming back home with her family, her friend, "CCC" began to probe her, why she was not going home anymore. It was then that she disclosed to "CCC" what she had been through in the hands of her father. Her friend encouraged and helped her in filing a formal complaint against her father. They went to the police authorities at Polo Police Station. She was referred to the Women's Protection Desk. It was there that her Sworn Statement was taken. After, which she was subjected to medical examinations.
xxxx
THE VERSION OF THE DEFENSE
[XXX] testified to belie the imputation against him made by his own daughter, [BBB]. He flatly denied the truth in the asseveration of facts labeled against him by his daughter, [BBB]. He claimed that there is no truth in the charges against him stating that his daughter is "isip bata" and was influenced by this friend of hers with whom she is currently living with. He further claims that [BBB] visited him in jail and asked for his forgiveness for falsely accusing him of raping her. Such confession of [BBB] was witnessed by his son and overheard by the "mayor" of the jail where he is presently detained.10
WHEREFORE, in the light of the foregoing, this court finds accused [XXX]:The RTC, in considering the evidence on record, found BBB's testimony to be straightforward and credible as against XXX's unsubstantiated defense of denial and alibi.12 Likewise, XXX's imputation of ill motive to BBB was considered by the RTC as "too petty to merit belief."13
(1) GUILTY for Criminal Case No. 671-V-10 and sentenced (sic) him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua; (2) GUILTY for Criminal Case No. 672-V-10 and sentenced (sic) him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua; (3) GUILTY for Criminal Case No. 673-V-10 and sentenced (sic) him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua; (4) GUILTY for Criminal Case No. 674-V-10 and sentenced (sic) him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua; (5) To indemnify [BBB] the amount of P75,000 as civil indemnity; P75,000 as moral damages; and P30,000 as exemplary damages, for each count of rape he was proven guilty.
The service of his sentence shall be served simultaneously and his preventive imprisonment shall be credited in full to his favour.
SO ORDERED.11
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the Joint Decision dated July 10, 2012 of the Regional Trial Court of Valenzuela City, Branch 270, is hereby AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION, to read as follows:Hence, the instant appeal.19
(1) In Criminal Case No. 671-V-10, appellant [XXX] is hereby found GUILTY and sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua; (2) In Criminal Case No. 672-V-10, appellant [XXX] is hereby found GUILTY and sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua; (3) In Criminal Case No. 673-V-10, appellant [XXX] is hereby found GUILTY and sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua; (4) In Criminal Case No. 674-V-10, appellant [XXX] is hereby found GUILTY and sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua; (5) Appellant [XXX] is hereby ordered to indemnify the private offended party, "BBB", the amount of P75,000.00 as civil indemnity; P75,000.00 as moral damages; and P30,000.00 as exemplary damages, for each count of rape he was proven guilty; and (6) Appellant [XXX] is ordered to pay the private offended party the further amount equivalent to the legal interest rate of Six Percent (6%) per annum on the total monetary award, until full payment of the same.
SO ORDERED.18 (Emphasis supplied)
Anent the first rape, it was established by sufficient evidence that appellant committed the offense charged in the information in Criminal Case No. 671-V-10. As testified to by "BBB", appellant:Significantly, BBB's narration of events was corroborated by the physical evidence, as contained in the medico-legal report, to wit:In the second rape incident, the prosecution, likewise, was able to prove that appellant was able to rape "BBB" using force and intimidation. Thus:
- Forcibly undressed her and made her lie down;
- He went on top of her and inserted his penis inside her vagina and made a pumping motion causing her to feel severe pain;
- He kissed her with his left hand caressing her thigh and his right hand holding a knife;
- He threatened her that he would kill her mother if she would report what he did to her; and
- She went to the bathroom and saw blood in her underwear.
With regard to the third rape incident, it was clearly shown by competent evidence that, using force and intimidation:
- Appellant, who was drunk, told her to lie down on the bed;
- He undressed himself and while holding a fan knife, he told her to undress also;
- He caressed her thighs and went on top of her;
- He inserted his penis and did a pumping motion for minutes causing "BBB" to feel severe pain; and
- He stopped pumping after he heard something.
As regards the fourth rape incident, it was also clearly shown by competent evidence that, using force and intimidation:
- Appellant, who was drunk, pulled a knife from his back pocket and told "BBB" to undress herself;
- He undress (sic) himself and told her to lie face down;
- He caressed her buttocks and while threatening "BBB" with a knife, inserted his penis into her vagina and made pumping motion and threatened her not to tell anyone what he did to her;
- She felt pain because appellant knelt on her thigh; and
- When he stopped pumping, she felt something sticky in her thigh.
