Compilation on Jurisprudence on Rape

From years 2000-2009

2009
People of the Philippines Vs. Ruben Corpuz
G.R. No. 175836 January 30, 2009

Ruling:
In People v. Adajio, the Court found that fear of bodily harm and fear for the safety of her
family prevented the therein complainant from shouting for help, caused her to spread her
legs upon the order of her rapist, and compelled her to follow him to the place where the
second charge of rape occurred. It thus held that physical resistance need not be
established in rape when threats and intimidation are employed and the victim submits
herself to the embrace of her rapist because of fear, as in the cases at bar.

The effects of threats and intimidation aside, appellant being the common-law spouse of
AAA’s mother BBB, moral ascendancy substituted for intimidation. Indeed, in rape
committed by a close kin, such as the victim's father, stepfather, uncle, or the common-law
spouse of her mother, it is not necessary that actual force or intimidation be employed;
moral influence or ascendancy takes the place of violence or intimidation.

As for the appellate court’s characterization of the crime as simple rape, the Court finds the
same to be consistent with Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code and settled
jurisprudence that, to obtain a conviction for qualified rape, the minority of the victim and
her relationship to the offender must be both alleged in the Information and proved with
certainty. In the present cases, AAA’s minority was alleged and proved, the same having
been averred in each of the Informations and proven by a certification from the Office of the
Civil Registrar of Kabugao, Apayao as to AAA’s date of birth.

The supposed stepfather-stepdaughter relationship between appellant and AAA, on the

other hand, was alleged in each of the Informations. The stepfather-stepdaughter
relationship as a qualifying circumstance presupposes that the victim’s mother and the
accused contracted marriage. The prosecution, however, did not present proof that BBB and
appellant did contract marriage. What appellant claimed is that he and BBB are merely
common-law spouses ("live-in" partners), which could also qualify the offense but only if the
same is alleged in each of the Informations and proven at the trial. The appellate court thus
correctly held that appellant committed six (6) counts of simple rape.

People of the Philippines Vs. Romeo Bandin

G.R. No. 176531 April 24, 2009
Ruling:

In this case, we find no reason to overturn the conclusion arrived at by the trial court as
affirmed by the CA. It held that AAA's testimony was credible as she delivered her
testimony in a clear, direct and positive manner. Through his voice, she positively identified
appellant as the man who sexually abused her. Identification of an accused by his voice has
been accepted, particularly in cases where, as in this case, the victim has known the
perpetrator for a long time.

Consequently, appellant's defense of denial and alibi must crumble in the face of AAA's
positive and clear identification of him as the perpetrator of the crime. Denial and alibi
cannot be given greater evidentiary value than the testimonies of credible witnesses who
testify on affirmative matters. Positive identification destroys the defense of alibi and
renders it impotent, especially where such identification is credible and categorical.

People of the Philippines Vs. Armando Padilla

G.R. No. 167955 September 30, 2009

Ruling:

It is clear from the Information that AAA was alleged to be a minor who was aged eleven
(11) at the time of the commission of the crime and that the accused is her father. Contrary
to the prosecution's asseveration, it does not matter that the private complainant's
relationship with the accused was denominated as an "aggravating circumstance" and not
as a "special qualifying circumstance."

The Court has repeatedly held, even after the amendments to the Rules of Criminal
Procedure took effect, that qualifying circumstances need not be preceded by descriptive
words such as "qualifying" or "qualified by" to properly qualify an offense. The Court has
repeatedly qualified cases of rape where the twin circumstances of minority and relationship
have been specifically alleged in the Information even without the use of the descriptive
words "qualifying" or "qualified by." In the instant case, the fact that AAA's relationship with
appellant was described as "aggravating" instead of "qualifying" does not take the
Information out of the purview of Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC ), as amended
by Section 11 of Republic Act No. 7659 (RA 7659), which was the prevailing law at the time
of the commission of the offense. Article 335 does not use the words "qualifying" or
"aggravating" in enumerating the circumstances that qualify rape so as to make it a heinous
crime punishable by death. It merely refers to the enumerated circumstances as "attendant
circumstances." The specific allegation of the attendant circumstances in the Information,
coupled with the designation of the offense and a statement of the acts constituting the
offense as required in Sections 8 and 9 of Rule 110, are sufficient to warn appellant that the
crime charged is qualified rape punishable by death.

In the present case, the attendant circumstances of minority and relationship were
specifically alleged in the Information. These allegations are sufficient to qualify the offense
of rape.

As to AAA’s relationship with appellant, the Court agrees that the prosecution was able to
prove it beyond reasonable doubt. The Information alleged that appellant is the father of
AAA. Appellant, in turn, admitted during trial that AAA is her daughter. Under prevailing
jurisprudence, admission in open court of relationship has been held to be sufficient and,
hence, conclusive to prove relationship with the victim.

However, with respect to AAA's minority, the settled rule is that there must be independent
evidence proving the age of the victim, other than the testimonies of the prosecution
witnesses and the absence of denial by appellant. The victim's original or duly certified birth
certificate, baptismal certificate or school records would suffice as competent evidence of
her age. In the instant case, aside from the testimonies of prosecution witnesses, coupled
with appellant's absence of denial, no independent substantial evidence was presented to
prove the age of AAA. Neither was it shown by the prosecution that the said documents had
been lost, destroyed, unavailable or were otherwise totally absent.

Anent appellant’s failure to object to the testimony of AAA, regarding her age, the Court has
held that the failure of the accused to object to the testimonial evidence regarding the rape
victim’s age shall not be taken against him. Even the appellant's implied admission of the
victim's age, in the absence of any supporting independent evidence, may not be considered
sufficient to prove her age. In People v. Biong, the appellant testified as to the exact date
when her daughter, the complainant, was born. However, the Court held that appellant's
testimony falls short of the quantum of proof required to establish her age. As the qualifying
circumstance of minority alters the nature of the crime of rape and increases the penalty
thereof, it must be proved with equal certainty and clearness as the crime itself. In the
present case, the Court agrees with appellant that the prosecution failed to discharge this
burden.

The Court finds it incredible for private complainant to trump up a charge of rape against
appellant on the simple reason that she has a grudge against the latter or that she was
influenced by her aunt who harbors resentment against him. No woman would cry rape,
allow an examination of her private parts, subject herself to humiliation, go through the
rigors of public trial and taint her good name if her claim were not true.

People of the Philipines Vs. Elmer Baldo

G.R. No. 175238 February 24, 2009

Ruling:

The "sweetheart theory" or "sweetheart defense" is an oft-abused justification that rashly

derides the intelligence of this Court and sorely tests our patience. For the Court to even
consider giving credence to such defense, it must be proven by compelling evidence. The
defense cannot just present testimonial evidence in support of the theory, as in the instant
case. Independent proof is required -- such as tokens, mementos, and photographs. There
is none presented here by the defense.

Moreover, even if it were true that they were sweethearts, a love affair does not justify
rape. As wisely ruled in a previous case, a man does not have the unbridled license to
subject his beloved to his carnal desires.

AAA’s failure to shout or to tenaciously resist appellant should not be taken against her
since such negative assertion would not ipso facto make voluntary her submission to
appellant’s criminal act. In rape, the force and intimidation must be viewed in the light of
the victim’s perception and judgment at the time of the commission of the crime. As already
settled in our jurisprudence, not all victims react the same way. Some people may cry out,
some may faint, some may be shocked into insensibility, while others may appear to yield
to the intrusion. Some may offer strong resistance while others may be too intimidated to
offer any resistance at all. Moreover, resistance is not an element of rape. A rape victim has
no burden to prove that she did all within her power to resist the force or intimidation
employed upon her. As long as the force or intimidation is present, whether it was more or
less irresistible is beside the point. In this case, the presence of a fan knife on hand or by
his side speaks loudly of appellant’s use of violence, or force and intimidation.

People of the Philipines Vs. Roberto Abay

G.R. No. 177752 February 24, 2009

Ruling:

Under Section 5(b), Article III of RA 7610 in relation to RA 8353, if the victim of sexual
abuse is below 12 years of age, the offender should not be prosecuted for sexual abuse but
for statutory rape under Article 266-A(1)(d) of the Revised Penal Code and penalized
with reclusion perpetua. On the other hand, if the victim is 12 years or older, the offender
should be charged with either sexual abuse under Section 5(b) of RA 7610 or rape under
Article 266-A (except paragraph 1[d]) of the Revised Penal Code. However, the offender
cannot be accused of both crimes for the same act because his right against double
jeopardy will be prejudiced. A person cannot be subjected twice to criminal liability for a
single criminal act. Likewise, rape cannot be complexed with a violation of Section 5(b) of
RA 7610. Under Section 48 of the Revised Penal Code (on complex crimes), a felony under
the Revised Penal Code (such as rape) cannot be complexed with an offense penalized by a
special law.

In this case, the victim was more than 12 years old when the crime was committed against
her. The Information against appellant stated that AAA was 13 years old at the time of the
incident. Therefore, appellant may be prosecuted either for violation of Section 5(b) of RA
7610 or rape under Article 266-A (except paragraph 1[d]) of the Revised Penal Code. While
the Information may have alleged the elements of both crimes, the prosecution’s evidence
only established that appellant sexually violated the person of AAA through force and
intimidation by threatening her with a bladed instrument and forcing her to submit to his
bestial designs. Thus, rape was established.
People of the Philippines Vs. Alberto L. Mahinay
January 20, 2009
Ruling:

Either way, this Court has observed in numerous cases that lust does not respect either
time or place. The evil in man has no conscience -- the beast in him bears no respect for
time and place, driving him to commit rape anywhere, even in places where people
congregate such as in parks, along the roadside, within school premises, and inside a house
where there are other occupants.

Neither do we find merit in Mahinay’s insistence that AAA’s failure to report the incident
immediately was tantamount to giving consent to the alleged act of Mahinay. Delay in
revealing the commission of rape is not an indication of a fabricated charge. Many victims of
rape never complain or file criminal charges against the rapist, for they prefer to silently
bear the ignominy and pain, rather than reveal their shame to the world or risk the
offender’s making good his threats.

As correctly argued by the appellee, the fact that AAA did not shout or make an outcry
when there were nearby persons does not mean that she was not raped by Mahinay. The
workings of the human mind under emotional stress are unpredictable; people react
differently in such situations: some may shout; some may faint; some may be shocked into
insensibility; others may openly welcome their intrusion.

As furthermore testified to by Mahinay himself, he left his residence after he had been
accused of raping AAA, and stayed in the house of his father in Tabunok. It is settled that
the flight of an accused is an indication of his guilt or of a guilty mind.

People of the Philipines Vs. Jessie Malate

G.R. No. 185724 June 5, 2009

Ruling:

In determining the guilt or innocence of the accused in rape cases, the Court is guided by
three well-entrenched principles: (1) an accusation of rape can be made with facility and
while the accusation is difficult to prove, it is even more difficult for the person accused,
though innocent, to disprove the charge; (2) considering that, in the nature of things, only
two persons are usually involved in the crime of rape, the testimony of the complainant
should be scrutinized with great caution; and (3) the evidence of the prosecution must
stand or fall on its own merit, and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of
the evidence for the defense.

Moreover, in cases involving the prosecution for forcible rape, the courts have consistently
held that, as a general rule, corroboration of the victim’s testimony is not a necessary
condition to a conviction for rape where the victim’s testimony is credible, or clear and
convincing or sufficient to prove the elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt.
The weight and sufficiency of evidence are determined by the credibility, nature, and quality
of the testimony.

The Court finds no reason to deviate from the time-honored doctrine that the assessment of
the credibility of witnesses and their testimonies is a matter best undertaken by the trial
court because of its unique opportunity to observe the witnesses firsthand and note their
demeanor, conduct, and attitude under grilling examination. Moreover, the issue on which
witness to believe is one that is best addressed by the trial court, for the findings of fact of a
trial judge are accorded great respect and are seldom disturbed on appeal for having the
opportunity to directly observe the witnesses, and to determine by their demeanor on the
stand the probative value of their testimonies.

This rule admits of exceptions, however, such as when the trial court’s findings of facts and
conclusions are not supported by the evidence on record, or when certain facts of substance
and value that would likely change the outcome of the case have been overlooked by the
trial court, or when the assailed decision is based on a misapprehension of facts. None of
these exceptions exists in this case.

And there is also no reason not to believe her that out of fear threatened with a knife, she
had to submit herself to the carnal desire of her ravisher against her will. She was helpless
alone with the knife-wielding man. Her passive submission may have saved her from any
physical injuries, both external and internal, but still the medical examination she allowed
herself to go through says that ‘genital findings do not exclude sexual abuse.’ (Exh. ‘B-
1’). After all ‘when a victim says she has been raped, she says in effect all that is necessary
to show that rape has been committed and if her testimony meets the test of credibility, the
accused may be convicted on the basis thereof.’ (People v. Balacano, G.R. no. 127156, July
31, 2000.)

Furthermore, accused-appellant cannot plausibly bank on the minor inconsistencies in the

testimony of the complainant to discredit her account of the incident. Even if they do exist,
minor and insignificant inconsistencies tend to bolster, rather than weaken, the credibility of
the witness for they show that his testimony was not contrived or rehearsed. Trivial
inconsistencies do not rock the pedestal upon which the credibility of the witness rests, but
enhances credibility as they manifest spontaneity and lack of scheming. As aptly held in the
American case of State v. Erikson, the rule that a victim’s testimony in sexual assault cases
must be corroborated "does not apply where the inconsistency or contradiction bears upon
proof not essential to the case." Well to point, even the most truthful witnesses can
sometimes make mistakes, but such minor lapses do not necessarily affect their credibility.

Undoubtedly, the complainant’s testimony has been found to be credible by the trial court
and this Court finds no reason to disturb such determination. Further, it is worth noting that
no married woman in her right mind would subject herself to public scrutiny and humiliation
in order to perpetuate a falsehood.
People of the Philippines Vs. Felix Palgan

G.R. No. 186234 December 21, 2009

Ruling:

AAA’s failure to resist or to cry for help during those times that she was raped cannot be
taken against her. Verily, when threat, intimidation and fear are employed, as was done
here by appellant, there is no need to establish physical resistance. Certainly, an added
reason for her failure was her stepfather’s dominance over her. In rape committed by a
father against his daughter, the father’s moral ascendancy and influence over the latter
substitute for violence and intimidation. The foregoing principle applies in the case of a
sexual assault of a stepdaughter by her stepfather and of a goddaughter by a godfather in
the sacrament of confirmation.

Moreover, no woman, especially one of tender age like AAA, would concoct a rape complaint
and would, at the same time, allow a gynecological examination on herself, as well as
subject herself to a public trial if she were not motivated by the desire to have her offender
apprehended and punished.

People of the Philippines Vs. Gualberto Cinco

G.R. No. 186460 December 4, 2009

Ruling:

In rape cases, failure to specify the exact dates or times when the rapes occurred does not
ipso facto make the information defective on its face. The reason is obvious. The date or
time of the commission of rape is not a material ingredient of the said crime because the
gravamen of rape is carnal knowledge of a woman through force and intimidation. The
precise time when the rape took place has no substantial bearing on its commission. As
such, the date or time need not be stated with absolute accuracy. It is sufficient that the
complaint or information states that the crime has been committed at any time as near as
possible to the date of its actual commission. In sustaining the view that the exact date of
commission of the rape is immaterial, we ruled in People v. Purazo that:

We have ruled, time and again, that the date is not an essential element of the crime of
rape, for the gravamen of the offense is carnal knowledge of a woman. As such, the time or
place of commission in rape cases need not be accurately stated. As early as 1908, we
already held that where the time or place or any other fact alleged is not an essential
element of the crime charged, conviction may be had on proof of the commission of the
crime, even if it appears that the crime was not committed at the precise time or place
alleged, or if the proof fails to sustain the existence of some immaterial fact set out in the
complaint, provided it appears that the specific crime charged was in fact committed prior to
the date of the filing of the complaint or information within the period of the statute of
limitations and at a place within the jurisdiction of the court.
The informations in Criminal Case No. Q-99-89097 and Q-99-89098 allege that AAA was a
minor at the time she was raped. However, there is no allegation therein that the offender,
herein appellant, is the common-law spouse of AAA’s parent. Thus, the qualifying
circumstances of minority and relationship cannot be properly appreciated. In the absence
of such qualifying circumstances, the rapes in the instant cases are treated as simple rapes.
Under Republic Act No. 8353, the penalty for simple rape is reclusion perpetua.

People of the Philippines Vs. Elmer Peralta

G.R. No. 187531 October 16, 2009

Ruling:

In a determination of guilt for the crime of rape, primordial is the credibility of complainant’s
testimony, because, in rape cases, the accused may be convicted solely on the testimony of
the victim, provided it is credible, natural, convincing, and consistent with human nature
and the normal course of things. This eloquent testimony of the victim, coupled with the
medical findings attesting to her non-virgin state, should be enough to confirm the truth of
her charges.

