546 Phil. 410
CHICO-NAZARIO, J.:
That on September 30, 1995 at around 7:00 o'clock in the morning, more or less, at Barangay Quinuartilan, Municipality of Camalig, Province of Albay, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, with lewd design and threatening the victim with a fan knife (balisong), by means of force, threat and intimidation, did then and there willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously have carnal knowledge with AAA, against her will and consent, which act impregnated her, to her damage and prejudice.[6]Upon arraignment, appellant, duly assisted by counsel, entered a plea of not guilty.[7]
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:On 20 June 1996, AAA gave birth to a baby girl.[16]
This is to certify that Mr./Ms. AAA, a 16 (year) old, female, single, 2nd yr. H.S. and presently residing at Kuinantilan (sic), Camalig, Albay.
Had been (examined, treated) and was found to be pregnant for 8 months. Last Menstrual Period: Sept. 12, 1995.
Physical Exam: Abdomen: Globularly enlarged AOG.[15]
WHEREFORE, based on the foregoing considerations, this Court (finds) the accused PATERNO P. OLIQUINO GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of RAPE and sentences him to a penalty of Reclusion Perpetua and to indemnify the victim AAA the amount of P50,000.00 as moral damages.Appellant seasonably appealed his case before this Court. In our Resolution dated 29 September 2004, we transferred the case to the Court of Appeals pursuant to our holding in the case of People v. Mateo.[35]
Considering that accused Paterno Oliquino admits that he is the father of CCC[33] which is the product of the rape committed by him upon private complainant AAA(,) he is ordered to acknowledge the child CCC as his daughter and to give her the necessary support.[34]
WHEREFORE, the foregoing premises considered, the decision subject of the appeal is hereby AFFIRMED save for a slight modification in that the accused-appellant is ordered to pay the victim an additional amount of the P50,000 as civil indemnity.[36]Once again, appellant is pleading his case before us arguing that the prosecution was unable to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.[37]
The question of whether or not the sexual intercourse in question is free and voluntary, hinges, on the credibility of witnesses, the determination of which is largely addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court. Appellate courts will generally not disturb the findings of the trial court, considering that it has unequalled competence to consider and determine the credibility of witnesses, in view of its unique opportunity to observe the demeanor of witnesses on the stand, an opportunity not afforded the appellate court, unless it has plainly overlooked certain facts of substance and value that, if considered, might affect the result of the case.[41]We have carefully reviewed the records of this case and found no reason to disturb the findings of both the trial court and the Court of Appeals. We particularly subjected the testimony of AAA to careful scrutiny as we are fully aware that oftentimes, rape cases are decided based on the testimony of the aggrieved party. In the end, we find that the conclusion reached by the trial court is proper. AAA's narration of appellant's attack upon her maidenhood was candid and straightforward -
WITNESS:
A. I was preparing food for breakfast.
Q. Now, while you were preparing food for breakfast, what happened?
A. That morning, Paterno Oliquino arrived.
Q. When you say Paterno, is he the same Paterno Oliqiuino who is the accused in this case?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What happened after Paterno arrived?
A. When Paterno arrived, he held my both hands.
Q. What happened next after he held your two hands?
A. He pushed me.
Q. And what happened to you after he pushed you?
A. After pushing me, he immediately sat on my stomach. (Witness points to her stomach).
Q. What was your position when the accused sat on your stomach?
A. I was already lying because of the push that he made.
Q. Was your face facing upward or facing towards the ground?
A. My face was facing up.
Q. Now, what else happened after he sat on your stomach while you were lying on the ground?
A. He undressed me.
Q. How did he undress you?
A. He removed my shorts (sic).
Q. After he removed your shorts, what else did he do?
A. He also removed my panty.
Q. Then, after he removed your panty, what else happened?
A. After removing my panty he also undressed himself.
Q. What did he undress himself?
A. First, he removed his pants.
x x x x
COURT:
Q. What did he remove first?
WITNESS:
A. His shorts and then his briefs (sic).
PROSECUTOR TOLOSA:
Q. Then after he removed his shorts and briefs (sic), what transpired next?
A. After that he placed himself on top of me and placed his penis on my vagina.
Q. Was his penis inserted on your vagina?
A. The penis of Paterno was inserted on my vagina.
x x x x
PROSECUTOR TOLOSA:
Q. Then after his penis was inserted to your vagina, what happened next?
WITNESS:
A. I felt pain.
Q. Did you shout?
A. I was hindered by Paterno from shouting because according him when I shout he will kill me.
Q. So what did you do?
A. I did not move because I was afraid.
Q. How long was Paterno on top of you?
A. For a while, sir.
Q. Now, after he finished, what transpired next?
A. After that, after Paterno was through, he put on his brief.
Q. Did he talk to you before he left?
ATTY. MACASINAG:
Leading.
WITNESS:
A. I was instructed not to shout, otherwise, he will kill me.
PROSECUTOR TOLOSA:
Q. Were you afraid?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Why?
A. Because he will kill me.
x x x x
ATTY. MACASINAG:
Q. Can you demonstrate to us how Paterno Oliquino sat on your stomach by demonstrating it using the Court Process Server as yourself and you as Paterno Oliquino.