- Appellant, who was drunk, told her to give him a towel;
- With the towel he undress (sic) himself and told her to lie face down;
- He caressed her buttocks and while threatening "BBB" with a knife, inserted his penis into her vagina and made pumping motion and threatened her not to tell anyone what he did to her;
- She felt pain because appellant knelt and pinned down her thigh.27
The Court has held on severa] occasions that when a rape victim's account is straightforward and candid and is further corroborated by the medical findings of the examining physician, such testimony is sufficient to support a conviction.29 As correctly pointed out in the questioned Decision, BBB was able to describe in clear detail how each incident of rape was committed by XXX.30 Moreover, the RTC, after observing BBB's manner and demeanor firsthand during trial, was sufficiently convinced of her credibility and the truthfulness of her testimony.31
Q: And considering the brief history in the Sexual Crime Protocol and the Manifestation of Consent, after you conducted the physical and genital examination of the victim in this case, what is (sic) your findings for your Final Medico-Legal Report and the Initial Medico-Legal Report, doctor? A: All the part that was indicated in my report revealed essentially normal except for the hymen which has a deep healed laceration at 5 o' clock position, sir. xxxx Q: And in your conclusion doctor, in your Final Report, what was the cause? A: My conclusion is that medical evaluation shows clear evidence of application of blunt trauma to the hymen, sir. Q: And considering the brief history in the Sexual Crime Protocol written by the minor victim herself, what can you say about your findings? A: Findings is (sic) consistent with the history that was given by the victim, sir. xxxx Q: For the Sexual Crime Protocol, doctor, how many times was the alleged raped (sic) according to the minor victim? A: As stated in the history given by the victim, the incident happened "noong 14 anyos pa lang ako ay ginahasa na po ng alting ama hanggang ngayon ginagahasa pa rin ako ng 4 na beses ang huling pangyayari po ay taong May 18, 2010", sir.28 (Emphasis supplied)
The foregoing narration adequately dispels whatever doubt XXX attempts to foster against BBB's credibility. Based on BBB's testimony, in all the incidents of rape, XXX was armed with a deadly weapon and he would, in several occasions, threaten BBB not to tell anyone of his acts. Thus, considering that XXX is the father of BBB, his moral ascendancy was certainly more than enough to silence her, not to mention the normal tendency of rape victims to conceal their humiliation and shame resulting from the irrevocable violation of their honor. On this score, the case of People v. Mingming36 instructs:
First Incident of Rape COURT Q : When was that, do you recall, when exactly was that, the first time your father raped you? A : 2004, Your Honor. PROS. JUAN Q : What did your father tell you? A : That he will kill my mother if I am going report what he did to me, sir. xxxx Q : When you were awakened and saw your father holding your back, what happened next? A : He threatened me not to make any noise because he will kill me. xxxx Second Incident of Rape xxxx COURT Q : Why did you not shout, knowing that this thing will happen again? A : I was really afraid of him, You (sic) Honor, I know "wala akong laban sa kanya." xxxx COURT Q : Why did you try to hide you (sic) crying from your brother? A : I am afraid that he will know, sir. Q : And why are you afraid that he will find out? A : "Baka po magkagulo sila sa bahay." It might cause trouble and mother might know, sir. xxxx Third Incident of Rape xxxx Q : And when he pulled out the knife, what happen (sic) next? A : He removed my blanket, sir, and then he pointed the knife. Q : What did he tell you while pointing the knife after removing your blanket? A : He told me not to make any noise because he do (sic) something, sir. xxxx Q : What was he whispering to you? A : He warned me not to tell anybody what he did to me, sir. xxxx Fourth Incident of Rape xxxx Q : And when you saw the knife, how did you feel? A : I felt afraid, sir. Q : And then what happened after he got (sic) [out] the knife? A : He used the knife in tearing my blouse, sir. xxxx COURT Q : Why did you not run when he was taking the knife? A : I was about to go out of the room, Your Honor, but he was able to get hold of the knife right away and he pushed me. xxxx Q : Did you not resist? A : I resisted, sir. COURT Q : How? A : I am attempting (sic) to stand up, You (sic) Honor. Q : You said he drunk (sic) that time, why did you not kick him? A : His knees were pinning my thigh so I could not stand up, Your Honor.35
