457 Phil. 934
PER CURIAM:
When arraigned, appellant, assisted by counsel, pleaded not guilty to both charges.[7] Trial on the merits ensued.Criminal Case No. 08-1074
That on or about March 26, 1997, in the municipality of Aparri, province of Cagayan, and within the jurisdiction of the Honorable Court, the above-named accused, with lewd design, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously have carnal knowledge of the herein offended party, his daughter, a woman under twelve (12) years of age, all against her will and consent.
Contrary to law.[5]Criminal Case No. 08-1075
That on or about March 28, 1997, in the municipality of Aparri, province of Cagayan, and within the jurisdiction of the Honorable Court, the above-named accused, with lewd design, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously have carnal knowledge of the herein offended party, his daughter, a woman under twelve years of age, all against her will and consent.
Contrary to law.[6]
Appellant set up the defense of denial and alibi. He claimed he was in another place at the time of the commission of the rapes. Appellant recalled that on the night of 26 March 1997, he was in his house with his brother, Romy Junas. His three children were then in the house of their grandmother, Herminia Ibañez. Appellant declared that it was not true that he and Rhoda were alone in his house on the night in question.[17]
- Hymen not intact.
- Positive healed lacerations at 7 & 11 o'clock position.
- Vagina admits 1 finger with ease.[16]
WHEREFORE, the court hereby renders judgment finding the accused Rodolfo Junas GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape in both cases for sexually abusing his own daughter Rhoda Junas, who was below twelve (12) years of age at the time of the incidents, on two (2) separate occasions, and sentencing him to...Hence, this automatic review.
1 - suffer the supreme penalty of death in each case, or two (2) death penalties;
2 - indemnify the victim Rhoda Junas in the amounts of:2.1 - P75,000.00 - as civil indemnity in each case, or a total of P150,000.00;
2.2 - 50,000.00 - as moral damages in each case, or a total of P100,000.00;
2.3 - 25,000.00 - as exemplary damages in each case, or a total of P50,000.00.
3 - pay the costs of litigation.
SO ORDERED.
Appellant contends that the trial judge showed manifest bias against him by acting as a virtual prosecutor. He points to the trial judge's alleged leading questions propounded to Rhoda during her direct examination as an indication of the judge's partiality for the prosecution.I
THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN PARTICIPATING DIRECTLY AND ACTIVELY IN THE PRESENTATION AND RECEPTION OF THE PROSECUTION'S EVIDENCE THEREBY FAILING TO UPHOLD THE `COLD NEUTRALITY OF AN IMPARTIAL JUDGE'.II
THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN RELYING HEAVILY ON THE TESTIMONY OF PRIVATE COMPLAINANT AND IN DECLARING THE LATTER'S NARRATION OF THE SUBJECT INCIDENTS IN QUESTION AS FIRM, CATEGORICAL, STRAIGHTFORWARD AND CONVINCING.III
THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN NOT RENDERING A VERDICT OF ACQUITTAL IN AS MUCH AS THE TESTIMONY OF PRIVATE COMPLAINANT WAS, INSTEAD, HIGHLY INCREDIBLE, NAY IN COMPLETE VARIANCE WITH HER OTHER STATEMENTS ANENT THE CRIMES CHARGED.[22]
The judge did not have to wait for an objection from opposing counsel to bar immaterial questions. If the opposing counsel does not object to such questions, the judge cannot stand idly by and allow the examining counsel to propound endless questions that are clearly irrelevant, immaterial, improper, or tend to be repetitious. A judge may examine or cross-examine a witness. He may propound clarificatory questions to test the credibility of the witness and to extract the truth. It will be a distorted concept of due process if in pursuing such a valid objective, the trial judge is stigmatized as a biased judge.[24]
Q - Miss witness, you said that your mother went abroad when you were still 2 years old, did I get you right?A - Yes, sir.Q - And from that time you have your two brothers as well as your father xxx staying at the house of your grandmother in Maura, Aparri, Cagayan?COURT: That is misleading. The witness testified from thereon she stayed in her grandmother's house while her father and two brothers stayed in their house. x x xQ - Do you remember when xxx your mother went abroad in August, 1996?A - No, sir.Q - Was there any occasion for you to drop by your mother at the airport in Manila?COURT: That is immaterial.ATTY. BRAVO: Because he is the father.PROSECUTOR CORTES: Well, we do not see any materiality.COURT: You mean to say on that occasion she was also with the father and the father did not rape her at the time.ATTY. BRAVO: We will be able to show the ....COURT: Yes. As far as we were concerned this is immaterial.[23]
About the active part that the judge took in the trial, the court finds that said active part was for the purpose of expediting the trial and directing the course thereof in accordance with the issues. While judges should as much as possible refrain from showing partiality to one party and hostility to another, it does not mean that a trial judge should keep mum throughout the trial and allow parties to ask the questions that they desire, on issues which they think are the important issues, when the former are improper and the latter, immaterial. If trials are to be expedited, judges must take a leading part therein, by directing counsel to submit the evidence on the facts in dispute by asking clarifying questions, and by showing an interest in a fast and fair trial. Judges are not mere referees like those of a boxing bout, only to watch and decide the results of a game; they should have as much interest as counsel in the orderly and expeditious presentation of evidence, calling attention of counsel to points at issue that are overlooked, directing them to ask the question that would elicit the facts on the issues involved, clarifying ambiguous remarks by witnesses, etc. Unless they take an active part in trials in the above form and manner, and allow counsel to ask questions whether pertinent or impertinent, material or immaterial, the speedy administration of justice which is the aim of the Government and of the people cannot be attained. Counsel should, therefore, not resent any interest that the judge takes in the conduct of the trial, they should be glad that a trial judge takes such interest and help in the determination of truth.Contrary to appellant's posture, the fact that the judge who penned the decision was not the one who heard the testimony of the complaining victim does not automatically taint the trial court's decision or ipso facto render it erroneous.[26] Appellant argues that since the judge who wrote the assailed decision was not the one who presided over the actual trial and observed Rhoda's demeanor, "his findings on the credibility of the private complainant are not binding upon the appellate courts." Appellant stresses that "the trial court erred in completely believing the testimony of private complainant."