Of note moreover is that the trial court, which had the undisputed vantage in the evaluation
and appreciation of testimonial evidence, found the victim’s narration of her painful ordeal
as clear, categorical, straightforward, sincere, and truthful.

People of the Philippines Vs. Elister Basmayor

G.R. No. 182791 February 10, 2009
Ruling:

The trial court was convinced that appellant, indeed, raped AAA not twice, but only once.
Due to AAA’s conflicting testimonies as to the number of times she was raped and whether
her mother was present when she was allegedly raped on 9 November 2001, the trial court
was compelled to dismiss Criminal Case No. 122127-H. However, as to the second rape
committed on 12 November 2001, the trial court was persuaded that it happened and that
appellant was the culprit. It accorded full credence to AAA’s testimony as to what happened
on the fateful morning of 12 November 2001. The victim identified appellant as the one who
violated her honor. Her testimony was further supported by the findings of the Dr. Carpio
who, upon genital examination, found fresh lacerations in her hymen at the 3:00 o’clock
and 6:00 o’clock positions. Consistent with his findings, Dr. Carpio concluded that AAA had
lost her virginity and that the lacerations, which were about three days old, were possibly
caused by the rape committed on 12 November 2001.

The trial court convicted appellant only of simple rape, because the prosecution failed to
establish that appellant was the common-law spouse of AAA’s mother. It said that the
prosecution failed to show that BBB and CCC were one and the same person.
In the case at bar, even though there were inconsistencies in the testimony of AAA
regarding the alleged rape committed on 9 November 2001, we find that said discrepancies
did not affect her credibility when she testified on the rape committed on her on 12
November 2001. We agree with the Court of Appeals when it said that the rape committed
on 12 November 2001 was separate and distinct from the one allegedly committed on 9
November 2001, and that what was essential was the consistency in the narration of the 12
November 2001 rape.

Appellant was charged with statutory rape. The first element was proved by the testimony
of the victim herself, while the second element was established by AAA’s Certificate of Live
Birth showing that she was born on 4 February 1990. AAA was eleven (11) years old when
the crime was committed on 12 November 2001.

We agree with the Court of Appeals that the qualifying circumstance of relationship has
been sufficiently proved. The victim declared that the appellant was her mother’s live-in
partner. Her mother, BBB, also testified and pointed to appellant as her live-in partner. On
the other hand, appellant, who calls the victim his "anak-anakan," claimed that his live-in
partner was CCC, not BBB. We find that BBB and CCC are one and the same person. It is of
no moment that appellant knows BBB by the name of CCC. BBB categorically identified
appellant to be her live-in partner, which statement was seconded by the victim. If BBB and
CCC were truly different persons, appellant could have easily presented CCC to show such
reality. This, he did not do. His reliance on his declaration that his common-law wife was
CCC and not BBB was fatal to his cause.

People of the Philippines Vs. Antonio Dalisay

G.R. No. 188106 November 25, 2009
Ruling:

This eloquent testimony of the victim, coupled with the medical findings attesting to her
non-virgin state, should be enough to confirm the truth of her charges. Further, deeply
entrenched in our jurisprudence is the rule that the findings of the trial court on the
credibility of witnesses are entitled to the highest respect and are not to be disturbed on
appeal in the absence of any clear showing that the trial court overlooked, misunderstood or
misapplied facts or circumstances of weight and substance which would have affected the
result of the case.

The Court discredits appellant’s defense of denial for it is a negative and self-serving
evidence, which pales in comparison to the victim’s clear and convincing narration and
positive identification of her assailant. The Court, likewise, does not find merit in appellant’s
rather belated assertion that the prosecution failed to establish force or intimidation and the
resistance of the victim to the intrusion. The presence of intimidation, which is purely
subjective, cannot be tested by any hard and fast rule, but should be viewed in the light of
the victim’s perception and judgment at the time of the commission of the rape.
People of the Philippines Vs. Eduardo Aboganda
G.R. No. 183565 April 8, 2009
Ruling:

Thus, while the informations allege that the rapes were committed on or about the months
of February and March 2000, the lack of particularity in time or date does not affect the
outcome of the instant case. The allegations as to the dates of commission substantially
apprised accused-appellant of the rape charges against him as the elements of rape were in
the informations. He, therefore, cannot insist that he was deprived of the right to be
informed of the nature of the charges against him. As the appellate court pertinently noted,
the conviction of accused-appellant does not depend on the time the rapes were committed
but on the credibility of AAA, whom the trial court found to have testified in a clear,
straightforward, and consistent manner. Her testimony outweighs accused-appellant’s weak
defense of alibi. He may be convicted on the sole testimony of the victim, provided that
such testimony is credible, natural, convincing, and consistent with human nature and the
normal course of things, a factor which exists in the present case.

Moreover, accused-appellant belatedly raised his argument on appeal. In the similar case of
People v. Mauro, the accused gave a "not guilty" plea upon arraignment instead of
questioning the so-called defect in the information against him. We observed in Mauro that
if the accused really believed in the allegedly defective information and the prejudice to his
rights, he should have filed a motion for bill of particulars before his arraignment. We, thus,
also rule in the instant case that it is too late for accused-appellant to protest the imprecise
dates found in the informations against him.

People of the Philippines Vs. Salvino Sumingwa

G.R. No. 183619 October 13, 2009
Ruling:

In rape cases particularly, the conviction or acquittal of the accused most often depends
almost entirely on the credibility of the complainant’s testimony. By the very nature of this
crime, it is generally unwitnessed and usually the victim is left to testify for herself. When a
rape victim’s testimony is straightforward and marked with consistency despite grueling
examination, it deserves full faith and confidence and cannot be discarded. If such
testimony is clear, consistent and credible to establish the crime beyond reasonable doubt,
a conviction may be based on it, notwithstanding its subsequent retraction. Mere retraction
by a prosecution witness does not necessarily vitiate her original testimony.

Clearly, the retraction made by the Victim is heavily unreliable. The primordial
factor that impelled the Victim to retract the rape charges against her father was her fear
and concern for the welfare of her family especially her four (4) siblings. It does not go
against reason or logic to conclude that a daughter, in hopes of bringing back the harmony
in her family tormented by the trauma of rape, would eventually cover for the dastardly acts
committed by her own father. Verily, the Victim’s subsequent retraction does not negate her
previous testimonies accounting her ordeal in the hands for (sic) her rapist.
In her direct testimony, AAA stated that appellant removed her short pants and panty, went
on top of her and rubbed his penis against her vaginal orifice. She resisted by crossing her
legs but her effort was not enough to prevent appellant from pulling her leg and eventually
inserting his penis into her vagina. Clearly, there was penetration.

It is noteworthy that appellant pulled AAA’s leg, so that he could insert his penis into her
vagina. This adequately shows that appellant employed force in order to accomplish his
purpose. Moreover, in rape committed by a father against his own daughter, the former’s
moral ascendancy and influence over the latter may substitute for actual physical violence
and intimidation. The moral and physical dominion of the father is sufficient to cow the
victim into submission to his beastly desires, and no further proof need be shown to prove
lack of the victim’s consent to her own defilement.

While appellant’s conviction was primarily based on the prosecution’s testimonial evidence,
the same was corroborated by physical evidence consisting of the medical findings of the
medico-legal officer that there were hymenal lacerations. When a rape victim’s account is
straightforward and candid, and is corroborated by the medical findings of the examining
physician, the same is sufficient to support a conviction for rape.

Aside from the fact of commission of rape, the prosecution likewise established that
appellant is the biological father of AAA and that the latter was then fifteen (15) years old.
Thus, the CA aptly convicted him of qualified rape, defined and penalized by Article 266-B of
the RPC.

AAA testified that in November 2000, while she and appellant were inside the bedroom, he
went on top of her and rubbed his penis against her vaginal orifice until he ejaculated. She
likewise stated in open court that on May 27, 2001, while inside their comfort room,
appellant rubbed his penis against her vagina while they were in a standing position. In both
instances, there was no penetration, or even an attempt to insert his penis into her vagina.

The aforesaid acts of the appellant are covered by the definitions of "sexual abuse" and
"lascivious conduct" under Section 2(g) and (h) of the Rules and Regulations on the
Reporting and Investigation of Child Abuse Cases promulgated to implement the provisions
of R.A. 7610:

(g) "Sexual abuse" includes the employment, use,persuasion, inducement, enticementor

coercionof a child to engage in, or assist another person to engage in, sexualintercourse or
lascivious conductor the molestation, prostitution, or incestwith children;

(h) "Lascivious 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
object into the genitalia, anus or mouth, of any person, whether of the same or opposite
sex, with an intent to abuse, humiliate, harass, degrade, or arouse or gratify the sexual
desire of any person, bestiality, masturbation, lascivious exhibition of the genitals or public
area of a person.
Following the "variance doctrine" embodied in Section 4, in relation to Section 5, Rule 120
of the Rules of Criminal Procedure, appellant can be found guilty of the lesser crime of Acts
of Lasciviousness committed against a child. The pertinent provisions read:

Sec. 4. Judgment in case of variance between allegation and proof. – When there is
variance between the offense charged in the complaint or information and that proved, and
the offense as charged is included in or necessarily includes the offense proved, the accused
shall be convicted of the offense proved which is included in the offense charged, or of the
offense charged which is included in the offense proved.

Sec. 5. When an offense includes or is included in another. – An offense charged necessarily

includes the offense proved when some of the essential elements or ingredients of the
former, as alleged in the complaint or information, constitute the latter. And an offense
charged is necessarily included in the offense proved, when the essential ingredients of the
former constitute or form part of those constituting the latter.

As the crime was committed by the father of the offended party, the alternative
circumstance of relationship should be appreciated. In crimes against chastity, such as Acts
of Lasciviousness, relationship is always aggravating.

The attempt that the RPC punishes is that which has a logical connection to a particular,
concrete offense; and that which is the beginning of the execution of the offense by overt
acts of the perpetrator, leading directly to its realization and consummation. In the instant
case, the primary question that comes to the fore is whether or not appellant’s act of
removing AAA’s pants constituted an overt act of Rape.

We answer in the negative.

Overt or external act has been defined as some physical activity or deed, indicating the
intention to commit a particular crime, more than a mere planning or preparation, which if
carried out to its complete termination following its natural course, without being frustrated
by external obstacles nor by the voluntary desistance of the perpetrator, will logically and
necessarily ripen into a concrete offense.

People of the Philippines Vs. Domingo Araojo

G.R. No. 185203 September 17, 2009
Ruling:
Testimonies of child-victims are normally given full weight and credit, since when a girl,
particularly if she is a minor, says that she has been raped, she says in effect all that is
necessary to show that rape has in fact been committed. When the offended party is of
tender age and immature, courts are inclined to give credit to her account of what
transpired, considering not only her relative vulnerability but also the shame to which she
would be exposed if the matter to which she testified is not true. Youth and immaturity are
generally badges of truth and sincerity.
Where the victim is below 12 years old, the only subject of inquiry is whether "carnal
knowledge" took place. Proof of force, threat or intimidation is unnecessary since none of
these is an element of statutory rape. There is statutory rape where, as in this case, the
offended party is below 12 years of age. In light of this perspective, the absence of a
struggle or an outcry from AAA, if this really be the case, vis-à-vis the first three, i.e., 1997,
1998 and 1999, dastardly attacks, would not carry the day for Araojo.

The Court is not convinced. To start with, full penile penetration, which would ordinarily
result in hymenal rupture or laceration of the vagina of a girl of tender years, is not a
consummating ingredient in the crime of rape. The mere knocking at the door of the
pudenda by the accused’s penis suffices to constitute the crime of rape. And given AAA’s
unwavering testimony as to her ordeal in the hands of Araojo, the Court cannot accord
merit to the argument that the lack of physical manifestation of rape weakens the case
against Araojo. The medical report on AAA is only corroborative of the finding of rape. The
absence of external signs or physical injuries on the complainant’s body does not
necessarily negate the commission of rape, hymenal laceration not being, to repeat, an
element of the crime of rape. A healed or fresh laceration would of course be a compelling
proof of defloration. What is more, the foremost consideration in the prosecution of rape is
the victim’s testimony and not the findings of the medico-legal officer. In fact, a medical
examination of the victim is not indispensable in a prosecution for rape; the victim’s
testimony alone, if credible, is sufficient to convict.

People of the Philipines Vs. Richard Sulima

G.R. No. 183702 February 10, 2009
Ruling:

AAA’s failure to offer any kind of resistance to her abuser is of no moment and cannot in
any way affect the credibility of her testimony. Rape is perpetrated when the accused has
carnal knowledge of the victim through the use of force or threats or intimidation. It must
be stressed that the resistance of the victim is not an element of the crime, and it need not
be established by the prosecution. In any event, the failure of the victim to shout or to offer
tenacious resistance does not make the sexual congress voluntary. Indeed, rape victims
have no uniform reaction: some may offer strong resistance; others may be too intimidated
to offer any resistance at all.

People of the Philippines Vs. Pedro Nogpo

G.R. No. 184791 April 16, 2009
Ruling:

Further weakening accused-appellant’s defense, even assuming arguendo that they were
lovers, is that rape could still have been committed if he had carnal knowledge with private
complainant against her will. This Court has consistently ruled that a "love affair" does not
justify rape, for the beloved cannot be sexually violated against her will.

A sweetheart cannot be forced to have sex against her will – love is not a license for lust.
The defense blames private complainant for not duly resisting accused-appellant,
considering that she was an adult woman of 33 years while accused-appellant was only 22,
drunk and unarmed. Suffice it to say that in rape cases, the law does not impose a burden
on the private complainant to prove resistance. The degree of force and resistance is
relative, depending on the circumstances of each case and on the physical capabilities of
each party. It is well settled that the force or violence required in rape cases is relative;
when applied, it need not be overpowering or irresistible. When force is an element of the
crime of rape, it need not be irresistible; it need but be present, and so long as it brings
about the desired result, all consideration of whether it was more or less irresistible is
beside the point.

Accused-appellant also faults private complainant, considering her failure to tell her
husband BBB on 9 March 2001 that she was allegedly raped that morning. The records of
the case elucidate on this matter. To recall, private complainant kept on crying the entire
day of the incident. And while she was not able to tell her husband directly what had
happened, probably due to the unbearable pain of personally telling her husband, she did
not hesitate to tell his mother that she was raped. The testimony of private complainant
was given in an honest and believable manner, devoid of any hint of falsity or attempt at
fabrication. The trial court observed the demeanor and deportment of private complainant
when she testified in court and narrated her ordeal, and it noted that she was candid, frank
and straightforward in her answers to questions relating to her harrowing experience, but
that she felt embarrassed, would often cry and hesitated, or sometimes would not answer
some questions even if the case was tried in a closed door hearing, where only the proper
parties were allowed inside the court. In several instances, her testimony was interrupted
by fits of crying and outbursts of emotion, leaving no room for doubt that she was truthful
in her narration of events.

The incident occurred in a 1½-meter x 2-meter wooden bed with a 3-month-old baby inside
a 3-meter x 3-meter room, while the rest of the children were sleeping in the dining room of
a small house, which barely had a floor area of 40 square meters. While private complainant
was struggling to repel the attack against her honor, her 3-month-old baby was crying
loudly. However, this was not impossible, as lust respects no time and place. In People v.
Agbayani, the Court stated that "(t)he evil in man has no conscience. The beast in him
bears no respect for time and place; it drives him to commit rape anywhere -- even in
places where people congregate such as in parks, along the roadside, within school
premises, and inside a house where there are other occupants." The crime of rape may be
committed even when the rapist and the private complainant are not alone. Rape may take
only a short time to consummate, given the anxiety of its discovery, especially when
committed near sleeping persons. Oblivious to the goings on, thus, the court has held that
rape is not impossible even if committed in the same room while the rapist’s spouse is
sleeping or in a small room where other family members also sleep. It was not impossible or
incredible for the members of the complainant’s family to be in deep slumber and not to be
awakened while the brutish sexual assault on her was being committed.

2008
People of the Philippines Vs. Reynaldo Dela Torre
G.R. No. 176637 October 6, 2008
Ruling:

The Court agrees. Conspiracy exists when the acts of the accused demonstrate a common
design towards the accomplishment of the same unlawful purpose. In the present case, the
acts of Dela Torre, Bisaya, and Amoroso clearly indicate a unity of action: (1) Dela Torre
called AAA and brought her inside the jeep; (2) Bisaya and Amoroso were waiting inside the
jeep; (3) Dela Torre kissed and touched AAA while Bisaya and Amoroso watched; (4) Dela
Torre passed AAA to Bisaya; (5) Bisaya kissed and touched AAA while Dela Torre and
Amoroso watched; (6) Bisaya passed AAA to Amoroso; and (7) Amoroso inserted his penis
in AAA's vagina and kissed her while Dela Torre and Bisaya watched.