[W]e do not believe that delay in reporting a rape should directly and immediately translate to the conclusion that the reported rape did not take place; there can be no hard and fast rule to determine when a delay in reporting a rape can have the effect of affecting the victim's credibility. The heavy psychological and social toll alone that a rape accusation exacts on the rape victim already speaks against the view that a delay puts the veracity of a charge of rape in doubt. The effects of threats and the fear that they induce must also be factored in. At least one study shows that the decisive factor for non-reporting and the failure to prosecute a rape is the lack of support - familial, institutional and societal - for the rape victim, given the unfavorable socio-cultural and policy environment. All these, to our mind, speak for themselves in negating the conclusion that a delay in reporting a rape is per se sufficient basis to disbelieve an allegation of rape. The more reasonable approach is to take the delay into account but to disregard it if there are justifiable explanations for the victim's prolonged silence.37On a related matter, that BBB continued to stay at their home despite the rape incidents is of no consequence. While XXX argues that such circumstance mitigates the multiple charges of rape against him, the Court finds no merit in his claim. As succinctly held in the questioned Decision:
It should be emphasized that when the first incident of rape was committed against "BBB", she was only fourteen (14) years old. A natural reluctant Filipina woman, who is fourteen (14) years old, would not have thought of leaving the house much less finding solace in [a] government institution that renders psychological and social services for [a] rape victim. It could hardly be expected that such a child of tender age would know what to do and where to go under the circumstances. Indeed, it is not proper to cast judgment on the actions of children who have undergone traumatic experiences by the norms of behavior expected under the circumstances from mature persons.38XXX's defense of alibi and denial failed to overcome the prosecution's evidence
| Very truly yours, |
(SGD) | |
MA. LOURDES C. PERFECTO | |
Division Clerk of Court | |
By: | |
TERESITA AQUINO TUAZON | |
Deputy Division Clerk of Court |
Endnotes:
* The identity of the victims or any information which could establish or compromise their identities, as well as those of their immediate family or household members, shall be withheld pursuant to RA 7610 titled, "AN ACT PROVIDING FOR STRONGER DETERRENCE AND SPECIAL PROTECTION AGAINST CHILD ABUSE, EXPLOITATION AND DISCRIMINATION, PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR ITS VIOLATION, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES," approved on June 17, 1992; RA 9262 titled "AN ACT DEFINING VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND THEIR CHILDREN, PROVIDING FOR PROTECTIVE MEASURES FOR VICTIMS, PRESCRIBING PENALTIES THEREFOR, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES," approved on March 8, 2004; and Section 40 of A.M. No. 04-10-11-SC, otherwise known as the "Rule on Violence against Women and Their Children" (November 15, 2004). (See footnote 4 in People v. Cadano, Jr., 729 Phil. 576, 578 [2014], citing People v. Lomaque, 710 Phil. 338, 342 [2013]. See also Amended Administrative Circular No. 83-2015 titled "PROTOCOLS AND PROCEDURES IN THE PROMULGATION, PUBLICATION, AND POSTING ON THE WEBSITES OF DECISIONS, FINAL RESOLUTIONS, AND FINAL ORDERS USING FICTITIOUS NAMES/PERSONAL CIRCUMSTANCES," dated September 5, 2017; and People v. XXX and YYY, G.R. No. 235652, July 9, 2018.)
1 CA rollo, pp. 157-159.
2Rollo, pp. 2-32. Penned by Associate Justice Sesinando E. Villon, with Associate Justices Rodil V. Zalameda and Pedro B. Corales concurring.
3 CA rollo, pp. 54-76. Penned by Presiding Judge Evangeline M. Francisco.
4 As amended by Republic Act No. 8353 (THE ANTI-RAPE LAW OF 1997) in relation to Republic Act No. 7610 (SPECIAL PROTECTION OF CHILDREN AGAINST ABUSE, EXPLOITATION AND DISCRIMINATION ACT).
5Rollo, pp. 2-3.
6 Id. at 3.
7 Id.
8 Id. at 4.
9 Id.
10 CA rollo, pp. 57-61.
11 Id. at 75-76.
12 Id. at 73-74.
13 Id. at 73.
14 Id. at 6.
15 Id. at 37-52.
16 Id. at 91-109.
17 Id. at 46-51.
18Rollo, pp. 30-31.
19 Id. at 33.
20 Id. at 41-42.
21 Id. at 46-47.
22People v. Gallano, 755 Phil. 120, 130 (2015).
23People v. Magayon, 640 Phil. 121, 135 (2010).
24People v. Gerola, G.R. No. 217973, July 19, 2017.
25People v. Aguilar, 565 Phil. 233, 247 (2007).
26 Id.
27Rollo, pp. 12-13.
28 TSN, May 31, 2011; pp. 10-13; rollo, pp. 14-15.
29People v. Traigo, 734 Phil. 726, 730 (2014).
30Rollo, pp. 13-14.
31 Id.
32 RULeS OF COURT, Rule 133, Sec. 2.
33 CA rollo, p. 49.
34 Id. at 46.
35Rollo, pp. 16-26.
36 594 Phil. 170 (2008).
37 Id. at 188-189.
38Rollo, p. 28.
39People v. Alvarez, 461 Phil. 188, 200 (2003).
40 CA rollo, p. 61.
41 Id.
42 Id.
43 Id. at 74.
44 Id. at 73-74.
45People v. Jugueta, 783 Phil. 806 (2016).
46 AN ACT TO IMPOSE THE DEATH PENALTY ON CERTAIN HEINOUS CRIMES, AMENDING FOR THAT PURPOSE THE REVISED PENAL LAWS, AS AMENDED, OTHER SPECIAL PENAL LAWS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
47People v. Tigle, 465 Phil. 368, 383. (2004).
48People v. Jugueta, supra note 45.
49 Section 11. Article [266-A] of the same Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
xxxx
The death penalty shall also be imposed if the crime of rape is committed with any of the following attendant circumstances:
1. when the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age and the offender is a parent, ascendant, step-parent, guardian, relative by consanguinity or affinity within the third civil degree, or the common-law-spouse of the parent of the victim. (Emphasis supplied)