Appellant failed to rebut the clear and positive testimony of Rhoda. No woman, especially one of tender age like Rhoda, would undergo the humiliation of a public trial and testify on the details of her ordeal, unless motivated by a desire to have the offender apprehended and punished.[32] Considering that Rhoda was not shown to have been ill-motivated in imputing such a grave offense against her own father, we find no reason to disbelieve her.[33]
Pros. Cortes: Q - Now, that evening of March 26, 1997, you stated that you went to the house of your father together with your aunt Alma Ibañez, your two brothers and your uncle, how long did you stay there that night?A - Quite long time, sir.Q - Did you sleep in the house of your father that night?A - Yes, sir.Q - While you were sleeping that night of March 26, 1997 do you recall if anything unusual took place?A - There was, sir.Q - What was that?A - When my aunt left already my father closed the door and the windows then he went on top of me and that was the time I was awakened, sir.Court: Q - Now, is the Court made to understand that when your Aunt Alma Ibañez left, you were already asleep?A - Yes, sir. I was already sleeping because my father told to my aunt to just leave me alone and sleep.Pros. Cortes: Q - By the way, before you slept that night in the house of your father what was your father doing?A - They were having a drinking spree, sir.Q - With whom?A - My uncle Joey, sir.Q - They were drinking what?A - San Miguel gin, sir.Q - Now, you stated earlier that when you were awakened your father was already on top of you, after waking up what did you do?A - I was able to get a chance and that was the time I ran towards the door, sir.Q - And after you ran away towards the door what did your father do?A - He pulled me, sir, and brought me to the folding bed.Q - What folding bed is that?A - A folding bed, sir.Court: Q - Is it made of canvass or steel?A - Made of steel, sir.Pros. Cortes: Q - And where is this bed situated in the house of your father?A - It is located in the living room, sir.Q - Is this also the same bed where you slept?A - No, sir.Q - When your father pulled you and brought you to that folding bed what happened next?A - He lowered my panty, sir.Court: Q - Okey [sic], let's exclude the public now. Everybody, except the mother, aunt and the accused.Pros. Cortes: Q - After lowering your panty what did your father do?A - He inserted his penis into my vagina, sir.Court: Q - What was your position at the time?A - I was then lying, sir.Q - And he[,] what was his position?A - He was also lying, sir.Q - Lying beside you or what?A - He was lying on top of me facing down, sir.Q - And how were you lying will you demonstrate?Interpreter: The witness was lying facing up.Court: Q - And your father was on top of you?A - Yes, sir.Q - What were his hands doing?A - He lowered my panty then he raised my two legs and that was the time he inserted his penis, sir.Q - Was his body between your legs?A - Yes, sir.Q - How were you dressed at that time?A - I was then using a daster [sic], sir.Q - Now, what hand did he use in removing your panty?A - His two hands, sir.Q - While he was removing your panty how was his body position[ed]?A - He was kneeling in front of me while he raised both my legs and pulled down my panty with his two hands, sir.Q - Now, what did you do while he was doing this?A - I begged from him not to continue, sir, but he did not accede.Q - Did you not shout?A - I shouted, sir, but he threatened me.Q - In what way did he threaten you?A - He said, `If you will reveal this matter I will kill you,' sir.Q - Now, when he removed your panty what was he wearing?A - He was wearing shortpants, sir.Q - And how did he remove his shortpants?A - He removed it, sir.Q - What kind of panty were you using then?A - A white panty, sir.Q - Is it the ordinary panty or what?A - Ordinary panty, sir.Q - By that you mean this panty with garter?A - Yes, sir.Court: Okey [sic], proceed.Pros. Cortes: Q - You stated that after he removed your panty your father inserted his penis into your vagina aside from that what else did your father do to you?A - He made pumping motions, sir.Q - And did you feel whether the penis penetrated your vagina or not?A - Yes, sir.Q - Aside from inserting his penis what other sexual act did he perform?A - He still sexually abused me, sir.Q - What do you mean by he sexually abused you?A - He also kissed me several times, sir.Court: Q - Kiss what?A - My face, sir.Court: Continue.Pros. Cortes: Q - Not your lips?A - He also kiss [sic] my lips, sir.Q - What about your breast?A - He only smashed it, sir.Q - He