Since there was conspiracy among Dela Torre, Bisaya, and Amoroso, the act of any one was
the act of all and each of them is equally guilty of all the crimes committed.

People of the Philippines Vs. Ricardo Talan

G.R. No. 177354 November 14, 2008
Ruling:

In People v. Ibarrientos, the Court held that: The allegation in the information x x x that the
appellant is an uncle of the victim is not specific enough to satisfy the special qualifying
circumstance of relationship. We have previously ruled, and now we reiterate, that it is
necessary to spell out in the Information for rape that the accused is a "relative within the
third degree of consanguinity or affinity" as stated in Article 266-B. Without such averment,
the Information x x x falls short of the statutory requirement for the imposition of capital
punishment on the offender. Factual allegations in the information do not need to be
referred to as "qualifying circumstances," in order to appreciate them as such and raise the
penalty. However, these factual allegations must be specified completely, in order to fully
inform the accused of the circumstances which warrant the imposition of a higher offense.
Otherwise, such circumstances cannot be appreciated to qualify the offense.

In the present case, the information in Criminal Case No. L-3373 merely states that Talan
abducted and raped his "niece" without specifying that Talan is a relative of the victim
within the third degree of consanguinity. In any event, the penalty for simple rape is still
reclusion perpetua.

People of the Philippines Vs. Rogelio Pelagio

G.R. No. 173052 December 16, 2008
Ruling:
Appellant harps on the alleged statements of the examining physician that there were no
external injuries on AAA's body or that the laceration on her hymen could be caused by
many factors. Case law has it that in view of the intrinsic nature of rape, the only evidence
that can be offered to prove the guilt of the offender is the testimony of the offended party.
Even absent a medical certificate, her testimony, standing alone, can be made the basis of
conviction if such testimony is credible. Moreover, the absence of external injuries does not
negate rape. In fact, even the absence of spermatozoa is not an essential element of rape.
This is because in rape, the important consideration is not the emission of semen but the
penetration of the female genitalia by the male organ.

People of the Philippines Vs. Roger Mendoza

G.R. No. 180501 December 24, 2008
Ruling:

The right to speedy trial, as an adjunct to the right of all persons to a speedy disposition of
their cases before judicial and quasi-judicial bodies, requires that court proceedings should
be conducted according to fixed rules and must be free from vexatious, capricious, and
oppressive delays. The same right may also be considered violated when unjustified
postponements of the trial are asked for and secured; or when without cause or justifiable
motive, a long period of time is allowed to elapse without the parties having their case tried.
None of these circumstances are, to us, present in the instant case. While perhaps there
might have been delays, accused-appellant does not state in some detail what or who
caused the delays, or whether these are of the vexatious or oppressive kind.

What is more, accused-appellant belatedly invoked his right to speedy trial only before the
CA. The proceedings cannot now be claimed to be attended by vexatious, capricious, and
oppressive delays. Accused-appellant cannot plausibly seek the protection of the law to
benefit from the adverse effects of his failure to assert his right at the first instance.

The Court need not belabor the issue of whether or not accused-appellant is guilty of rape
which in turn resolves itself into the question of whether or not he inserted his fingers into
AAA’s sexual organ. The issue has been peremptorily answered in the negative by the CA,
basing its resolution on the relevant finding of the examining doctor and on the testimony of
AAA, who, at best, was tentative in her response when queried about the finger-insertion
aspect of the incident. Also, the People does not challenge the determination. And precisely
because of the fact of non-insertion that the appellate court was impelled, and rightly so, to
downgrade the criminal act to acts of lasciviousness. The records appear to support the
appellate court’s modificatory action. Consider the following answer given by AAA to the
prosecution’s question: "Where did Roger touch you?" AAA pointed to the vagina of a female
figure she had drawn.

Absent any showing of the actual insertion of the finger in the private part of the child,
there can be no consummated rape. Thus, the failure of the prosecution to establish
accused-appellant’s guilt for rape notwithstanding, this Court finds him liable for the lesser
crime of acts of lasciviousness. This latter crime is considered an offense included or
subsumed in the rape charge. Thus in Dulla v. Court of Appeals and People v. Bon, the
Supreme Court convicted the accused with the crime of acts of lasciviousness even though
the information charged the crime of rape.
People of the Philippines Vs. Mario Martin
G.R. No. 172069 January 30, 2008
Ruling:

The Rules of Court requires that grounds for objection must be specified, whether orally or
in writing. The result of violating this rule has been spelled out by this Court in a number of
cases. In Krohn v. Court of Appeals, the counsel for the petitioner objected to the testimony
of private respondent on the ground that it was privileged but did not question the
testimony as hearsay. We held that "in failing to object to the testimony on the ground that
it was hearsay, counsel waived his right to make such objection and, consequently, the
evidence offered may be admitted." In Tan Machan v. De la Trinidad, the defendant assailed
as error the admission of plaintiff's book of account. We rejected the contention and ruled
that an appellate court will not consider any other ground of objection not made at the time
the books were admitted in evidence. In the case at bar, the respondent did not assail in
the trial court the hearsay character of the documents in question. It is too late in the day
to raise the question on appeal.

It is undisputed that AAA is a mental retardate. This was shown in the psychological
evaluation report wherein she was found to have an IQ of 41.8. Even appellant admitted his
daughter’s "handicap" in his testimony. However, despite her age and retardation, she was
still able to communicate her experience in a sufficiently coherent and detailed manner. She
clearly stated that appellant touched her breasts, removed her clothes and underwear,
touched her vagina and inserted his penis in her vagina. Her narration was as natural and
straightforward as could be, considering her mental deficiency. If there were instances when
her answers were inaccurate or unresponsive, these did not make her testimony any less
credible. Even children of normal intelligence cannot be expected to give a precise account
of events considering their naiveté and still undeveloped vocabulary and command of
language. Yet, despite her limitations, AAA never wavered in her testimony.

People of the Philippines Vs. Elmer Glivano

G.R. No. 177565 January 28, 2008
Ruling:
The delay in the reporting of the crime, the absence of a threat on the life of the victim, and
the presence of other occupants in the house cannot weaken the force of the victim’s clear
and convincing statements. Jurisprudence states that the delay in reporting the commission
of rape is not an indication of a fabricated charge. The charge is beclouded - only if the
delay is unreasonable and unexplained. Often, victims would rather bear the ignominy and
the pain in private than reveal their shame to the world. Likewise, a stepfather, who
exercises moral and physical ascendancy over his stepdaughter, need not make any threat
against her because the latter is cowed into submission when gripped with the fear of
refusing the advances of a person she customarily obeys. Rape may, likewise, be committed
in a room adjacent to where the victim's family is sleeping, or even in a room shared with
other people. There is no rule that rape can only be committed in seclusion.
Emilio Campos Vs. People of the Philippines
G.R. No. 175275 February 19, 2008
Ruling:
Further, resistance is not an element of rape and the absence thereof is not tantamount to
consent. If resistance would nevertheless be futile because of intimidation, then offering
none at all does not mean consent to the assault so as to make the victim’s submission to
the sexual act voluntary.

Established is the rule that the testimonies of rape victims, especially child victims, are
given full weight and credit. It bears emphasis that the victim was barely thirteen when she
was raped. In a litany of cases, this Court has applied the well-settled rule that when a
woman, more so if she is a minor, says that she has been raped, she says, in effect, all that
is necessary to prove that rape was committed, for as long as her testimony meets the test
of credibility. No young girl, indeed, would concoct a sordid tale of so serious a crime as
rape at the hands of a close kin, undergo medical examination, then subject herself to the
stigma and embarrassment of a public trial, if her motive were other than an earnest desire
to seek justice. This holds true especially where the complainant is a minor, whose
testimony deserves full credence.

People of the Philippines Vs. Nido Garte

G.R. No. 176152 November 25, 2008

Ruling:
Accused-appellant's reliance on the alleged discrepancies between [AAA]'s Sinumpaang
Salaysay and handwritten sworn affidavit on the number of times she was raped is
untenable. We take note of the steadfast doctrine prevailing in our criminal justice system
that inconsistencies found in the ex parte affidavits do not necessarily downgrade the
credibility of a witness. Almost always, ex parte affidavits are considered incomplete and
often inaccurate. They are products sometimes of partial suggestions and at other times of
want of suggestions and inquiries, without the aid of which witnesses may be unable to
recall the connected circumstances necessary for accurate recollection.

In the same manner, we rule that the alleged inconsistency with respect to the weapons
used in the commission of the rapes is likewise unavailing as we find the same as a mere
extraneous matter and does not remove the fact that the crime of rape was repeatedly
committed by the accused-appellant against the victim through the use of force and
intimidation…

More specifically on the kind of weapon used by appellant to threaten AAA, AAA's claims
bearing thereon are not necessarily conflicting. AAA corrected herself by pointing out that
aside from the knife, appellant also threatened her with a gun. If the defense wanted to
impeach AAA, it should have followed the procedure laid down by Rules of Court by laying
the predicate. No such effort was done, however.

It bears emphasizing that in a rape committed by a father against his own daughter, the
former's moral ascendancy and influence sufficiently takes the place of violence or
intimidation. Under the same circumstances, proof of force and violence is not even
essential, because the moral and physical ascendancy of the father over his daughter is
sufficient to cow her into submission to his bestial desires.

People of the Philippines Vs. Jimmy Tabio

G.R. No. 179477 February 6, 2008

Ruling:

AAA never wavered in her assertion that appellant raped her. AAA’s testimony is
distinctively clear, frank and definite without any pretension or hint of a concocted story
despite her low intelligence as can be gleaned from her answers in the direct examination.
The fact of her mental retardation does not impair the credibility of her unequivocal
testimony. AAA’s mental deficiency lends greater credence to her testimony for someone as
feeble-minded and guileless as her could not speak so tenaciously and explicitly on the
details of the rape if she has not in fact suffered such crime at the hands of the appellant.

AAA’s testimony on these two later rapes was overly generalized and lacked many specific
details on how they were committed. Her bare statement that appellant repeated what he
had done to her the first time is inadequate to establish beyond reasonable doubt the
alleged second and third rapes. Whether or not he raped her is the fact in issue which the
court must determine based on the evidence offered. The prosecution must demonstrate in
sufficient detail the manner by which the crime was perpetrated. Certainly, the testimony of
AAA to the effect that the appellant repeated what he did in the first rape would not be
enough to warrant the conclusion that the second and third rape had indeed been
committed. Each and every charge of rape is a separate and distinct crime so that each of
them should be proven beyond reasonable doubt. The quantum of evidence in criminal
cases requires more than that.

x x x Be that as it may, however, on the bases of the evidence adduced by the prosecution,
appellant can be convicted only of the two rapes committed in November, [sic] 1990 and on
July 21, 1994 as testified to by complainant, and for the eight counts of rape committed in
May and June and on July 16, 1994 as admitted in appellants aforementioned letter of
August 24, 1994. We cannot agree with the trial court that appellant is guilty of 183 counts
of rape because, as correctly asserted by the defense, each and every charge of rape is a
separate and distinct crime so that each of them should be proven beyond reasonable
doubt. On that score alone, the indefinite testimonial evidence that complainant was raped
every week is decidedly inadequate and grossly insufficient to establish the guilt of appellant
therefore with the required quantum of evidence. So much of such indefinite imputations of
rape, which are uncorroborated by any other evidence, fall within this category.(Emphasis
supplied)
People of the Philippines Vs. Marcelino Ramos
G.R. No. 179030 June 12, 2008
Ruling:

That appellant never sexually molested his other daughters and that AAA had a boyfriend
are inconsequential facts that do not cast a doubt on AAA's claim that appellant raped her
several times.

People of the Philippines Vs. Conrado Diocado

G.R. No. 170567 November 14, 2008
Ruling:
She remained steadfast in this narration and her identification of Diocado as the perpetrator
despite the rigorous cross-examination she underwent. Her credibility was strengthened
when she cried at certain points of her testimony as she related the details of the rape. It
was further reinforced by its marked compatibility with the physical evidence reflected in Dr.
Capellan's findings. These findings were consistent with her testimony that she was made to
bend down while Diocado held her by the waist as she was raped.

we cannot avoid considering that this is a case where AAA is pitted against the testimonies
of her stepfather and her own mother. What is involved, however, is not a straight line
weighing of statements against statements, with two statements being always better than
one. In a court of law, we look at the totality of the evidence adduced and we weigh these
using the scales of reason, experience and credibility based on insights into the human
character, all made within the parameters of the law. All these now tell us that, under the
circumstances of this case, the mother's word cannot prevail against the word of her
wronged daughter. The testimonial evidence of rape, supported by convincing physical
evidence, cannot be defeated by a mother's contrary testimony. That CCC was in fact at
home in the afternoon of February 7, 1998 does not negate the commission of the rape.
Time and again, we have declared that lust is no respecter of time and place. It is a master
that does not recognize decency or morality but cares only for the fulfillment of its selfish
desires. CCC's changing testimonies also tell us that at some point she might have chosen
the practical option of siding with the husband who provides for her and her family. Thus,
we cannot give credit to what CCC, as mother, said with respect to her daughter's charge of
sexual abuse in the hands of her stepfather.

People of the Philippines Vs. Ramon Arivan

G.R. No. 176065 April 22, 2008
Ruling:
This Court is in conformity with the findings of both the trial court and the appellate court
that, indeed, the appellant and the private complainant were not sweethearts. The
"sweetheart defense" is a much-abused defense that rashly derides the intelligence of the
Court and sorely tests its patience. Being an affirmative defense, the allegation of a love
affair must be supported by convincing proof. In the present case, other than the
appellant’s self-serving assertions, there was no support of his claim that he and AAA were
lovers. His "sweetheart defense" cannot be given credence in the absence of corroborative
proof like love notes, mementos, pictures or tokens, that such romantic relationship really
existed. More so, as the appellate court stated in its Decision, the following circumstances or
actuations of the private complainant immediately after the alleged raped incident belies
appellant’s claim of such a relationship, to wit: (1) AAA immediately disclosed to her uncle
that she was raped; (2) AAA immediately sought the help of the police authorities in
apprehending the appellant; (3) AAA subjected herself to physical examination; (4) AAA
outrightly filed the criminal complaint against the appellant; and (5) AAA never knew the
name of the appellant until after the appellant’s statement was taken at Police Station 6. In
addition, the corroborative testimony of Rizaldy that the private complainant and the
appellant were sweethearts cannot be given any credit because of his relationship with the
appellant. This Court notes that Rizaldy is the brother of the appellant and it is well settled
that the testimonies of close relatives and friends are necessarily suspect and cannot prevail
over the unequivocal declaration of the complaining witness.

The law does not impose upon a rape victim the burden of proving resistance, particularly
when intimidation is exercised upon the victim and the latter submits herself to the
appellant’s advances out of fear for her life or personal safety. The test remains to be
whether the threat or intimidation produces a reasonable fear in the mind of the victim that
if she resists or does not yield to the desires of her attacker, the threat would be carried
out. It is thus not necessary for the victim to have resisted unto death or to have sustained
physical injuries in the hands of the accused. So long as the intercourse takes place against
the victim’s will and she submits because of genuine apprehension of harm to her and her
family, rape is committed.

It is well-settled that the rupture of the hymen or vaginal lacerations are not necessary for
rape to be consummated. A medical examination is not indispensable in the prosecution of a
rape victim. Insofar as the evidentiary weight of the medical examination is concerned, we
have already ruled that a medical examination of the victim, as well as the medical
certificate, is merely corroborative in character and is not an indispensable element for
conviction in rape. What is important is that the testimony of private complainant about the
incident is clear, unequivocal and credible, and this we find here to be the case. Further,
well-settled is the rule that prior sexual intercourse which could have resulted in hymenal
laceration is not necessary in rape cases for virginity is not an element of rape. Hence, it is
of no moment that there is a finding that AAA’s hymen was remnant.

Similarly, it must be stressed that the absence of spermatozoa in the private complainant’s
sex organ does not disprove rape. It could be that the victim washed or urinated prior to
her examination, which may well explain the absence of spermatozoa.

