600 Phil. 8
BRION, J.:
That on or about the 30th day of May, 1998, in Quezon City, Philippines, the said accused by means of force and intimidation, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously touch [AAA's][3] private part, a minor 13 years of age, removed her panty and inserted his index finger on her vagina and thereafter have carnal knowledge with the undersigned complainant against her will and without her consent.The appellant pleaded not guilty to the charge. The prosecution presented the following witnesses in the trial on the merits that followed: AAA; BBB; SPO4 Susano San Diego (SPO4 San Diego); SPO4 Milla Billones (SPO4 Billones); and Dr. Ma. Cristina Freyra (Dr. Freyra). The appellant took the witness stand for the defense.
CONTRARY TO LAW.[4]
F I N D I N G S:On cross examination, she stated that the hymenal lacerations on AAA's private part could have been caused by the insertion of a blunt object into her vagina.[10]
GENERAL AND EXTRAGENITAL:
Fairly developed, fairly nourished and coherent female subject. Breasts are undeveloped. Abdomen is flat and soft.
GENITAL:
There is absence of pubic hair. Labia majora are full, convex and coaptated with pinkish brown labia minora presenting in between. On separating the same disclosed an elastic, fleshy-type hymen with deep, healed lacerations at 4 and 9 o'clock positions. External vaginal orifice offers strong resistance to the introduction of the examining index finger. Vaginal canal is narrow with prominent rugosities.
C O N C L U S I O N:
Subject is in non-virgin state physically.
There are no external signs of recent application of any form of trauma at the time of examination.
REMARKS:
Vaginal and peri-urethral smears are negative for gram-negative diplococcic and for spermatozoa. x x x.[9]
WHEREFORE, premises considered, judgment is hereby rendered finding the herein accused Henry Guerrero Agripa GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT of Rape and hereby sentences him to suffer the penalty of Reclusion Perpetua and to indemnify the offended party the sum of P50,000.00 and to pay the costs.The records of this case were originally transmitted to this Court on appeal. Pursuant to our ruling in People v. Mateo,[13] we endorsed the case and the records to the CA for appropriate action and disposition.[14]
SO ORDERED.[12][Emphasis in the original]
ART. 266-A. Rape; When and How Committed. - Rape is committed -Thus, for the charge of rape to prosper, the prosecution must prove that (1) the offender had carnal knowledge of a woman, and (2) he accomplished the act through force, threat or intimidation, or when she was deprived of reason or was otherwise unconscious, was under 12 years of age, or was demented.[19]
1) By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances:
a) Through force, threat or intimidation;
b) When the offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious;
c) By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority; and
d) When the offended party is under twelve (12) years of age or is demented, even though none of the circumstances mentioned above be present.
x x x x
AAA's testimony strikes us to be clear, convincing and credible, corroborated as it was in a major way by the medico-legal report and the testimony of Dr. Freyra. It bears emphasis that during the initial phases of AAA's testimony, she broke down on the witness stand when the prosecution asked her questions relating to the rape she suffered. This, to our mind, is an eloquent and moving indication of the truth of her allegations. In addition, our examination of the records gives us no reason to doubt AAA's testimony or suspect her of any ulterior motive in charging and testifying against the appellant. We have held time and again that testimonies of rape victims who are young and immature, as in this case, deserve full credence considering that no young woman, especially one of tender age, would concoct a story of defloration, allow an examination of her private parts, and thereafter subject herself to a public trial if she had not been motivated solely by the desire to obtain justice for the wrong committed against her.[21]
Q: On May 30, 1998, do you recall of any unusual incident that happened to you? [AAA] A: Yes, sir. Q: What was that unusual incident? A: He called me. He was just standing by the window, and then he dragged me inside the house. Q: What happened after you were dragged inside the house? A: He removed my dress. Q: What followed after he undressed you? A: He also undressed himself. ASSISTANT PROSECUTOR DELA CRUZ At this juncture the witness is crying, Your Honor, may we ask that the continuation of the testimony of witness be reset tomorrow x x x. CONTINUATION OF DIRECT EXAMINATION BY ASSISTANT PROSECUTOR DELA CRUZ Q: Ms. Witness, for clarity, will you please step down from the witness stand and tap the shoulder of the accused in this case, Henry Guerrero Agripa? [AAA] A: Yes, sir. This man, sir. COURT INTERPRETER Witness tapping the right shoulder of the man who is wearing a yellow T-shirt and who when asked identified himself as Henry Guerrero Agripa. ASSISTANT PROSECUTOR DELA CRUZ Q: Yesterday, during the direct examination, you were telling us about your ordeal, what you experienced on May 30, 1998 in the hands of this accused, Henry Guerrero Agripa? Do you remember that, Mr. [sic] Witness? A: Yes, sir. Q: Now, Ms. Witness, again, I will ask you, what happened on May 30, 1998? What happened to you? x x x A: I was then near their window and he grabbed me inside their house. Q: When you said "nila," to whom are you referring to? A: The house of the suspect. Q: You mean Henry Guerrero Agripa, the accused in this case? A: Yes, sir. Q: What happened after you were dragged inside the house of the accused? A: He undressed me. Q: What was removed by the accused when you said he undressed you? A: My shorts and panty. Q: And then what did he do next, if he did anything, after he undressed