COURT:
Q. She's lying down. Just a moment, where were you lying down?
WITNESS:
A. I was lying on the floor.
COURT INTERPRETER:
At this juncture, witness is going down the witness stand to demonstrate how the accused sat on her stomach. Witness is now sitting on the stomach of the Process Server. The position is that like she is riding on a horse back, facing both legs of the Process Server.
ATTY. MACASINAG:
Q. So on that position, Madam Witness, your panty and your shorts were removed by Paterno Oliquino?
WITNESS:
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And on that position, Paterno Oliquino inserted his penis to your vagina?
A. After removing my short pants and panty, he changed his position by turning and facing me already.
Q. And he kissed your lips?
A. No, sir.
Q. He did not kiss your breast?
A. No, sir.
Q. So he just immediately inserted his penis on your vagina?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And on your position demonstrated a while ago by you, you did not hold anything to protect yourself because Paterno at that time was facing your legs?
WITNESS:
A. No, sir.
x x x x
COURT:
Q. In that position, he removed your short pants and your panty?
A. Yes.
Q. Did you not move?
A. I was attempted to move but he told me not to move.
Q. He really told you not to move?
A. Yes because I was afraid.
Q. Why were you afraid?
A. Because he will kill me.
Q. By his bare hands or what?
A. He was armed, your honor.
Q. What?
A. A small knife.
Q. What did he do with it?
A. He was just holding that small knife.
Q. Did he show it to you?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, when he was able to remove your panty and your shorts, what did he do next?
A. After removing my short pants and my panty he face (sic) me already.
Q. You did not stand at first?
A. I stood up but he placed his both legs spread on my body.
Q. Facing you already. You're face to face already?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. He was able to remove his short pants, how?
A. He was standing straight with his legs spread, that was the time when he removed his pants.
COURT:
Q. At that time when he remove his short pants as well as his briefs (sic), he was with you?
WITNESS:
A. Yes, sir.
Q. At that time when he removed his brief and shorts, he was standing astride facing you?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. After that when he was able to remove his shorts and his briefs (sic), what else did he do?
A. He placed himself on top of me.
Q. After that, what else did he do?
A. That was the time when he placed his penis on my vagina.
Q. After placing his penis and penetrated on your vagina, what did he do?
A. When his penis was already on my vagina, he started pumping.
Q. How many minutes, how many seconds or how long?
A. For a while, sir.
Q. After he satisfied himself, what did he do?
A. That was the time when he dressed up.
Q. What you are telling here is true?
A. It is true, sir.
Q. You must remember that what you are telling here is serious? If he found to be guilty, he might be penalized or sentenced to death?
A. That is true, sir.[42]
It is noteworthy to consider first the actuation of Ortilio Gomez: He considers AAA (his) granddaughter, nevertheless, he kept mum about what he saw between Paterno and AAA who were engaged in the alleged sexual act because he presumed that they have a good understanding. In a barangay where the residents regard themselves as closely knit and who observe family tradition, as in this case, the normal reaction of Otilio Gomez is to talk to herein accused and ask him why he was having a relationship with AAA who was only 15 years old then. But he never lifted a finger to tell Paterno or AAA's grandmother because he "presumed" the good relationship of the two. The relationship of Paterno and AAA if there really was, is unusual which can not be taken sitting down by an on-looker, especially considering that Otilio allegedly saw the two in (a compromising) situation.[45]Indeed, if it were true that Gomez treated AAA as his own kin, he would have immediately discussed his observations with appellant or informed BBB regarding the inappropriate behavior of her minor granddaughter. The fact that he did not does not augur well for his credibility.
[I]ntimidation must be viewed in light of the victim's perception and judgment at the time of the commission of the crime and not by any hard and fast rule. It is enough that the intimidation produces a fear that if the victim does not yield to the bestial demands of the accused, something would happen to her at the moment, or even thereafter, as when she is threatened with death should she report the incident. x x x.Finally, the parties agree that there was no animosity among them prior to this dispute. This, to our minds, undermines the appellant's case for in areas such as where AAA was raised, young ladies by custom and tradition act with circumspection and prudence, and that great caution is observed so that their reputation remains untainted.[57] We see no reason, and appellant failed to produce any, to inquire into the motive behind AAA's institution of this action except to seek justice for the irreparable damage that appellant had inflicted upon her. Indeed, no woman, much less a young girl such as AAA, would make public a painful and humiliating secret unless she was viciously wronged.
With regard to his civil liability, however, the trial court's award of damages should be modified. Under the present law, an award of P50,000.00 as civil indemnity is mandatory upon the finding of the fact of rape. This is exclusive of the award of moral damages of P50,000.00, without need of further proof. The 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.[59]WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR No. 00540 affirming, with modification, the decision of the Regional Trial Court Branch 3, Legazpi City, in Criminal Case No. 7192, is hereby AFFIRMED. In addition, appellant is ordered to give support to his offspring by AAA in the amount of P500.00 each month. No costs.