People of the Philippines Vs. Arturo Domingo

G.R. No. 177136 June 30, 2008
Ruling:
To begin with, let it be emphasized that delay in reporting a case of rape is not always to be
taken as an ostensible badge of a fabricated charge. A rape charge becomes doubtful only
when the delay in revealing its commission is unreasonable and unexplained. In this case,
AAA’s reluctance and hesitation in breaking her agonizing silence were sufficiently
established by her testimony that appellant was able to instill fear in her by threatening to
kill her mother should the incidents be made known to anyone. Such intimidation is
sufficient to cower AAA and make her choose to suffer privately instead of disclosing her
sordid tale of abuse in the hands of appellant. Settled is the theory that delay or hesitation
in reporting the abuse due to the threats of the assailant is justified and must not be taken
against the victim, since it is not uncommon that a rape victim conceal for some time the
assault against her person on account of fear of the threats posed by her assailant.

Especially in cases where, as in this case, both the offender and the offended party are
living under the same roof and are thus expected to give solace and protection to each
other, the offender can easily build an atmosphere of psychological terror that effectively
numbs the victim to silence. In these cases, it is fear, not reason, which abounds in the
mind of the victim both at the time of the assaults and thereafter. Inasmuch as intimidation
is addressed to the victim’s mind, response thereto and the effect thereof naturally cannot
be measured against any hard-and-fast rule such that it must be viewed in the context of
the victim’s perception and judgment not only at the time of the commission of the crime
but also at the time immediately thereafter.

The threat and intimidation in this case, at least in the mind of AAA, were made even more
real by the fact that at the time she was being ravished, a knife was drawn to her side
which by itself was sufficient to animate her fear that appellant was seriously bent on
actualizing his threat of physical harm, or at the very least it placed AAA in a confused
situation that effectively sealed her lips for some time. It is thus not strange that it actually
took her two long years before she could muster enough courage in taking the bold step
towards her expiation, that is, when she has finally decided to join the cause of her own
sister who, for an attempted rape, lost no time in filing a complaint against appellant.

Affidavits or sworn statements are usually incomplete since they are often prepared by
administering officers who cast the same in their language and understanding of what the
affiant has said. Most of the time, they are products of partial suggestions and sometimes of
want of suggestions and searching inquiries without the aid of which witnesses may be
unable to recall the circumstances necessary for an accurate recollection. Thus, AAA’s
belated claim that appellant poked a knife at her in all three instances of rape cannot be
taken to hurt the credibility of her testimony. Be that as it may, such lapse in AAA’s own
narrative does not go into any of the elemental acts necessary to make a reasonable
conclusion that appellant is guilty indeed of the charges.

One important note. As correctly ruled by the appellate court, appellant should be
sentenced to suffer the penalty corresponding to only simple rape for it is settled that the
minority of the victim and her relationship to the offender must be both alleged in the
charging sheets and proved with certainty. These qualifying circumstances do not obtain in
the present case for although the criminal informations allege that appellant is the
stepfather of AAA, there is nothing in the evidence that supports the same. The stepfather-
stepdaughter relationship as a qualifying circumstance presupposes that the victim’s mother
and the accused are married to each other. AAA herself stated that appellant is her
stepfather but the prosecution did not submit any proof that BBB, AAA’s mother, and
appellant are indeed married to each other. Appellant for his part claimed that he and BBB
are merely common-law spouses ("live-in" partners) which could also qualify the offense but
only if the same is alleged in the informations and proven at the trial.

In the same way, the circumstance pertaining to AAA’s minority cannot likewise be taken
into account for failure of the prosecution to prove the same with certainty. People v.
Barcena, citing People v. Pruna, laid down the following guidelines in appreciating the age of
the victim in rape cases. It held that the original or certified true copy of birth certificate is
the best evidence to prove the age of the victim in the absence of which similar authentic
documents--i.e., baptismal certificate and school records—showing the victim’s date of birth
may be submitted to the court; that should the foregoing be not available on account of loss
or destruction, the credible testimony of the mother or any relative by consanguinity or
affinity qualified to testify on matters respecting pedigree shall be sufficient under certain
conditions; and that if all the foregoing cannot be obtained, the testimony of the victim will
suffice provided that it is expressly and clearly admitted by the accused. In this case, the
prosecution did not submit any proof that AAA was a minor at the time the rapes were
committed, except the testimony of AAA herself which however has not been admitted by
appellant as in fact the latter in his testimony claimed that he had no knowledge of AAA’s
age at the time.

People of the Philippines Vs. Joselito Lopit

G.R. No. 177742 December 17, 2008
Ruling:
Explicitly, when the accused pleads guilty to a capital offense, the court shall conduct a
searching inquiry into the voluntariness and full comprehension of the consequences of his
plea and require the prosecution to prove his guilt and the precise degree of his culpability.
The accused may also present evidence on his behalf. Under the foregoing Rule, three
things are enjoined upon the trial court when a plea of guilty to a capital offense is entered:
(1) the court must conduct a searching inquiry into the voluntariness of the plea and the
accused's full comprehension of the consequences thereof; (2) the court must require the
prosecution to present evidence to prove the guilt of the accused and the precise degree of
his culpability; and (3) the court must ask the accused if he desires to present evidence on
his behalf and allow him to do so if he desires.

Clearly, Section 3, Rule 116 of the 1985 Rules of Criminal Procedure was not satisfactorily
complied with. The trial court should have taken the necessary measures to see to it that
accused-appellant really and freely comprehended the meaning, full significance and
consequences of his plea but it did not. It failed to explain to accused-appellant that the
penalty imposable for the crime attended by the qualifying circumstance of minority and
filiation, as alleged in the Information against him, is death, whether or not he pleads guilty
and regardless of the presence of other mitigating circumstances. Accused-appellant's
justification that he had no money to defend his case and his belief that the penalty would
be reduced if he pleaded guilty were not sufficient reasons for the trial court to allow a
change of plea from not guilty to one of guilty. It was the duty of the judge to see to it that
the accused did not labor under this mistaken impression.

Still, the trial court's shortcomings will not necessarily result in accused-appellant's
acquittal. The evidence for the prosecution, independently of accused-appellant's plea of
guilty, adequately established his guilt beyond reasonable doubt as charged in the
Informations. The testimony of the victim AAA is worthy of belief and enough to convict
accused-appellant. She testified in a candid, straightforward and categorical manner.

In the prosecution of criminal cases, especially those involving the extreme penalty of
death, nothing but proof beyond reasonable doubt of every fact necessary to constitute the
crime with which an accused is charged must be established. Qualifying circumstances or
special qualifying circumstances must be proved with equal certainty and clearness as the
crime itself; otherwise, there can be no conviction of the crime in its qualified form. As a
qualifying circumstance of the crime of rape, the concurrence of the victim's minority and
her relationship to the accused-appellant must be both alleged and proven beyond
reasonable doubt.

Here, the Information alleged the concurrence of the victim's minority and her relationship
to accused-appellant. However, except for the bare testimony of the victim and her mother
as to the former's age as well as their filiation to the accused-appellant, no birth certificate
or baptismal certificate or school record and marriage contract exist on record to prove
beyond reasonable doubt the victim's age or her minority at the time of the commission of
the offense.

People of the Philippines Vs. Jose Magbanua

G.R. No. 176265 April 30, 2008
Ruling:
The Court of Appeals correctly observed that since the second sexual assault occurred on 13
January 1999, Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No.
8353, otherwise known as "The Anti-Rape Law of 1997" which took effect on 22 October
1997, should have been applied. Under that law, the insertion of one’s finger into the
genital of another already constitutes rape through sexual assault. Appellant would have
been convicted of consummated rape for inserting his finger into the vagina of AAA were it
not for the fact that the information charged him with attempted rape only. This being so,
he cannot be convicted of the graver offense of rape by sexual assault. Nevertheless,
appellant can be convicted of acts of lasciviousness because said crime is included in
attempted rape.

People of the Philippines Vs. Luis Aycardo

G.R. No. 168299 October 6, 2008
Ruling:
Considering that private complainant was 9 years old at the time the first rape was allegedly
committed and was 10 years old during the second and third rape incidents, the three
counts of rape fall under paragraph 3 of Art. 335 of the Revised Penal Code. Carnal
knowledge of a girl under 12 years old is statutory rape. Consent of the offended party is
immaterial as she is presumed not to have any will of her own, being of tender age. The
fact that the offended party is under 12 years old at the time of the commission of the crime
is an essential element of the crime and must be proved beyond reasonable doubt. In
statutory rape, violence or intimidation is not required, and the only subject of inquiry is
whether carnal knowledge took place.

Youth and immaturity are generally badges of truth and sincerity. No sane girl would
concoct a story of defloration, allow an examination of her private parts and subject herself
to public trial or ridicule if she has not, in truth, been a victim of rape, and thus impelled to
seek justice for the wrong done to her. The weight of her testimony may be countered by
physical evidence to the contrary, or indubitable proof that the accused could not have
committed the rape, but in the absence of such countervailing proof, the testimony shall be
accorded utmost value.

People of the Philippines Vs. Michael Muro

G.R. No. 176263 December 24, 2008
Ruling: (ACQUITTED)
It is settled that the absence of external signs of injuries on the private complainant’s body
does not negate the commission of rape nor does it signify lack of resistance by private
complainant to the sexual act, proof of injury not being an essential element of the crime of
rape.

The uncorroborated testimony of the victim in a rape case may, under certain
circumstances, be adequate to warrant conviction. The testimony must, however, be clear,
impeccable and ring true throughout or bear the stamp of absolute candor, free from any
serious contradictions.

Such inexplicable discrepancies on important details vis a vis the result of her physical
examination which bears no indication of the commission of sexual intercourse committed
hours earlier nag the Court to entertain serious doubts on whether appellant committed the
crime charged. The Court’s doubts are reinforced by prosecution witness Berme’s following
observation, viz:

ATTY. JAO: Mr. witness, when you saw the victim, [AAA], how [did] she looks [sic]?
A: Very tired, sir.
Q: Was she crying?
A: No, sir.
Q: How about her clothes?
A: A bit alright, sir. (Underscoring supplied.),
which do not indicate the commission of rape in a watery area.
That appellant even fetched BBB and accompanied her to the barangay hall where AAA was,
a fact attested even by the prosecution witnesses, seals the doubts on whether he had
hours earlier raped AAA.

People of the Philippines Vs. Jerry Nazareno

G.R. No. 167756 April 8, 2008
Ruling:
The argument is specious. An information is intended to inform an accused of the
accusations against him in order that he could adequately prepare his defense. Verily, an
accused cannot be convicted of an offense unless it is clearly charged in the complaint or
information. Thus, to ensure that the constitutional right of the accused to be informed of
the nature and cause of the accusation against him is not violated, the information should
state the name of the accused; the designation given to the offense by the statute; a
statement of the acts or omissions so complained of as constituting the offense; the name
of the offended party; the approximate time and date of the commission of the offense; and
the place where the offense has been committed. Further, it must embody the essential
elements of the crime charged by setting forth the facts and circumstances that have a
bearing on the culpability and liability of the accused, so that he can properly prepare for
and undertake his defense.
However, it is not necessary for the information to allege the date and time of the
commission of the crime with exactitude unless time is an essential ingredient of the
offense. In People v. Bugayong, the Court held that when the time given in the information
is not the essence of the offense, the time need not be proven as alleged; and that the
complaint will be sustained if the proof shows that the offense was committed at any time
within the period of the statute of limitations and before the commencement of the action.

In People v. Gianan, the Court ruled that the time of the commission of rape is not an
element of the said crime as it is defined in Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code. The
gravamen of the crime is the fact of carnal knowledge under any of the circumstances
enumerated therein, i.e.: (1) by using force or intimidation; (2) when the woman is
deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; and (3) when the woman is under twelve
years of age or is demented. In accordance with Rule 110, Section 11 of the 2000 Rules of
Criminal Procedure, as long as it alleges that the offense was committed "at any time as
near to the actual date at which the offense was committed," an information is sufficient.

We find that appellant is guilty of two qualified rapes, instead of multiple rapes under
Criminal Case No. 2650, and only one qualified rape, not multiple, under Criminal Case No.
2638. The legal basis for conviction for as many offenses as are charged and proved is
Section 3, Rule 120 of the 2000 Rules of Criminal Procedure.

It is axiomatic that each and every charge of rape is a separate and distinct crime. Verily,
each of the alleged incidents of rape charged should be proven beyond reasonable doubt.

Considering that the law was already in force at the time of the insertion of appellant's
finger into BBB's vagina on December 6, 1998, he should have been prosecuted and tried
for rape by sexual assault and not under the traditional definition of rape. The People,
however, failed in this regard. That is fatal.

Under the new rules, the information or complaint must state the designation of the offense
given by the statute and specify its qualifying and generic aggravating circumstances.
Otherwise stated, the accused will not be convicted for the offense proved during the trial if
it was not properly alleged in the information. Although the rule took effect on December 1,
2000, the same may be applied retroactively because it is a cardinal rule that rules of
criminal procedure are given retroactive application insofar as they benefit the accused.

People of the Philippines Vs. Sammy Ramos

G.R. No. 172470 April 8, 2008
Ruling:
The threat instilled enormous fear in her such that she failed to take advantage of any
opportunity to escape from the appellant. Also, as AAA explained, she withstood her father's
lechery and stayed with him despite what he did because she wanted to complete her
studies until 28 March 1992 when she graduated. Besides, getting away from appellant was
a task extremely difficult for a 13-year old girl, alone with the predator in a far-away place,
motherless, without any relative to turn to in an hour of need, penniless, and uninformed in
the ways of the world. In fact, it was only when a Good Samaritan crossed her path that the
victim was able to report to the authorities about her father's spiteful deeds.

It is highly improbable for an innocent girl, who is very naïve to the things of this world, to
fabricate a charge so humiliating not only to herself but to her family. Moreover, it is
doctrinally settled that testimonies of rape victims who are of tender age are credible. The
revelation of an innocent child whose chastity was abused deserves full credit, as the
willingness of the complainant to face police investigation and to undergo the trouble and
humiliation of a public trial is eloquent testimony of the truth of her complaint.

People of the Philippines Vs. John Montinola

G.R. No. 178061 January 31, 2008
Ruling:
The Court is not impressed with Montinola's claim that AAA's testimony is not credible
because it contains an inconsistency. Montinola pointed out that, on direct examination, AAA
stated that she was not sure whether Montinola was able to insert his penis in her vagina
during the 28 March 2000, 29 March 2000, and 4 November 2000 incidents. Then, on cross
examination, she stated that Montinola was able to insert his penis during those instances.
The Court of Appeals held that this minor inconsistency was expected and did not destroy
AAA's credibility:
[M]inor lapses should be expected when a person is made to recall minor details of an
experience so humiliating and so painful as rape. After all, the credibility of a rape victim is
not destroyed by some inconsistencies in her testimony. Moreover, testimonies of child
victims are given full faith and credit.
Rape victims do not cherish keeping in their memory an accurate account of the manner in
which they were sexually violated. Thus, errorless recollection of a harrowing experience
cannot be expected of a witness, especially when she is recounting details from an
experience so humiliating and painful as rape. In addition, rape victims, especially child
victims, should not be expected to act the way mature individuals would when placed in
such a situation.

In the instant case, a minor inconsistency is expected especially because (1) AAA was
a child witness, (2) she was made to testify on painful and humiliating incidents, (3) she
was sexually abused several times, and (4) she was made to recount details and events
that happened several years before she testified.

There have been too many instances when rape was committed under circumstances as
indiscreet and audacious as a room full of family members sleeping side by side. Rape is not
rendered impossible simply because the siblings of the victim who were with her in that
small room were not awakened during its commission.

2007

The penalty of prision mayor is imposed for rape committed under paragraph 2 of Article
266-A which is committed by any person who inserts his penis into another person’s mouth
or anal orifice; or any instrument or object, into the genital or ano orifice of another person.
Ormilla vs. Director, Bureau of Corrections, 512 SCRA 177.

It must be emphasized that the same penalties were imposed under Article 335 of the
Revised Penal Code prior to the enactment of R.A. No. 8353—the law did not downgrade the
applicable penalties. Id.

The elements of rape under the aforequoted provision are: 1) The offender is a man; 2) The
offender had carnal knowledge of a woman; and 3) The said act was committed with the
use of force or intimidation, or the woman is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious,
or the woman is under 12 years of age or is demented. People vs. Buban, 512 SCRA 500.

In a rape committed by a father against his own daughter, the former’s moral ascendancy
and influence over the latter substitutes for violence or intimidation. Id.; People vs.
Pioquinto, 520 SCRA 712; People vs. Noveras, 522 SCRA 777; People vs. Ubiňa, 527 SCRA
307; People vs. Balonzo, 533 SCRA 760.

Where the discrepancy as to the period between the third and fourth rapes is one (1) month
based on the Informations, and one (1) day based on the victim’s testimony, the
discrepancy is not so serious as to create a reasonable doubt that the accused indeed
committed the crime and not enough as to throw him off guard and prevent him from
defending himself in cour. Id.
The precise date and time of the commission of rape are not essential elements of it. Id.;
People vs. Dadulla, 519 SCRA 48; People vs. Jalbuena, 526 SCRA 500; People vs Rafon, 532
SCRA 370; People vs. Soriano, 534 SCRA 140; People vs. Domingo, 538 SCRA 733

When the testimony of a rape victim is consistent with the medical findings, there is
sufficient basis to conclude that there was carnal knowledge. Id.

