427 Phil. 82
SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J.:
“That on or about the twenty-fifth (25th) day of June, 1990, in the City of Olongapo, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, with lewd design, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously have carnal knowledge of one Riza Cleodoro,[3] an 11 year old girl, and by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the accused, with intent to kill, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously assault and strangle the said Riza Cleodoro, which caused her death shortly thereafter.Accused entered a plea of "not guilty."[4] During the hearing, the prosecution presented Dr. Richard Patilano, Atty. Juanito Atienza, Pfc. Roosevelt Menor, Cpl. Felipe Francia, and Pat. Marlon Agno as its witnesses. The defense, on the other hand, offered the sole testimony of accused Deorito Porio.
“CONTRARY TO LAW.”
"Contusions: 4x1 cm over the left side of the neck; 2x1 cm over the anterior aspect of the neck; 2x1.5 cm over the left side of the inguinal area.The day after Riza's exanimate body was found, Barangay Purok Leader Francisco Montes informed Cpl. Felipe Francia of the Olangapo Police Department that the accused attempted to rape Riza on three previous occasions. Montes got this information, as a Purok Leader, from Trinidad, the victim's mother, who confirmed its veracity.[7]
Breast: not yet developed.
Genital Examination:
No pubic hair, Labia majora-gaping, Labia Minora –gaping. Feurchetelax with fresh lacerations at the median line, Vestibular mucosa, cyanotic with congestion. Hymen and vaginal walls with fresh lacerations at 1:00 o’clock and 6:00 0’clock positions. Hymenal orifice, originally annular admitted 2.5 cm in diameter bottle with marked resistance. Vaginal walls congested with bloody materials, scanty.
Lungs: Voluminous, soggy, dark red in color. Petechial hemorrhages present at the subepicardial and subpleural areas.x x x x x x
Conclusion:Genital Findings are compatible with sexual intercourse with a man on or about the alleged date of commission, with violence.Cause of death: Neurogenic Shock and Asphyxia by Strangulation.” (Emphasis ours)
The prosecution failed to present Purok Leader Montes as a witness because he died during the hearing of this case.[15] Meanwhile, the subpoena upon the victim's mother has remained unserved as she is no longer residing at her given address.
“T: Ano ang masasabi mo sa nangyaring ito?
S: Nagawa ko po iyon dahil gusto ko po at ako ay nakainom.T: Isalaysay mo nga sa akin ang mga pangyayari?
S: Pagkatapos ko pong ayusin ang aking trabaho ay umalis na ako, bandang alas otso na po iyon at dumaan ako sa isang tindahan at bumili ng isang lapad na ESQ, tapos tuloy na ako sa bahay namin ni Trining at Teresa.T: Sino naman itong Trining?
S: Ina po ni Teresa, na kinakasama ko.T: Ipagpatuloy mo ang iyong salaysay?S: Iyon po, pagdating ng bahay ay ininom namin ni Trining ang dala kong alak na ESQ, tapos itong bata naman na si Teresa ay nagpaalam sa kanyang ina na aakyat at magpapakilo ng plastic doon sa buyer, tapos nang magtagal siya ay sinundan siya ng ina niya at sinundan ko na rin at nakita ko si Teresa at nakita ko siya sa malapit sa puno ng mangga at sinabi ko sa kanya na samahan niya ako sa manga at doon ay nakatuwaan kong alisin ang kanyang short at hinawakan ko ang puki niya (affiant is referring to Teresa Florez, 11 years old, the victim) at hindi ako nakatiis ay inihiga ko siya sa damuhan.T: Anong sabi niya nang ihiga mo, hindi ba siya natakot o sumigaw?
S: Ang sabi niya ay ano ang gagawin mo sa akin?T: Ano naman ang sinabi mo sa kanya?