did not kiss it?A - No, sir.Q - How did he smash your breast?A - He pressed it, sir.Interpreter: The witness demonstrated by pressing her breast.Court: Q - Did he kiss your nipple?A - No, sir.Q - Did he removed [sic] your daster [sic]?A - Yes, sir.Q - So you were completely naked?A - Yes, sir.Court: Continue.Pros. Cortes: Q - What did you feel when your father inserted his penis into your vagina?A - It was painful, sir.Q - And what did you feel also when your father smashed your breast?A - It was also painful, sir.Q - And how did you react while your father was sexually abusing you?A - I was crying, sir.Q - After your father was through abusing you what did he tell you if any?A - He said, `We must keep it secret what had happened between us only,' sir.Court: Q - Did you enjoy having sex with your father?A - No, sir.Court: Continue.Pros. Cortes: Q - Now, in the evening of March 28, 1997 where did you sleep?A - In our house, sir.Q - Why did you sleep in the house of your father when according to you you were staying in the house of your grandmother?A - He came to fetch me sir, and told me to guard our house because he will go fishing.Q - In what part of your house did you sleep that night?A - In our bedroom, sir.x x x. Pros. Cortes: Q - Did you locked [sic] the door of that bedroom where you slept?A - Yes, sir.Q - And while you were there inside that bedroom what did your father do?A - He came and knocked at the door, sir, and told me to unlock the door.Q - And after that what happened?A - While I was then sleeping, sir, he came to lie down beside me.Q - And what did your father do?A - He lowered my panty, sir.Q - And he again abused you?A - Yes, sir.Q - He performed the same sexual act like what he did on March 26, 1997?A - Yes, sir.Q - And how did you react to that sexual abuse?A - I was crying, sir.Q - After that sexual assault what did your father tell you?A - The same as what he told me, sir, the first time he abused me that I will not reveal.x x x. Pros. Cortes: Q - You said that your father again abused you on March 28, 1997 will you demonstrate how he abused you?Interpreter: The witness is demonstrating by lying down facing up.Court: Q - While you were lying down you said your father knocked at the door, is that correct?A - Yes, sir.Q - And what did you do?A - I went to open the door, sir.Q - And what did you do after opening the door?A - After opening the door, sir, he told me not to lock the door.Q - So after that what did you do?A - I went back to bed, sir.Q - And were you able to sleep?-A - Yes, sir.Q - So what happened after that?A - My father came and lay down beside me, sir.Q - So when he came and lay down beside you what did you do?A - When my father came beside me, sir, I was surprised why he came beside me.Q - And what did he tell you?A - He told me, sir, `Do not reveal this to anybody, only the two of us knew [sic].'Q - And what did he do?A - He again lowered my panty, sir.Q - Now, what was your position at the time?A - After opening the door I went back to bed and I was lying on my side and that was the time my father came and lay beside me and let me lie facing up, sir, and then he lowered my panty.Q - What dress were you wearing at the time?A - Shortpants, sir.Q - How did he lower your panty when you were wearing shortpants? How was he able to lower your panty with your shortpants?A - He unzipped my shortpants and lowered it together with my panty, sir.Q - Did you do it willingly?A - No, sir, in fact I was then resisting but he was aiming his hand to box me.Court: Continue.Pros. Cortes: Q - And after lowering your panty what did your father do?A - The same thing that happened when he first abused me, sir.Q - So he also inserted his penis inside your vagina?A - Yes, sir.Q - And he also kissed you?A - Yes, sir.Q - On your lips?A - Yes, sir.Q - And he also smashed your breasts?A - Yes, sir.Q - And what did you feel when your father inserted his penis for the second time?A - It was painful, sir.[31]
Art. 335. When and how rape is committed. -- x x xUnder this provision, both circumstances of the victim's minority and her relationship to the offender must be alleged in the information and proven during the trial to warrant the imposition of the death penalty.[45]
x x x
The death penalty shall also be imposed if the crime of rape is committed with any of the following attendant circumstances:
- When the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age and the offender is a parent, ascendant, step-parent, guardian, relative by consanguinity or affinity within the third civil degree, or the common law spouse of the parent of the victim.