Not a few persons convicted of rape have attributed the charges against them to family
feuds, resentment, or revenge. People vs. Reyes, 512 SCRA 712.

Carnal knowledge of a woman under 18 years of age by a parent is qualified rape. Id.

In determining the guilt or innocence of the accused in rape cases, the courts are guided by
three will-entrenched principles: (1) an accusation of rape can be made with facility and
while the accusation is difficult to prove, it is even more difficult for the accused, though
innocent, to disprove; (2) considering that in the nature of things, only two persons are
usually involved in the crime of rape, the testimony of the complainant should be scrutinized
with great caution; and (3) the evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own
merits and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the evidence for the
defense. People vs. Salidaga, 513 SCRA 306; People vs. Batiancila, 513 SCRA 434; People
vs. Suyat, 518 SCRA 582; People vs. Fernandez, 522 SCRA 189; People vs. Noveras, 522
SCRA 777; People vs. Cornelio, 523 SCRA 419; People vs. Abellano, 524 SCRA 388; People
vs. Astrologo, 524 SCRA 477; People vs. Ubiňa, 527 SCRA 307; People vs. Mangubat, 529
SCRA 377; People vs. Ortoa, 529 SCRA 536; People vs. San Antonio, Jr., 532 SCRA 411;
People vs Balanzo, 533 SCRA 760; People vs. Ela, 541 SCRA 508.

A woman raped in a state of unconsciousness would not be able to narrate her defloration
during that state, and her violation may be proved indirectly by other evidence. People vs.
Salidga, 513 SCRA 306.

The prosecution, at all times, bears the burden of establishing an accused’s guilt beyond
reasonable doubt—no matter how weak the defense may be, it is not and cannot be the sole
basis of conviction if, on the other hand, the evidence for the prosecution is even weaker;
The accused may offer no more than a feeble alibi but the Court is enjoined to proclaim him
innocent in light of insufficient evidence proving his guilt. Id.

Youth and immaturity are generally badges of truth and sincerity. People vs. Batiancila, 513
SCRA 434.

The force, violence, or intimidation in rape is a relative term, depending not only on the
age, size, and strength of the parties but also on their relationship with each other. Id.;
People vs. Ubiňa, 527 SCRA 307.

Physical resistance need not be established in rape when intimidation is exercised upon the
victim and the latter submits herself against her will to the rapist’s advances because of fear
for her life and personal safety. Id.; People vs. Fernandez, 522 SCRA 189; People vs.
Castro, 529 SCRA 800; People vs. Gingos, 532 SCRA 670; People vs. Tuazon, 537 SCRA
494.

Defense cannot just present testimonial evidence in support of the theory that the accused
and the victim were sweethearts, independent proof is necessary such as tokens,
mementos, and photographs. People vs. Batiancila, 513 SCRA 434.

Unless there are substantial matters that might have been overlooked or discarded, the
findings of credibility by the trial court will not generally be disturbed on appel. Id.

The law punishes not only the person who commits the acts of sexual intercourse or
lascivious conduct with the child but also those who engage in or promote, facilitate or
induce child prostitution. People vs. Delantar, 514 SCRA 115.

A child is deened exploited in prostitution or subjected to other sexual abuse, when the child
indulges in sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct (a) for money, profit or any other
consideration, or (b) under the coercion or influence of any adult, syndicate or group. Id.

The acts done on AAA by the two clients ranged from “lascivious conduct” the defined under
the Implementing Rules and Regulations of R.A. No. 7610 x x x and statutory rape under
Art. 335, paragraph 3 of the Revised Penal Code as amended by R.A. No. 7659. Id.

Appellant’s violation of Sec. 5, Art. III of R.A. No. 7610 is as clear as day. The provision
penalizes anyone who engages in or promotes, facilitates or induces child prostitution either
by: (1) acting as a procurer of a child prostitute; or (2) inducing a person to be a client of a
child prostitute by means of written or oral advertisements or other similar means; or (3) by
taking advantage of influence or relationship to procure a child as a prostitute; or (4)
threatening or using violence towards a child to engage him as a prostitute; or (5) giving
monetary consideration, goods or other pecuniary benefits to the child with the intent to
engage such child in prostitution. Id.

A child who is “a person below eighteen years of age or those unable to fully take care of
themselves or protect themselves from abuse, neglect, cruelty, exploitation or
discrimination because of their age or mental disability or condition” is incapable of giving
rational consent to any lascivious act or sexual intercourse. Id.

Under R.A. No. 7610, Sec. 31 (c), relationship is not a qualifying circumstance but only an
ordinary generic aggravating circumstance. Id.

Where the birth certificate presented was not signed by the father against whom filiation is
asserted, such may not be accepted as evidence of the alleged filiation. Id.

The birth certificate of AAA is prima facie evidence only of the fact of her birth and not of
her relation to appellant. Id.

The guardian envisioned by law is a person who has a legal relationship with a ward. Id.

Court deletes the award of civil indemnity because appellant was not the one who
committed the lascivious acts and perpetrated the rape of AAA; Award of exemplary
damages likewise improper considering that appellant is not AAA’s biological father. Id.

Rape can be committed even in places where people congregate, in parks, along the
roadside, within school premises, inside a house or where there are other occupants, and
even in the same room where there are other members of the family who are sleeping.
People vs. Diunsay-Jalandoni, 515 SCRA 227.

A medical examination is not essential in the prosecution of a rape case because it is merely
corroborative in character; Penetration of the penis by entry into the labia of the pudendum
of the vagina, even without rupture or laceration of the hymen, is enough to justify a
conviction for rape. Id.; People vs. Dadulla, 519 SCRA 48; People vs. Fernandez, 522 SCRA
189; People vs. Gregorio, Jr., 523 SCRA 216; People vs. Balonzo, 533 SCRA 760; People vs.
Ela, 541 SCRA 508.

An accused may be convicted on the basis of the lone, uncorroborated testimony of the rape
victim, provided that her testimony is clear, convincing and otherwise consistent, with
human nature. Id.; People vs. Fernandez, 522 SCRA 189; People vs. Aguilar; 540 SCRA
509.

The long settled rule is that qualifying circumstances must be sufficiently alleged in the
indictment and proved during trial to be properly appreciated by the trial court, otherwise it
would be a denial of the right of the accused to be informed of the charges against him,
and, thus, a denial of due process, if he is charged with simple rape but is convicted of its
qualified form even if the attendant qualifying circumstance is not set forth in the
information; Where the Information merely states that the victim is a retardate without
specifically stating that the accused knew of her mental disability at the time of the
commission of the rape, the accused can only be convicted of simple rape. Id.

For defense of sweetheart theory to prosper, it should be substantiated by some

documentary or other evidence of the relationship—like mementos, love letters, notes,
pictures and the like. People vs. Oliquino, 517 SCRA 579.

Not a few number of cases have established that an offer of marriage is considered an
implied admission of guilt of the accused. Id.

Delay in revealing the commission of rape is not an indication of a fabricated charge. Id.;
Piople vs. Pandapatan, 521 SCRA 304; People vs. Senieres, 519 SCRA 13; People vs.
Noveras, 522 SCRA 777

Article 345 of the Revised Penal Code directs persons guilty of rape to acknowledge the
offspring unless the law should prevent him from so doing. Id.

In cases where the victim could not testify on the actual commission of the rape because
she was rendered unconscious at the time the crime was perpetrated, the Revised Rules on
Evidence sanctions the courts to rule on the basis of circumstantial evidence. People vs.
Moran, Jr., 517 SCRA 714.

Of course, an unconscious woman will not know who is raping her; It is precisely when the
sexual intercourse is performed when the victim is unconscious that the act of statutory
offense of rape specially when the loss of consciousness was the result of the accused’s
violent act. Id.

It takes a lot of perversity for a 14-year-old child to acquiesce to a coitus accompanied by

violence and threat. Id.

In rape cases, the evaluation of the credibility of witnesses is addressed to the sound
discretion of the trial judge whose conclusion thereon deserves much weight and respect
because the judge has the direct opportunity to observe them on the stand and ascertain if
they are telling the truth or not. Id.

It is inconceivable for a child to concoct a sordid tale of so serious a crime as rape at the
hands of a close kin, her father in this case, and subject herself to the stigma and
embarrassment of a public trial, if her motive were other than an earnest desire to seek
justice. People vs. Alarcon, 517 SCRA 778.

Where it is established only by himself and by his relative, an accused’s denial of culpability
does not deserve consideration in the face of the affirmative testimony of a credible
prosecution witness. Id.

It is not necessary that the place where the rape is committed be isolated. Id.

The imposition of the supreme penalty of death is proper if the special qualifying
circumstances of the victim’s minority and her relationship to the accused were properly
alleged in the Information and their existence duly admitted by the defense on stipulation of
facts during pre-trial. Id.

This Court has held time and again that testimonies of rape victims who are young and
immature deserve full credence, considering that no young woman, especially of tender
age, would concoct a story of defloration, allow an examination of her private parts, and
thereafter pervert herself by being subject to a public trial, if she was not motivated solely
by the desire to obtain justice for the wrong committed against her. People vs. Pangilinan,
518 SCRA 358.

There is no rule that a woman can only be raped in seclusion. Id.

The delay and initial reluctance of a rape victim to make public the assault on her virtue is
neither unknown nor uncommon. Id.

The gravamen of the offense of rape is sexual congress with a woman by force and without
consent. Id. People vs. Bejic, 525 SCRA 488; People vs. Jalbuena, 526 SCRA 500.

In rape cases specifically, the credibility of the complaint is of paramount importance as

oftentimes her testimony, when it satisfies the test of credibility, may be the sole basis for
an accused’s conviction. People vs. Suyat, 518 SCRA 582

The rule is that when a rape victim’s testimony is straightforward and candid, unshaken by
rigid cross-examination and unflawed by inconsistencies or contradictions in its vital points,
the same must be given full faith and credit. Id.

For the conviction of rape, it is not necessary that the same be supported by medical
findings of injuries as proof of injuries is not an essential element of the crime. Id.

The rape victim’s injury is now recognized as inherently concomitant with and necessarily
proceeds from the appalling crime of rape which per se warrants an award of moral
damages. Id.

In a rape case, what is most important is the credible testimony of the victim. People vs.
Senieres, 519 SCRA 13.
Court has repeatedly observed that no standard form of behavior can be anticipated of a
rape victim following her defilement, particularly by a child who could not be expected to
fully comprehend to fully comprehend the ways of an adult. Id.; People vs. Dadulla, 519
SCRA 48; People vs. Balonzo, 533 SCRA 760

Hymenal lacerations, whether healed or fresh, are the best evidence of forcible defloration.
Id.

The settled jurisprudence is that categorical and consistent positive identification, absent
any showing of ill-motive on the part of the eyewitness testifying thereon, prevails over the
defenses of denial and alibi which, if not substantiated by clear and convincing proof,
constitute self-serving evidence undeserving of weight in law. Id.

Alibi, like denial, is also inherently weak and easily fabricated; For this defense to justify an
acquittal, the following must be established: The presence of the appellant in another place
at the time of the commission of the offense and the physical impossibility for him to be at
the scene of the crime. Id.

The failure to shout or offer tenacious resistance does not make voluntary the victim’s
submission to the criminal act of the offender. People vs. Dadulla, 519 SCRA 48.

The “sweetheart defense” is effectively an admission of carnal knowledge of the victim and
consequently places on the accused the burden of proving the alleged relationship by
substantial evidence. Id.

Court has consistently held that civil indemnity ex delicto is mandatory upon a finding of
rape. Id.

Rape is committed when the accused has carnal knowledge of the victim by force or
intimidation and without consent. People vs. Durano, 519 SCRA 466.
When the testimony of a rape victim is simple and straightforward, unshaken by rigorous
cross-examination and unflawed by any serious inconsistency or contradiction, the same
must be given full faith and credit—when a woman says that she has been raped, she says
in effect all that is necessary to show that rape has been committed. Id.

Physical evidence of bruises or scratches eloquently speaks of the force employed upon the
rape victim. Id.

Resistance is not an element of rape as rape could be perpetrated through the use of force
or intimidation. Id.

Behavioral psychology teaches that people react to similar situations dissimilarly. Id.

A sweetheart cannot be forced to have sex against her will—definitely a man cannot
demand sexual gratification from a fiancée and, worse, employee violence upon her on the
pretext of love. Id.

When a woman or a girl-child says that she has been raped, she says in effect all that is
necessary to show that rape has indeed been committed. People vs. Pioquinto, 520 SCRA
712; People vs. Guillermo, 521 SCRA 597; People vs. Ibaňez, 523 SCRA 136; People vs.
Astrologo, 524 SCRA 477; People vs. Bejic, 525 SCRA 488; People vs. Hermocilla, 527 SCRA
296; People vs Miranda, 529 SCRA 670; People vs. Aquilar, 540 SCRA 509.

More often than not, a victim would rather bear the ignominy and pain in private rather
than reveal her shame to the whole world or risk the danger of physical harm by the rapist.
Id.

A searching inquiry is mandatory if an accused pleads quilty to a capital offense. Id.

In incestuous rape, we have held that a rape victim’s testimony against her father is entitled
to greater weight because it is deeply ingrained in our culture to revere and respect our
elders, thus, unless true, a child would not thoughtlessly accuse a parent of rape. People vs.
Reyes, 521 SCRA 146.

In People vs. Pruna, 390 SCRA 577 (2002), the Court laid down the guidelines in
appreciating the age of the victim. People vs. Villanueva, 521 SCRA 236.

The fact of minority was further established by victim’s certificate of live birth, albeit a mere
photocopy of the original. Id.

The presentation of the photocopy of the birth certificate of the victim is admissible as
secondary evidence to prove its contents. Id.

In incest, access to the victim is guaranteed by the blood relationship, proximity magnifying
the sense of helplessness and the degree of fear. People vs. Pandapatan, 521 SCRA 304.

Lust is no respecter of time, place or kinship. Id.; People vs. Mayao, 522 SCRA 748; People
vs. Castro, 529 SCRA 800; People vs. Tuazon, 537 SCRA 494.

The fact that the laceration of the hymen did not exceed fifty percent of its opening does
not negate the fact of rape, either. Id.

We have already held that rape victims are not expected to mechanically keep tab and give
an accurate account of the exact dates of the rape. Id.

A rape victim’s testimony against her parent is entitled to great weight since Filipino
children have a natural reverence and respect for their elders. Id.
The alleged ill-feelings harbored by a daughter against her father are too flimsy to justify
the filing of charges punishable by death. People vs. Guillermo, 521 SCRA 597.

Rape committed upon one who was asleep falls within Article 266-A-1(b) of the Revised
Penal Code. Id.

In an appeal where the culpability or innocence of the accused depends on the issue of the
credibility of witnesses and the veracity of their testimonies, the findings of the trial court
are given the highest degree of respect if not finality, People vs. Fernandez, 522 SCRA 189.

When there is no evidence to show any improper motive on the part of the prosecution
witness to falsely testify against or falsely implicate the accused in the commission of the
crime, the logical conclusion is that the testimony is worthy of full faith and credence. Id.

For alibi to prosper, the following requisites must concur: (a) the presence of appellant at
another place at the time of the perpetration of the offense; and (b) it was physically
impossible for the accused to be at the scene of the crime. Id.; People vs. Gregorio, Jr., 523
SCRA 216.

So long as the crime was committed under circumstances that would justify the imposition
of the death penalty, the accused shall pay civil indemnity in the amount of P75,000.00. Id.

Rape can be committed even when relatives of the victim are just nearby for it is not
necessary for the place to be ideal for it to be committed. People vs. Mayao, 522 SCRA 748.

The precise time of commission is not an essential element of the crime. Id.

An accused charged with rape through one mode of commission may still be convicted of
the crime if the evidence shos another mode of commission provided that the accused did
not object to such evidence. Id.

The concurrence of the minority of the victim and her relationship to the offender is a
special qualifying circumstance which increases the penalty; Such must be properly alleged
in the information because of the right to be informed of the accused. Id.

The relationship of stepfather presupposes a legitimate relationship. Id.

If the offender is merely a relation—not a parent, ascendant, stepparent, guardian or

common law spouse of the mother of the victim—the specific relationship must be alleged in
the information, i.e. that he is “a relative by consanguinity or affinity within the third civil
degree.” Id.

It is settled that when the victim’s testimony is corroborated by the physician’s finding of
penetration, there is sufficient foundation to conclude the existence of the essential requisite
of carnal knowledge. People vs. Noveras, 522 SCRA 777.