S: Sabi ko sa kanya, sige na, hindi ko na matiis.T: Ipagpatuloy mo ang salaysay mo?S: Nang maihiga ko siya ay ibinaba ko ang pantalon ko hanggang tuhod tapos ipinasok ko ang ari ko sa kanyang pag-aari at kalahati lang ang naipasok ko dahil nasasaktan siya at umiiyak, at nawalan siya nang malay.T: Nang mawalan na si Teresa ng malay, ano ang sumunod na ginawa mo?S: Nabigla po ako at nahawakan ko ang leeg niya at nasakal ko na siya hanggang mamatay na siya, at nang iwan ko siya ay talagang hindi na humihinga at nagtuloy ako sa bahay na tinirhan namin ni Trining at nagpalipas ng oras doon at nang magkagulo doon sa bahay ni Bruan ay pumunta ako doon at nakita ko na nga itong si Teresa na kalong ng kanyang ina at patay na.T: Nang malaman mong nakamatay ka na nga, ano ang ginawa mo?
S: Wala po, nagbantay pa ako doon at ako pa ang nagbuhat ng bangkay ni Teresa papuntang taas doon sa bahay ni SEVERO FLORES para maimbistigahan at tuloy madala dito sa Funeraria Fernandez.x x x x x x T: Nakahiram ka ba ng pera kay Pineda pagkatapos ng insidenteng ito?
S: Opo, dalawang daan lang para sana ibigay ko sa nanay ng bata.T: Naibigay mo naman?
S: Opo.T: Nasaan na ngayon si Teresa?
S: Nandoon po siya nakaburol sa simbahan ng Purok 1.T: May ipapakita akong isang short sa iyo, ano ang masasabi mo dito?S: Iyan po ang suot na short ni Teresa na hinubad ko (Affiant is pointing to a blue short pants allegedly wore by the victim during the incident)T: Sa kasalukuyan ay wala na akong itatanong pa sa iyo, may nais ka bang idagdag dito sa sinabi mo?S: Wala na po, maliban sa kaya ako nagtapat ay nakokonsensya ako.ASSISTED BY: (Sgd) (Sgd) ATTY. JUANITO C. ATIENZA DEORITO PORIO Affiant"[14]
“WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing considerations, this Court finds accused Deorito Porio y Rapsing guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the complex crime of rape with homicide and sentences him to RECLUSION PERPETUA; to indemnify the complainant Trinidad Cleodoro the amount of P50,000.00 as actual damages; P100,000.00 as moral damages; P100,000.00 as exemplary damages; and to pay the costs.Feeling aggrieved, the accused, now appellant, comes to us ascribing to the trial court the following errors:
SO ORDERED.”[17]
Appellant mainly contends that the taking of his Sinumpaang Salaysay was in violation of his constitutional rights and is, therefore, inadmissible. He claims that he was not assisted by an independent counsel and that he was "intimidated or practically forced to execute or sign" the same. He likewise maintains that the evidence against him is insufficient since all the prosecution witnesses are mere "witnesses after the fact."“I
THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN ADMITTING THE EXTRAJUDICIAL CONFESSION OF THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT IN VIOLATION OF HIS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO HAVE COMPETENT AND INDEPENDENT COUNSEL PREFERABLY OF HIS OWN CHOICE.“II
THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN NOT ACQUITTING THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT CONSIDERING THE INSUFFICIENCY OF THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED BY THE PROSECUTION.“III
THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN GIVING MUCH WEIGHT AND CREDIT TO THE TESTIMONIES OF THE PROSECUTION WITNESSES AND IN REJECTING THE EVIDENCE FOR THE DEFENSE.“IV
THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN FINDING THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT OF THE COMPLEX CRIME OF RAPE WITH HOMICIDE."[18]
"PAGPAPATUNAYOn its face, the Sinumpaang Salaysay has no sign of suspicious circumstances tending to cast doubt on its integrity. Like in other cases where this Court upheld the admissibility of extra-judicial confessions, appellant's narration reflects spontaneity and coherence which, psychologically, cannot be associated with a mind to which force and intimidation have been applied. Appellant's response to each question contains details beyond what was being asked, thus indicating a mind free from exraneous restraints. As can be gleaned from the confession, the investigator did not propound questions answerable only by yes or no. He gave appellant sufficient latitude to elaborate by simply saying to him, "Ipagapatuloy mo ang iyong salaysay."