you? A: He also undressed himself. Q: Thereafter, what happened next, if any. ASSISTANT PROSECUTOR DELA CRUZ At this juncture, your honor, may we put on record that the witness is crying. x x x A: "Ginalaw na niya po ako." x x x COURT: I will ask her a question. When you said "ginalaw," you mean he only held your hands? [AAA] A: No, your honor, he touched my whole body. Q: Including what? A: My private parts. x x x Q: About how many times did he do to you this touching of your body as well as your private parts? A: Many times. x x x Q: When you said he touched your private parts, you mean he touched you with his hands? A: He used his private parts. Q: You mean his penis? A: Yes, sir. Q: What did you feel? A: I felt pain. Q: And what did he do exactly when you said you felt pain, what was he doing at this time when you felt pain? A: Because he was trying to force his private part into mine, into my vagina. Q: Aside from the pain that you felt, was there anything else that happened to you on account of that act of the accused trying to penetrate you? A: No more, sir. Q: Okay. What did you observe in you[r] private parts after the accused tried to penetrate you? A: There was blood. Q: And how did you react when you said there was blood in your private part? A: I just cried. Q: You said he tried to penetrate you with his penis, how many times did he do this? A: Once only. x x x[20] [Emphasis supplied]
Second, the appellant employed force and intimidation in satisfying his lustful desires. AAA categorically stated that she was dragged by the appellant - who was wielding a knife - inside his (appellant's) house. AAA likewise testified that the appellant continued to threaten her while they were inside his house; and that she (AAA) did not attempt to run for fear for her life. As an element of rape, force or intimidation need not be irresistible; it may be just enough to bring about the desired result. What is necessary is that the force or intimidation be sufficient to consummate the purpose that the accused had in mind.[26] In People v. Mateo,[27] we held:
ATTY. RONALD ANCHETA Q: Doctor, in your findings, you said that you found out that the hymen was lacerated at 4 and 9 o'clock positions. DR. FREYRA A: Yes, sir. Q: Doctor, what could have been the cause of the laceration? A: The cause of such laceration is the insertion of any blunt object inside the vagina. Q: Now doctor, would you be able to distinguish if only the tip of the penis or full or the whole penis was inserted. Would you determine that considering that the laceration is [at] 4 and 9 o'clock positions? A: The laceration is inflicted in the hymen if there was insertion of any hard blunt object and the size of the laceration would depend on the object that penetrated and it does not matter whether the tip of the penis is short or inverted. Q: Are you saying that even the tip of the penis could have caused the laceration at 4 and 9 o'clock? A: As I have said, it would depend on the diameter of the thing that enters the hymen and it would break that would need to accommodate the diameter of the thing that enters [sic]. Q: So how about in this case, Doctor, if the male factor is an adult at the time of the sexual abuse and there was full penetration. Is it not a fact that there could have been more laceration than what has been stated there in your report? A: No, sir because the hymen is elastic and it would break and produce lacerations that are made in order to accommodate the diameter of the thing that enters and since the thing that penetrated only required two lacerations located at 4 and 9 o'clock, those were the only lacerations inflicted in order to accommodate the thing that entered. Q: How about if the finger was inserted in the hymen of the victim, would it produce that type of lacerations? A: If it was a finger that penetrated the hymen, perhaps I would see a smaller laceration in the hymen. Then also it would depend on the size of the smaller finger that entered the hymen and did not do any other movements like sideward movement it would be a shallow laceration. But in this case, it is a deep healed laceration of the hymen. x x x[25] [Emphasis ours]
It is a settled rule that the force contemplated by law in the commission of rape is relative, depending on the age, size strength of the parties. It is not necessary that the force and intimidation employed in accomplishing it be so great and 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.By itself, the act of holding a knife is strongly suggestive of force or at least of intimidation, more so if the knife was directed at a minor, as in this case. Clearly, AAA could not be expected to act with equanimity and with nerves of steel, or to act like an adult or a mature and experienced woman who would know what to do under the circumstances, or to have the courage and intelligence to disregard the threat.[29] Under the circumstances obtaining in this case, the overt acts of the appellant were sufficient to bring AAA into submission.
Intimidation, more subjective than not, is peculiarly addressed to the mind of the person against whom it may be employed, and its presence is basically incapable of being tested by any hard and fast rule. Intimidation is normally best viewed in the light of the perception and judgment of the victim at the time and occasion of the crime.[28]
Article 266-A. Rape; When and How Committed. - Rape is committed:Although the prosecution proved during trial that the rape was committed with the use of a deadly weapon, we cannot appreciate this qualifying circumstance as it was not alleged in the Information. The lower courts therefore are correct in imposing the penalty of reclusion perpetua on the appellant.
1) By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances:
a) Through force, threat, or intimidation;
x x x x
Article 266-B. Penalties. - Rape under paragraph 1 of the next preceding article shall be punished by reclusion perpetua.
x x x x