The aggravating circumstance of nighttime cannot be appreciated where there is no proof

that the crime began and was completed at nighttime. Id.

In the prosecution of rape cases, conviction or acquittal depends on the credence to be

accorded to the complainant’s testimony because of the fact that usually the participants
are the only witnesses to the occurrences; Factual findings of fact of the trial court should
not be disturbed on appeal. People vs. Lizano, 522 SCRA 803.

It has been an oft-repeated rule that mere denial, if unsubstantiated by clear and
convincing evidence, has no weight in law and cannot be given greater evidentiary value
than the positive testimony of a rape victim. Id.

A rape victim cannot, after all, be expected to summon the courage to report a sexual
assault committed against her person, where the act was accompanied by a death threat.
Id.

Civil indemnity is automatically imposed upon the accused without need of proof other than
the fact of the commission of rape; Moral damages is also automatically granted in rape
cases without need of further proof other than the commission of the crime. Id.

Court cannot bring its mind to a rest that a young girl, like X X X, could have the courage
and strength to fabricate a tale of defloration against her very own father and relate in
public all its horrifying details were she not in fact physically abused and violated. People vs.
Gregorio, Jr., 523 SCRA 216.

Motive is not necessary when, as here, the identity of the wrongdoer is positively identified
by the victim herself. Id.

The failure of the victim to immediately report the rape is not necessarily an indication of a
fabricated charge. Id.

A denial, unsubstantiated by clear and convincing evidence, is negative, self-serving and

merits no weight in law. Id.

The circumstances mentioned in RA 7659, i.e., minority of the victim and her relationship to
the offender, are in the nature of qualifying circumstances which cannot be proved as such
unless alleged in the information. Id.

Exemplary damages in the sum of P25,000 in each case of rape are likewise imposed on
appellant to deter other fathers with perverse tendencies and aberrant sexual behavior from
preying upon and sexually abusing their daughters. Id.

The silence of a victim of rape or her failure to disclose her misfortune to the authorities
without loss of material time does not prove that her charge is baseless and fabricated—it is
not uncommon for young girls to conceal for some time the assault on their virtues because
of the rapist’s threat on their lives, more so when the offender is someone whom she knew
and who was living with her. People vs. Cornelio, 523 SCRA 419.

No woman would want to go through the humiliation of trial unless she has been so
brutalized that she desires justice for her suffering—it takes a certain amount of
psychological depravity for a young woman to concoct a story which could cost the life of
her own father and drag the rest of her family, including herself, to a lifetime of shame.
People vs. Abellano, 524 SCRA 388.

Nowhere in People vs. Bartolome, 381 SCRA 91 (2002); People vs. Cula, 329 SCRA 101
(2000); and People vs. Liban, 345 SCRA 453 (2000), is it declared that the exact age,
including the number of months must be recited in the Information, otherwise, an accused
may not be convicted of qualified rape. Id.

It has been said that when the testimony of rape victim is consistent with the medical
findings, sufficient basis exists to warrant a conclusion that the essential requisite of carnal
knowledge has thereby been established. People vs. Astrologo, 524 SCRA 477.

Although denial is a legitimate defense in rape cases, mere bare assertions to this effect
cannot overcome the positive, straightforward, unequivocal and categorical testimony of the
victim—an affirmative testimony is far stronger than a negative testimony, especially so
when it comes from a credible witness. Id.

The insertion of one’s finger into the genital or anal orifice of another person constitutes
rape by sexual assault and not merely an act of lasciviousness. People vs. Fetalino, 525
SCRA 170.

The evidence which should be considered by the court in criminal cases need not be limited
to the statements made in open court, rather it should include all documents, affidavits or
sworn statements of the witnesses and other supporting evidence. Id.
The rule is settled that against the positive identification by the private complainant, the
mere denials of an accused cannot prevail to overcome conviction by the trial court. Id.

A mother like BBB certainly would not expose her own daughter to the ignominy of a rape
trial simply to retaliate against her husband for the transgressions, knowing fully well the
lifelong stigma and scars that such a public trial could bring. Id.

Each and every charge of rape is a separate and distinct crime so that each of the other
rape charges should be proven beyond reasonable doubt. Id.

The severity, permanence and irreversible nature of the penalty prescribed by law makes
the decision-making process in capital offenses, such as qualified rape, subject to the most
exacting rules of procedure and evidence. Id.

In crimes against chastity, like acts of lasciviousness, relationship is considered aggravating.

Id.

In determining the quilt or innocence of the accused in cases of rape, the victim’s testimony
is crucial in view of the intrinsic nature of the crime in which only two persons are normally
involved. People vs. Bejic, 525 SCRA 488.

When the credibility of a witness is a primordial consideration, as in the present case, 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. Id.

It is well-entrenched in our case law that the rape victim’s pregnancy and resultant
childbirth are irrelevant in determining whether or not she was raped—pregnancy is not an
essential element of the crime of rape, and whether the child which the rape victim bore
was fathered by the accused, or by some unknown individual, is of no moment. Id.
Denial is inherently a weak defense, as it is negative and self-serving and cannot prevail
over the positive identification and testimony of witnesses unless buttressed by strong
evidence of non-culpability—corollarily, alibi is the weakest of all defenses for it is easy to
contrive and difficult to disprove. Id.

Rape victims do not cherish keeping in their memory an accurate account of the manner in
which they were sexually violated—errorless recollection of a harrowing experience cannot
be expected of a witness, especially when she is recounting details from an experience so
humiliating and painful as rape. Id.

Testimonies of victims of tender age are credible, more so if they are without any motive to
falsely testify against their offender. People vs. Abellera, 526 SCRA 329.

Statutory rape is carnal knowledge of a woman below 12years of age. Id.

When on accuses a close relative of having raped her, as in this case where the complainant
accused her very own father, her testimony is entitled to greater weight. People vs.
Jalbuena, 526 SCRA 500.

Parental punishment or disciplinary chastisement is not enough for a daughter in a Filipino

family to falsely accuse her father of rape. Id.

That the complainant’s hymen remained intact despite the claim of three occasions of rape
is not impossible and does not negate a finding that they were committed – a torn or
broken hymen is not an essential element of rape, not even when the victim is an innocent
child. Id.

The determination and the competence and credibility of a witness rest primarily with the
trial court. People vs. camanda, 528 SCRA 689.
Doctrinal Guidelines in Scrutinizing Credibility. Id.

A young girls revelation that she has been raped, coupled with her voluntary submission to
medical examination and her willingness to undergo public trial where she could be
compelled to give out the details of an assault to her dignity be so easily dismissed as a
mere concoction. Id.

The defense of insanity and imbecility must be clearly proved, for there is a presumption
that acts penalized by law are voluntary. Id.

The briefest of contacts under circumstances of force, intimidation or unconsciousness even

without the laceration of the hymen, is deemed to be rape in our jurisprudence; the more
introduction of the penis to the aperture of the female organ, thereby touching the labia of
the pudendum, already consummates the crime of rape. Id.

Youth and immaturity are generally badges of truth and sincerity. People vs. Ubiňa, 527
SCRA 307.

Family resentment, revenge or feud have never swayed the court from giving full credence
to the testimony of a complainant for rape. Id.

To be believed, denial must be buttressed by strong evidence of non-culpability; for alibi to

prosper, it must be proven that during the commission of the crime, the accused was in
another place and that it physically impossible for him to be at the locus criminis. Id.

Appellant cannot be charged with committing the crime of rape in this simple form and then
be tried and convicted of rape in its; qualified form. Id.

Forcible abduction is absorbed in the crime of rape if the real objective of the accused is to
rape the victim. Garces vs. People, 527 SCRA 827.
The mere fact that the rape was committed at the night time does not make nocturnity an
aggravating circumstance. Id.

The aggravating circumstance of an uninhabited place cannot likewise be appreciated in the

absence of evidence that the accused actually sought an isolated place to better execute
their purpose. Id.

That the gas lamp was “a bit fair” from AAA when the incident occurred did not preclude her
from recognizing the appellant; AAA lived with the appellant for more or less 6 years to
enable her to acquire familiarity with the voice, gait and demeanor. People vs. Canuto, 528
SCRA 366.

A six month delay in reporting the rape to the authorities does not impair the
credibilityof the private complainant or indicate a fabricated charge if satisfactorily
explained. Id.

Minority and relationship constitute a special qualifying circumstances which when

alleged in the information and proved during the trial warrant the imposition of the death
penalty, the proper penalty imposable on appellant is reclusion perpetua. Id.

Non-paternity of the appellant will not necessarily negate the crime of rape as
positively prove and established by AAs’ credibility testimony; they may or may not be a
conception after the commission of the crime of rape because the offense may be
consummated even without full penetration or even complete ejaculation on the part of the
assailant. Id.

There is no stereotypical on the form of reaction from a woman, much more a

minor, when faced with a shocking and horrifying experience such as sexual assault. Id.
 Kit is not necessary that the force and intimidation employed to commit rape to be
so great of such character as could not be resisted because all that is required is that it be
sufficient to consummate the purpose which the accused had in mind. People vs. dela Cruz,
529 SCRA 109.

It is instinctive for a young woman, unmarried woman to protect her honor and thus difficult
to believe that she would fabricate a tale of defloration, allow the examination of her private
parts, reveal her shame and permit herself to be the subject of a public trial if she had not
really been ravished. Id.

It is not to show that the irresistible force or intimidation accompanied the crime of
rape – it suffice to show that the force or intimidation was present and did not result in the
accused copulating with the offended woman against her will. People vs. Cabierte, 529
SCRA 311.

The victims’ character in rape is immaterial. Id.

It is not unusual for a rape victim to conceal the incident at least momentarily. Id.

The rule is that when a rape victims’ testimony is straightforward and candid,
unshaken by grid cross-examinations and unflawed by inconsistencies or contradictions in
its’ material points, the same must be given full faith and credit. People vs. Mangubat, 529
SCRA 377.

Verily, an affirmative testimony is far stronger than a negative testimony, especially so

when it comes from the mouth of a credible witness; Mere resentment is not so compelling
as to motivate a young girl to accuse a person who practically took care of her since birth
and whom she already considers as her father, of such a serious crime as rape. Id.
In the prosecution of criminal cases, especially those involving the penalty of death, nothing
but proof beyond reasonable doubt of every fact necessary to constitute the crime with
which an accused is charged must be established. Id.

A person cannot be considered as step-grandfather where he and the grandmother only

lived in a common-law relationship—he cannot even be considered as grandfather by affinity
in relation to the grandchild of the grandmother. Id.

The qualifying circumstance of relationship cannot be established by mere testimony or

even by the accused’s very own admission. Id.

At the core of almost all rape cases is the issue of credibility of witnesses and the trial court
is in the bes position to resolve the question, having heard the witnesses and observed their
demeanor during trial. People vs. Miranda, 529 SCRA 399.

It is well-settled that lacerations, whether fresh or healed, are the best physical evidence of
forcible defloration. Id.

A person is guilty of rape when he had sexual intercourse with a female who was suffering
from a “borderline mental deficiency.” Id.

It is not uncommon in incestuous rape for the accused to claim that the case is a mere
fabrication and that the victim was moved by familial discord and influence, hostility, or
revenge. Id.

No matter how enraged a mother could be, it would take nothing less than psychological
depravity for her to concoct a story too damaging to the welfare and well-being of her own
daughter. Id.
There is no uniform behavior that can be expected from those who had the misfortune of
being sexually molested. Id.

The proper penalty to be imposed on the accused in this case is provided in Section 2,
paragraph (a) of R.A. No. 9346 which prescribes that the penalty of reclusion perpetua be
imposed when the law violated makes use of the nomenclature of the penalties under the
Revised Penal Code. Id.

The fact that the private complainant did not resist or attempt or flee or shout for help does
not negate force or intimidation. People vs. Castro, 529 SCRA 800.

The court finds it strange for the complainant, who was already being molested by the
accused with the insertion of his finger inside her vagina, to still find time to expose her
breast and breastfeed her crying child in order to calm him. People vs. Perez, 530 SCRA
376.

Judges must free themselves of the natural tendency to be overprotective of every woman
decrying her having been sexually abused, and demanding punishment for the abuser. Id.

When a rape victim’s testimony, however, is straightforward and marked with consistency
despite grueling examination, it deserves full faith and confidence and cannot be discarded.
People vs. Abulon, 530 SCRA 675.

It is inconceivable and contrary to human experience for a daughter, who is attached to her
father by the natural bond of love and affection, to accuse him of rape, unless he is the one
who raped and defoliated her. Id.

Nothing is more settled in criminal law jurisprudence than that alibi and denial cannot
prevail over the positive and categorical testimony and identification of the complainant. Id.
A child of thirteen years cannot be expected to know how to go about reporting the crime to
the authorities. Id.

Well-established is the rule that force or intimidation need not be proven in incestuous
cases—the overpowering moral influence of a father over his daughter takes the place of
violence and offer of resistance ordinarily required in rape cases where the accused is
unrelated to the victim. Id.

With the enactment of Republic Act. No. 8353 (R.A. No. 8353), otherwise known as the
Anti-Rape Law of 1997, the concept of rape was revolutionized with the new recognition
that the crime should include sexual violence on the woman’s sex-related orifices other than
her organ, and be expanded as well to cover gender-free rape. Id.

Rape through sexual intercourse is also denominated as “organ rape” or “penile rape,” while
on the other hand, rape by sexual assault is otherwise called “instrument or object rape,”
also “gender-free rape,” or the narrower “homosexual rape.” Id.

“Rape Through Sexual Intercourse” and “Rape by Sexual by Sexual Assault,” Distinguished.
Id.

Where the charge in the Information is rape through carnal knowledge, the accused cannot
be found guilty of rape by sexual assault although proven. Id.

An accused charged with rape may be found guilty of the lesser crime of acts of
lasciviousness—acts of lasciviousness or abusos dishonestos are necessarily included in
rape. Id.

The “sweetheart theory” is effectively an admission of carnal knowledge of the victim and
consequently places on the accused the burden of proving the supposed relationship by
substantial evidence—to be worthy of judicial acceptance, such a defense should be
supported by documentary, testimonial, or other evidence. People vs. Hapin, 531 SCRA 224.
Moral damages is automatically granted in rape cases without need of further proof other
than the commission of the crime, because it is assumed that a rape victim has actually
suffered moral injuries entitling her to such award, and the presence of the aggravating
circumstance of use of a deadly weapon justifies the award of exemplary damages. Id.

That a daughter would falsely accuse her own father of committing so grave a crime as rape
only o fuel a grudge harbored by her uncle is hardly believable. People vs. Rafon, 532 SCRA
370.

Although the Court have held that the moral ascendancy of the accused in incestuous rapes,
alone, does not lead to the conclusion that sufficient intimidation was present, it may be
considered a contributing factor when coupled with other threatening circumstances. Id.

The “sweetheart defense” is a much-abused defense that rashly derides the intelligence of
the Court and sorely tests its patience—to be worthy of judicial acceptance, such a defense
should be supported by documentary, testimonial or other evidence. People vs. San
Antonio, Jr., 532 SCRA 411.

Failure of the victim to shout or offer tenacious resistance does not make voluntary the
victim’s submission to the criminal acts of the accused—there is no standard form of
reaction for a woman, much more a minor, when facing a shocking and horrifying
experience such as a sexual assault. Id.

It is settled that force or intimidation is not limited to physical force—as long as it is present
and brings the desired result, all consideration of whether it was more or less irresistible is
beside the point. Id.

It is well-settled that proof of physical injuries sustained by reason of resistance to the

sexual attacker is not an essential element of the crime of rape—it is enough to show that
the appellant did succeed in having sexual intercourse with the complainant against her will.
Id.
The trial judge enjoys the advantage of observing the witness’ deportment and manner of
testifying, her “furtive glance, blush of conscious shame, hesitation, flippant or sneering
tone, calmness, sigh, or the scant or full realization of an oath”—all o f which are useful aids
for an accurate determination of a witness’ honesty and sincerity. Id.

The act of the complainant in filing a complaint against the accused, few hours after the
rape incident happened, can be regarded as an indication of a truthful narration that indeed,
she was raped by the accused; Testimonies of child-victims are given full faith and credit,
since when a girl says she has been raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to show
that rape was indeed committed. Id.

Where age is not adequately proven, it cannot be used to qualify the offense of rape. People
vs. Biyoc, 532 SCRA 528.

Admission in open court of relationship is sufficient and hence conclusive to prove

relationship with the rape victim. Id.

No woman would openly admit that she was raped and consequently subject herself to an
examination of her private parts, undergo the trauma and humiliation of a public trial and
embarrass herself with the need to narrate in detail how she was raped unless she was in
fact raped. Id.

Mere penetration of the labia by the penis is enough to consummate rape.

In rape cases particularly, the conviction or acquittal of the accused most often depends
almost entirely on the credibility of the complainant’s testimony. People vs. Gingos, 532
SCRA 670.

A medical certificate is not indispensable to prove the commission of rape. Id.

There was conspiracy where there was obvious, concerted efforts to perpetrate, one after
the other, the crime of rape. Id.

In rape cases, the credibility of the victim is almost always the single most important issue.
People vs. Ceballos, Jr., 533 SCRA 493.

The nearby presence of the relatives of the victim, the cramped condition of the room, the
presence of other people therein, or the high risk of being caught, have been held as not
sufficient and effective to deter the commission of rape. Id.

Parental punishment or disciplinary chastisement is not enough for a daughter in a Filipino

family to falsely accuse her father of rape. Id.

The crime of acts of lasciviousness is necessarily included in the crime of rape. Id.

The familiar rule is that in passing upon the credibility of witnesses, the highest degree of
respect must be afforded to the findings of the trial court unless there is proof of its
misappreciation of evidence. People vs. Balonzo, 533 SCRA 760.

The law does not impose a burden on the rape victim to prove resistance. Id.

It is the most natural reaction for victims of criminal violence to strive to see the
appearance of their assailant and observe the manner in which the crime was committed.
Id.

Jurisprudence dictates that in appreciating age, either as an element of the crime or as a

qualifying circumstance4, the best evidence is an original or certified true copy of the
certificate of live birth of a party. Id.
When the victim’s testimony is corroborated by the physician’s findings of penetration, then
there is sufficient foundation to conclude the existence of the essential requisite of carnal
knowledge. People vs. Soriano, 534 SCRA 140.

In rape, the force and intimidation must be viewed in the light of the victim’s perception and
judgment at the time of the commission of the crime. Id.

The presence of people in a certain place is no guarantee that rape will not and cannot be
committed. Id.

When the testimony of the rape victim is consistent with the medical findings, there is
sufficient basis to establish carnal knowledge. People vs. Sancho, 534 SCRA 256.

For conviction in the crime of rape, the following elements must be proved beyond
reasonable doubt: 1) that the accused had carnal knowledge of the victim; and 2) that sid
act was accomplished (a) through the use of force or intimidation, or (b) when the victim is
deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious, or (c) when the victim is twelve years of age
or is demented. People vs. Barangan, 534 SCRA 570.

The “sweetheart theory” or “sweetheart defense” is an oft abused justification that rashly
derides the intelligence of the Supreme Court and sorely tests its patience. Id.

A man does not have an unbridled license to subject his beloved to his carnal desires. Id.

Rape is committed by having carnal knowledge of a woman who is depreived of reason or

otherwise unconscious—thus, there is rape where the woman was unconscious as when she
was asleep when the carnal act was accomplished. People vs. Fernandez, 535 SCRA 159.
The relationship as first cousins is not covered by any of the alternative circumstances of
relationships mentioned in Article 15 of the Revised Penal Code. Id.

Having sexual intercourse with a female whose mental age is below 12 years old, even if
she voluntarily submitted herself to the sexual desires of the accused without force or
intimidation, is rape within the context of Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code. People vs.
Constantino, 535 SCRA 165.

The rape victim’s positive identification of the accused prevails over the inherently weak
defenses of denial and alibi. Id.

The vernacular words “hinimod” and “kinantot” have meanings that are so different from
each other ot the point of raising reasonable doubt against the prosecution—on the face of it
all, the Court strongly suspects that the author of the child-victim’s lurid vocabulary can be
none other but her own mother who is a veteran in taking up rape charges. People vs.
Paredes, 535 SCRA 171.

When the offended party is under 18 years of age and the offender is an ascendant of the
victim, rape is qualified and becomes punishable by death as provided under Section 11 of
Republic Act No. 7659. People vs. Mira, 535 SCRA 543.

When either one of the qualifying circumstances of relationship and minority is omitted or
lacking, that which is pleaded in the Information and proved by the evidence may be
considered as an aggravating circumstance; It may not serve to raise the penalty because
in simple rape, the imposable penalty is reclusion perpetua which is single and indivisible.
Id.

The conviction or acquittal in a rape case more often than not depends almost entirely on
the credibility of the complainant’s testimony because of the very nature of this crime—it is
usually the victim who alone can testify as to its occurrence. People vs. Tuazon, 537 SCRA
494.
Testimonies of rape victims who are young and immature demand full credence. Id.

When the testimony of a rape victim is consistent with the medical findings, sufficient basis
exists to warrant a conclusion that the essential requisite of carnal knowledge has thereby
been established. Id.

In truth, a man and a woman cannot be physically closer to each other than during a sexual
act. Id.

The hesitance of the victim in reporting the crime to the authorities is not necessarily an
indication of a fabricated charge, and this is especially true where the delay can be
attributed to the pattern of fear instilled by the threats of bodily harm made by a person
who exercises moral ascendancy over the victim. Id.

It is highly inconceivable that a grandmother would willfully and deliberately corrupt the
innocent mind of her young granddaughter and put into her lips the lewd description of a
carnal act to justify a personal grudge or anger against the accused. Id.

If it can be conclusively determined that the accused did not sire the alleged rape victim’s
child, this may cast the shadow of reasonable doubt and allow his acquittal on this basis.
People vs. Umanito, 537 SCRA 552.

Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA) print or identification technology is now recognized as a

uniquely effective means to link a suspect to a crime, or to absolve one erroneously
accused, where biological evidence is available—for purposes of criminal investigation,
Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA) identification is a fertile source of both inculpatory and
exculpatory evidence. Id.

With respect to the date of the commission of the offense, Section 11, Rule 110 of the
Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure specifically provides that it is not necessary to state in
the information the precise date the offense was committed except when it is a material
ingredient of the offense, and that the offense may be alleged to have been committed on a
date as near as possible to the actual date of its commission; In rape cases, failure to
specify the exact dates or times when the rapes occurred does not ipso facto make the
information defective on its face—the date or time of the commission of rape is not a
material ingredient of the said crime because the gravamen of rape is carnal knowledge of a
woman through force and intimidation. People vs. Ching, 538 SCRA 117.

The Supreme Court has upheld complaints and informations in prosecutions for rape which
merely alleged the month or year of its commission—allegations in the informations which
stated that the three incidents of rape were committed in the year 1996 and in May 1998
are sufficient to affirm the conviction of the accused in the instant case. Id.

To curb the disturbing trend of children being snatched from the cradle of innocence by
some beast to sate its deviant sexual appetite, the accused should, likewise, be made to
pay exemplary damages which is pegged at P25,000.00. Id.

The crying of a victim during her testimony is eloquent evidence of the credibility of the
rape charge with the verity borne out of human nature and experience. People vs. Aguilar,
540 SCRA 509.

The accused’s barefaced denial of the charge cannot prevail over the positive, spontaneous
and straightforward identification by the victim of the accused as the malefactor. Id.

A stepdaughter is the daughter of one’s spouse by a previous marriage—for the accused to

be the stepfather of the victim, he must be legally married to the latter’s mother. Id.

The Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure which took effect on 1 December 2000 now
provides that aggravating circumstances must be alleged in the information to be validly
appreciated by the court; The retroactive application of the Revised Rules of Criminal
Procedure cannot adversely affect the rights of a private offended party to exemplary
damages that have become vested prior to the effectivity of the said Rules. Id.
The eloquent testimony of the victim, coupled with the medical findings attesting to her
non-virgin state, should be enough to confirm the truth of the charges. People vs. Ela, 541
SCRA 508.

To sustain a conviction for rape, there must be proof of the penetration of the female organ.
People vs. Capwa, 541 SCRA 516.

There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics." Figures often beguile me,
particularly when I have the arranging of them myself; in which case the remark attributed
to Disraeli would often apply with justice and force

2006

People of the Philipines Vs. Henry Bidoc

G.R. No. 169430 October 31, 2006

Ruling:

In reviewing rape cases, the Court is guided by these principles: First, the prosecution has
to show the guilt of the accused by proof beyond reasonable doubt or that degree of proof
that, to an unprejudiced mind, produces conviction. Second, unless there are special
reasons, the findings of trial courts, especially regarding the credibility of witnesses, are
entitled to great respect and will not be disturbed on appeal. Third, the disposition of rape
cases are governed by the following guidelines: (1) an accusation for rape can be made with
facility; it is difficult to prove but more difficult for the person accused, though innocent, to
disprove; (2) in view of the intrinsic nature of the crime of rape where only two persons are
usually involved, the testimony of the complainant must be scrutinized with extreme
caution, and (3) the evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits and
cannot draw strength from the weakness of the evidence of the defense.

It is settled that when a woman, more so if she is a minor, says she has been raped, she
says, in effect, all that is necessary to prove that rape was committed and if her testimony
meets the test of credibility, that is sufficient to convict the accused. As in this case, when
AAA testified in court, her testimony described in details the hideous experiences suffered
by her on 21 November 1999 and sometime in December 1999 in the hands of her own
father. In her narration on the manner of how the appellant took advantage of her, she
never wavered in her testimonies. In fact, she even exemplified the details of the incident
without flourish and innuendo.

While denial is a legitimate defense in rape cases, bare assertions to this effect cannot
overcome the categorical testimony of the victim. It is an established rule that an
affirmative testimony is far stronger than a negative testimony, especially so when it comes
from a credible witness. It is hornbook doctrine that the positive and categorical testimony
of a rape victim-daughter, identifying her own father as the one who sexually attacked her,
prevails over his bare denial. No daughter will charge a father, especially a good father, with
rape. The charge is not only embarrassing to the victim and the family. It means death to
the head of the family. A father so charged cannot exculpate himself by a bare-bone denial.

People of the Philippines Vs. Jose Alvizo Audine

G.R. No. 168649 December 6, 2006

Ruling:

We also fail to see anything extraordinary or unbelievable in AAA’s testimony that despite
her act of kicking the accused-appellant he still succeeded in inserting his penis into her
vagina. While it may be admitted that AAA’s act of kicking made penetration somewhat
difficult, it certainly did not render the satyr’s maniacal attack irresistible, nor his
penetration into the citadel of his daughter’s purity anything impossible.

Private complainant is being faulted for not taking the necessary measures to prevent a
recurrence of her horrible experience with accused-appellant last 24 December 1999. Her
failure to perform what accused-appellant claims she ought to have done cannot be taken
against her. A fourteen-year old girl cannot be reasonably expected to exercise or put into
place any measure that would avert the repetition of the ordeal with her father. How the
victim comported herself after the incident was not significant as it had nothing to do with
the elements of the crime of rape. Not all victims can be expected to act conformably to the
usual expectations of everyone. Different and varying degrees of behavioral responses are
expected in the proximity of, or in confronting, an aberrant episode. It is settled that
different people react differently to a given situation or type of situation and there is no
standard form of human behavioral response when one is confronted with a strange,
startling or frightful experience. The workings of the human mind when placed under
emotional stress are unpredictable. This Court, in People v. Luzorata, held: This Court
indeed has not laid down any rule on how a rape victim should behave immediately after
she has been abused. This experience is relative and may be dealt with in any way by the
victim depending on the circumstances, but her credibility should not be tainted with any
modicum of doubt x x x

The defense tried to impute ill motive on private complainant claiming that the latter filed
the two cases of rape to exact revenge because he separated private complainant from her
lover-boyfriend.

We find this hard to believe. Motives such as feuds, resentment and revenge have never
swayed us from giving full credence to the testimony of a minor complainant. It is highly
improbable that a girl of tender years, one not yet exposed to the ways of the world, would
impute to any man a crime so serious as rape if what she claims is not true. Youth and
immaturity are generally badges of truth. Full weight and credit should, indeed, be accorded
AAA’s testimony. It is very unlikely for her to accuse her father of so heinous a crime if it
were not true. Her credibility was bolstered beyond reproach by her spontaneous emotional
breakdown during trial.

People of the Philippines Vs. Emeterio Ricamora

G.R. No. 168628 December 6, 2006

Ruling:

The filing of complaints for rape months, even years, after their commission may or may not
dent the credibility of witness and of testimony, depending on the circumstances attendant
thereto. Under the circumstances attendant to the present case, the delay of respondent in
reporting the incidents of rape may not be taken against her.

In any event, the subject of the complaint filed on January 22, 1998 by private complainant,
which became the basis of the filing of the information, was the last incident of rape, that
which occurred on January 21, 1998. Any delay in the report of the previous commissions of
rape is thus irrelevant to this case.

For rape to exist it is not necessary that the force or intimidation employed 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 purpose which the accused had in mind. Intimidation must be
viewed in the light of the victim’s perception and judgment at the time of the rape and not
by any hard and fast rule. It is therefore enough that it produces fear — fear that if the
victim does not yield to the bestial demands of the accused, something would happen to her
at the moment or thereafter, as when she is threatened with death if she reports the
incident. Intimidation would also explain why there are no traces of struggle which would
indicate that the victim fought off her attacker. [Emphasis supplied; citations omitted]

The rule is well-settled that evidence to be believed must not only come from a credible
source but must also be credible in itself such as one that the common experience and
observation of mankind can approve as probable under the circumstances. The immediately
foregoing version of the defense falls short of such standard. It is difficult to believe that an
18 year-old barrio lass would initiate and consent to having an amorous affair with the
common-law spouse of her own mother, under the same roof where she and her younger
siblings are staying.

The Court however, does not believe the unbelievable and strange story of the neighbor-
spouses which not only borders on the improbable but also fantastic. It would be the height
of incredulity for live-in partners between a young lady and a middle age man to display for
others to see their intimate moments for even married husband and wife will normally seek
a place where they are alone together to perform their romantic encounters secure from
possible prying eyes.

People of the Philippines Vs. Romeo Canare

G.R. No. 168444 December 13, 2006

Ruling:

The foregoing is borne out by the transcript of stenographic notes of XXX's positive and
clear testimony of how appellant ravished her despite her plea for mercy. An examination of
the transcripts of the proceedings in the court of origin shows that XXX repeatedly cried
while testifying; so much so that the trial had to be suspended sometimes because of her
bitter sobs and occasional trembling to enable her to regain her composure.

If anything else, XXX's act of crying several times during her testimony bolsters the
credibility of the rape charge with the verity borne out of human nature and experience.

To be sure, the law does not impose burden on the rape victim to prove resistance. It is
enough if the intercourse takes place against the victim's will. Tenacious resistance against
rape is not required; neither is a determined nor a persistent physical struggle on the part
of the victim necessary. In fact, whatever resistance XXX was able to muster was easily
repulsed by appellant considering the great disparity in their physical built. Record reveals
that XXX is 5'1" in height and 123 pounds in weight while appellant is 6 feet tall and weigh
220 pounds.

More importantly, alibi cannot prevail over the positive identification of the accused as the
perpetrator of the crime. Here, XXX clearly and positively identified appellant as the very
man who raped her on that fateful day of August 4, 1998 inside a room at Wise Hotel in
Pasay City.
To recapitulate, the guiding rule in rape cases is that the lone testimony of the victim, if
credible, is enough to sustain a conviction. XXX's testimony, given in a straightforward
manner amidst sobs as she recounted her harrowing experience, is indubitably credible
especially considering that there is no showing that she was motivated by any evil motive to
falsely testify against appellant who is a complete stranger to her. As we see it, XXX,
innocent and naïve as she is to the ways of the world, would not concoct a tale of
defloration or bestiality and consequently subject herself to an examination of her private
parts, undergo the trauma and humiliation of a public trial, and embarrass herself with the
need to narrate in sordid details how she was raped, if she was not in fact raped, unless
motivated by her quest to right an injustice done to her.

People of the Philippines Vs. Melchor Cabalquinto

G.R. Nos. 167693 September 19, 2006

Ruling:

The testimony of [AAA] was even more bolstered by the consistency of her declaration
under cross by the defense counsel, Atty. Torralba of the Public Attorney's Office, whose
attempt to discredit [AAA]'s accusation by making it appear that she would not have known
how to testify that she was raped by her own father, had she not been coached by someone
else to say so, miserably failed. In the following portions of [AAA]'s cross-examination by
the Defense, instead of destroying [AAA]'s credibility the more that it was established that
accused indeed raped her (sic) daughter.

[AAA]'s declaration that she was raped corroborates the testimony of the doctor who
testified that a strand of hair was found inside [AAA]'s vaginal vault. The doctor's testimony
that the presence of a strand of hair inside the vaginal vault would not be possible without
sexual intercourse, bolsters the accusation of [AAA] that she had been raped. Of course,
there is no test to determine whose hair was it, but considering [AAA]'s testimony that
accused had carnal knowledge of her twice prior to examination, a conclusion that the hair
is accused's is plausible. The idea that that hair was purposely placed inside [AAA]'s vagina
would be absurdity. Thus, when [AAA] pointed to her father as the person who molested
her, this Court can only believe because no daughter in [AAA]'s age would accuse her own
father of any wrongdoing, if it is not for the fact that he had wronged her, and that hair
(pubic or not) is accused's.

It should be emphasized that AAA was but eight (8) years old when the rapes happened. A
child of her tender years cannot be expected to be able to recount the details of her torment
with exactitude. In People v. Villar, the accused questioned the inconsistency between the
victim's declaration in her sworn statement and her direct testimony in court as to the exact
time when she was first raped by the accused in 1993. The Court held that it cannot impose
the burden of exactness in the victim's recollection of her harrowing experience more so
because the victim was an innocent and tender nine (9)-year old lass when she was first
raped. Citing People v. Sagucio, we also held that errorless testimony cannot be expected
especially when a witness is recounting the details of a harrowing experience.

People of the Philippines Vs. Bernie Teodoro

G.R. No. 170473 October 12, 2006

Ruling:

Thus, the contention of appellant that there were no lacerations in the vagina does not
merit any consideration. In that regard, it has been held that the medical examination of
the victim is merely corroborative in character and is not an element of rape. Likewise, a
freshly broken hymen is not an essential element of rape and healed lacerations do not
negate rape.

People of the Philippines Vs. Charlie Gloria

G.R. No. 168476 September 27, 2006

Ruling:

The Court does not subscribe to appellant's claim that the filing of the rape charges was
part of ABC's effort to gain custody of her children, especially since the accused failed to
prove the same. This is mere conjecture and obviously, a vain attempt to escape liability
from his dastardly acts. It will take a sick and sinister parent to conjure up such a ploy and
use an offspring as an engine of malice. It is also unthinkable for a mother to allow an
examination of her daughter's private parts and subject her through the rigors and
humiliation of a public trial if the accusations were not true, or if she was not motivated
solely by the desire to have the person responsible for the defloration of her daughter
apprehended and punished.

With regard to the alleged inconsistency in AAA's testimony and the physical evidence,
indeed, AAA testified on cross-examination that her father did not tie her up at anytime in
the year 1999, despite the medico-legal's finding that there were ligature marks on both her
wrists. On re-cross, however, she stated that she denied having been tied up by her father
because she was afraid of her father. She then said that her father used a plastic straw
when he tied her up the first time he raped her. Moreover, even if she hemmed and hawed
in revealing the fact of her being tied up by her father, this does not detract from the cold
reality that she was raped. It should be pointed out that errorless recollection of a traumatic
and agonizing incident cannot be expected of a witness when she is recounting details of an
experience as humiliating and painful as rape. A rapist should not expect the hapless object
of his lechery to have "the memory of an elephant and the cold precision of a
mathematician."

People of the Philippines Vs. Celestino Gardon

G.R. No. 169872 September 27, 2006

Ruling:

That AAA failed to immediately report the rape is not necessarily indicative of fabrication as
Gardon suggests. As we held in People v. Melivo, incest magnifies the terror of rape because
the perpetrator is a person normally expected to give solace and protection to the victim.
Access to the victim is guaranteed by the blood relationship, proximity magnifying the sense
of helplessness and the degree of fear. The perpetrator takes full advantage of his blood
relationship, ascendancy and influence over his victim, both to commit the sexual assault
and to intimidate the victim into silence.

In this case, not only was AAA cowed into submission and silence by the fact that Gardon is
her grandfather, the latter also actually threatened to kill her and her brother if she told
anyone what happened.

To reiterate, given that the Informations failed to allege the aggravating circumstance of
use of a deadly weapon and the qualifying circumstances of minority and relationship,
Gardon is guilty of simple rape only.

People of the Philippines Vs. Gregorio Corpuz

G.R. No. 168101 February 13, 2006

Ruling:

It is highly inconceivable that complainant would not recognize her own father, with whom
she had been living for a long time. We have held that it is the most natural reaction for
victims of criminal violence to strive to see the appearance of their assailant and observe
the manner in which the crime was committed. Most often, the face and body movements of
the assailants create a lasting impression which cannot be easily erased from their memory.
The impression becomes more profound where the malefactor is the victim's own father.
Also, Juvilie categorically testified that it was her father who raped her. It is unthinkable, if
not completely preposterous, that a daughter would concoct a story of rape against her
father, taking to mind the reverence and respect for elders that is too deeply ingrained in
Filipino children. It is well-settled that a categorical and positive identification of an accused,
without any showing of ill-motive on the part of the eyewitness testifying on the matter,
prevails over alibi and denial, which are negative and self-serving evidence undeserving of
real weight in law unless substantiated by clear and convincing evidence.

Identification of an accused by his voice has been accepted particularly in cases where, such
as in this case, the witness has known the malefactor personally for so long and so
intimately. In People v. Calixto, the Supreme Court has given credence to the blindfolded
rape victim’s identification of the accused, a barriomate, by his voice. Also, in an earlier
case, the Supreme Court has said: "x x x [C]omplainant’s identification of the appellant was
not based solely on the latter’s physical defect, but by his voice as well, when he warned
complainant, ‘Flor, keep quiet.’ Although complainant did not see appellant’s face during the
sexual act because the house was dark, nevertheless, no error could have been committed
by the complainant in identifying the voice of the accused, inasmuch as complainant were
neighbors."

Be that as it may, the amendment of the information did not affect the crime committed by
the appellant, that is, qualified rape. In cases of incestuous rape, force or intimidation need
not even be proven. The overpowering moral influence of the father over the daughter takes
the place of violence and offer of resistance required in rape cases committed by an accused
unrelated to the victim. Consequently, his conviction is in order.
People of the Philippines Vs. Alfredo Bon

G.R. No. 166401 October 30, 2006

Ruling:

It is carnal knowledge, not pain, that is the element to consummate rape. Indeed pain may
be deduced from the sexual act but accused cannot be convicted of rape by presuming
carnal knowledge out of pain. It is well-settled that complete penetration of the penis into
the vagina is not necessary to convict for consummated rape since the slightest penetration
of one into the other will suffice. However, in People v. Campuhan, the term "slightest
penetration" was clarified to mean that there must be sufficient and convincing proof of the
penis indeed touching at the very least the labias of the female organ. Mere epidermal
contact between the penis and the external layer of the victim's vagina (the stroking and
the grazing of the male organ upon the female organ or the mons pubis) categorizes the
crime as attempted rape or acts of lasciviousness. There must be positive proof of even the
slightest penetration, more accurately, the touching of the labias by the penis, before rape
could be deemed consummated. We, therefore, take exception to the finding of the trial
court that when the accused was trying to insert his penis into the child's vagina, the act
proved painful to [AAA,] which made the accused stop from further executing the act. From
the testimony of private complainant, [AAA] in the afore-numbered cases, the prosecution
failed to demonstrate beyond any shadow of doubt that accused-appellant's penis reached
the labia of the pudendum of AAA's vagina. There is no basis then to apply the rule that the
introduction of the penis into the aperture of the female organ (thereby touching the labia of
the pudendum) already consummates the case of rape. x x x

It should be added that under Article 6 of the Revised Penal Code, there is an attempt when
the offender commences the commission of a felony directly by overt acts, and does not
perform all the acts of execution which should produce the felony by reason of some cause
or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance. In the crime of rape, penetration is
an essential act of execution to produce the felony. Thus, for there to be an attempted rape,
the accused must have commenced the act of penetrating his sexual organ to the vagina of
the victim but for some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance, the
penetration, however slight, is not completed.

2005
People of the Philippines Vs. Antonio Mendoza

G.R. No. 152589 and 152758 January 31, 2005

Ruling:

There is an attempt to commit rape when the offender commences its commission directly
by overt acts but does not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the felony
by reason of some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance. The
elements, therefore, of an attempted felony are the following: (1) the offender commences
the commission of the felony directly by overt acts; (2) he does not perform all the acts of
execution which should produce the felony; (3) the offender's act be not stopped by his own
spontaneous desistance; and (4) the non-performance of all acts of execution was due to
cause or accident other than his spontaneous desistance.

Upon the other hand, Article 366 of the Revised Penal Code states: "(a)ny person who shall
commit any act of lasciviousness upon the other person of either sex, under any of the
circumstances mentioned in the preceding article, shall be punished by prision correccional."
The elements of this crime are: (1) that the offender commits any act of lasciviousness or
lewdness; (2) that it is done (a) by using force and intimidation, or (b) when the offended
party is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious, or (c) when the offended party is
under 12 years of age; and (3) that the offended party is another person of either sex. As
explained by an eminent author of criminal law, rape and acts of lasciviousness have the
same nature. There is, however, a fundamental difference between the two. In rape, there
is the intent to lie with a woman whereas this element is absent in acts of lasciviousness.

In this case, the series of appalling events which took place on the night of 18 March 1998
inside the humble home of private complainant and of accused-appellant, establish beyond
doubt that the latter intended to ravish his very own flesh and blood. As vividly narrated by
private complainant before the trial court, accused-appellant, taking advantage of the cover
of darkness and of the absence of his wife, removed her (private complainant's) clothing
and thereafter placed himself on top of her. Accused-appellant, who was similarly naked as
private complainant, then proceeded to kiss the latter and he likewise touched her breasts
until finally, he rendered private complainant unconscious by boxing her in the stomach.
These dastardly acts of accused-appellant constitute "the first or some subsequent step in a
direct movement towards the commission of the offense after the preparations are made."
Far from being mere obscenity or lewdness, they are indisputably overt acts executed in
order to consummate the crime of rape against the person of private complainant.

Indeed, had private complaint given a categorical statement that the penis of accused-
appellant had in fact penetrated her vagina or that it had at least touched her labia, we
would have definitely affirmed the accused-appellant's conviction for consummated rape in
Crim. Case No. 6636-G. Unfortunately, the records are bereft of any indication to this effect
thus, we are constrained to find accused-appellant guilty only of attempted rape as far as
Crim. Case No. 6636-G is concerned lest we obliterate the fine distinction between an
attempted and consummated rape.

2004

EN BANC [G.R. No. 139236. February 3, 2004]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, appellee, vs. RODEL ANTIVOLA, appellant.

In the present case, no birth certificate or any similar authentic document was presented
and offered in evidence to prove Rachel’s age. The only evidence of the victim’s age is her
testimony and that of her mother’s (Sally de Guzman’s) Simumpaang Salaysay, which was
adopted as part of the latter’s direct testimony, attesting to the fact that her five-year-old
daughter was raped.

Sally’s testimony regarding Rachel’s age was insufficient, since Rachel was alleged to be
already five years old at the time of the rape, and what is sought to be proved is that she
was then less than seven years old. Her testimony will suffice only if it is expressly and
clearly admitted by the accused. There is no such express and clear declaration and
admission of the appellant that Rachel was less than seven years old when he raped her.
Moreover, the trial court made no finding as to the victim’s age.

However, Sally’s testimony that her daughter was five years old at the time of the
commission of the crime is sufficient for purposes of holding the appellant liable for
statutory rape, or the rape of a girl below twelve years of age. Under the second paragraph
of Article 266-B, in relation to Article 266-A(1)(d), carnal knowledge of a woman under
twelve years of age is punishable by reclusion perpetua. Thus, the appellant should be
sentenced to suffer reclusion perpetua, and not the death penalty.

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES VS CARMELITO LAURENTE CAPWA,,

G.R. No. 174058 December 27, 2007

We now rule on the prosecution’s sufficiency of evidence. To sustain a conviction for rape,
there must be proof of the penetration of the female organ. In this case, the conviction of
accused-appellant was anchored mainly on the testimony of the minor victim, AAA.
Accused-appellant, however, questions AAA’s credibility, alleging that there was
significant discrepancy between her Sinumpaang Salaysay, where she said that she
was harassed; and her testimony in court, where she said that she was raped.

We affirm the credibility of AAA. It is a settled doctrine that the trial court’s finding of
credibility is conclusive on the appellate court, unless it is shown that certain facts of
substance and value have been plainly overlooked, misunderstood, or misapplied. In this
case, accused-appellant has not shown that the RTC and CA findings should be reversed.
As correctly observed by the CA, the inaccuracy in AAA’s Sinumpaang Salaysay may be
attributed to the inadequacy of the investigator’s language, and not on her alleged lack of
honesty. Moreover, AAA’s testimony in court clearly proved that accused-appellant had
sexually abused her. It must be stressed that affidavits taken ex parte are inferior to
testimony given in court, the affidavits being invariably incomplete and oftentimes
inaccurate due to partial suggestions or want of specific inquiries.

EN BANC [G.R. No. 145223. February 11, 2004]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, appellee, vs. ALBERTO LUCERIANO, appellant.

An appeal in a criminal case throws the whole case wide open for review and the reviewing
tribunal can correct errors, though unassigned in the appealed judgment, or even reverse
the trial court’s decision on the basis of grounds other than those that the parties raised as
errors. Thus, although not raised as an issue by appellant, we deem it prudent to discuss
appellant’s use of force or intimidation in consummating his bestial act. Mysan testified that
appellant “pointed a knife at her side.” There was, therefore, the essence of force and
intimidation sufficient to engender fear in Mysan’s mind that she would be killed if she did
not yield to appellant’s bestial desire. The act of holding a knife by itself is strongly
suggestive of force or at least intimidation, and threatening the victim with a knife is
sufficient to bring her into submission.

Even in the absence of force, threat or intimidation, appellant’s sexual intercourse with
Mysan would constitute statutory rape. The Information alleged, and the prosecution
proved during trial, that Mysan was only eleven (11) years old when appellant had sexual
intercourse with her. Under Article 266-A(d) of the Revised Penal Code, when the victim is
under twelve (12) years of age, there is rape even in the absence of force, threat or
intimidation.

Appellant’s pretense cannot prevail over the testimony of Mysan which the trial court found
to be “candid, plain, and straightforward.” The testimony of victims who are of tender age
are credible. Besides, we note that Mysan could not hold back her emotions and cried
profusely at certain points during the trial. The spontaneous crying of a young victim while
recounting her heart-rending experience is evidence that speaks well of her credibility.

There being proof beyond reasonable doubt that appellant committed the crime as charged,
we affirm his conviction.

In the present case, the Information does not state that appellant is the live-in partner of
Mysan’s mother. Even if the prosecution proved that appellant was in fact the common-law
spouse of Mysan’s mother, the death penalty could not be imposed on appellant because
the Information did not specifically allege this relationship. The relationship cannot increase
the crime to qualified rape if the Information does not specifically allege the relationship.
Otherwise, appellant would be deprived of his right to be informed of the nature of the
charge against him. Consequently, appellant is only liable for simple rape under the first
paragraph of Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code which penalizes simple rape
with reclusion perpetua.

Since we are reducing the penalty to reclusion perpetua, the damages awarded by the trial
court to Mysan should be modified accordingly. The award of P50,000 civil indemnity is in
accordance with current jurisprudence involving simple rape.

In the present case, the Information did not specifically allege the relationship between
appellant and Mysan although the prosecution proved during the trial the relationship with
the testimonies of Mysan, Mysan’s mother, and appellant’s own admission. Hence, even if
the relationship cannot be appreciated as a qualifying circumstance, it can nonetheless be
the basis of a civil award of P25,000 in exemplary damages.

EN BANC [G.R. No. 152954. March 10, 2004]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, appellee, vs. PAULINO SEVILLENO y VILLANUEVA, a.k.a.

“Tamayo Sevilleno”, appellant.

It is doctrinal that the requirement of proof beyond reasonable doubt in criminal law does
not mean such a degree of proof as to exclude the possibility of error and produce absolute
certainty. Only moral certainty is required or that degree of proof which produces
conviction in an unprejudiced mind. While it is established that nothing less than proof
beyond reasonable doubt is required for a conviction, this exacting standard does not
preclude resort to circumstantial evidence when direct evidence is not available. Direct
evidence is not a condition sine qua non to prove the guilt of an accused beyond reasonable
doubt. For in the absence of direct evidence, the prosecution may resort to adducing
circumstantial evidence to discharge its burden. Crimes are usually committed in secret and
under conditions where concealment is highly probable. If direct evidence is insisted on
under all circumstances, the prosecution of vicious felons who commit heinous crimes in
secret or secluded places will be hard, if not impossible, to prove.

In the end, the rule is settled that where the culpability or innocence of the accused hinges
on the credibility of the witnesses and the veracity of their testimonies, the findings of trial
courts are given the highest degree of respect. Hence, their findings on such matters are
binding and conclusive on appellate courts, unless some fact or circumstance of weight and
substance has been overlooked, misapprehended or misinterpreted. We find no
circumstance of weight or substance that was overlooked by the trial court.