Pagpapatunay po ito na naunawaan ko ang lahat ng nasasaad sa gawing itaas, pinawalang halaga o bisa ko ang mga ito sa harapan ni Atty. JUANITO C. ATIENZA. Kusa po akong nagbigay ng kusang salaysay at hindi ako pinilit o tinakot o pinangakuan ng ano pa man, lahat ng aking sasabihin ay buong katotohanan lamang.(Sgd.)
DEORITO PORIO
May salaysay “[26]
"Sec. 12. (1) Any person under investigation for the commission of an offense shall have the right to be informed of his right to remain silent and to have competent and independent counsel preferably of his own choice. If the person cannot afford the services of counsel, he must be provided with one. These rights cannot be waived except in writing and in the presence of counsel."The rights to remain silent and to have a competent and independent counsel may be waived by the accused provided that the constitutional requirements are complied with. It must appear clearly that the accused was beforehand accorded his right to be informed of such rights. In addition, the waiver must be in writing and in the presence of counsel.
It is now too late in the day for appellant to insist that he did not know Atty. Atienza and that the latter was only "picked up" by Pfc. Menor outside the police station. It must be emphasized that appellant did not object when Atty. Atienza, suggested by the police, acted as his own counsel. We have consistently ruled that while the initial choice of the lawyer, in cases where a person under custodial investigation cannot afford the services of the lawyer, is naturally lodged in the police investigator, the accused really has the final choice as he may reject the counsel chosen for him and ask for another one. A lawyer provided by the investigator is deemed engaged by the accused where the latter never raised any objection against the former's appointment during the course of the investigation, and the accused thereafter subscribes to the veracity of his statement before the swearing officer.[30] We reiterate that appellant did not interpose any opposition when Atty. Atienza assisted him.
COURT: Q But you have no objection for Atty. Atienza to help you in that investigation?A No, sir.Q In fact you would prefer that you were assisted by a lawyer while being investigated in a very serious charge of rape with homicide?
A Yes, sir.Q And the fact that Atty. Atienza was there to help you, you consented to your having assisted while being investigated?A Yes, sir.Q You understand Tagalog very well?A Yes, sir.” (Emphasis supplied)[29]
“….willing to fully safeguard the constitutional rights of the accused, as distinguished from one who would merely be giving a routine, peremptory and meaningless recital of the individual’s constitutional rights. In People v. Basay (219 SCRA 404, 418) this Court stressed that an accused’ right to be informed of the right to remain silent and to counsel contemplates the transmission of meaningful information rather than just the ceremonial and perfunctory recitation of an abstract constitutional principle."[31]Atty. Atienza testified that he was present and assisted appellant during the time that the latter waived his constitutional rights and gave his statement admitting that he committed the crime charged. As a matter of fact, he asked the investigator to give him an opportunity to talk to appellant alone. We quote Atty. Atienza's testimony, thus:
III. The confession is explicit and categorical.
“PROSECUTOR MACABANGUN: Q I have here a document, it appears in that statement executed by the accused Deorito Porio that your signature appears at the bottom of the statement, and it is stated that you assisted the accused. Will you please look at this document and tell the Court if you can recognize your signature?
A Yes, sir, I remember when my signature appears as said counsel during the custodial investigation of a certain Porio.Q Will you please tell the Court if at the time that certain Porio was investigated in the police department and his statement was being taken x x x will you please tell us whether you were present during the taking of this statement that you just identified?
A I was present during the actual taking of the statement – of this statement you have shown me, sir.Q All the time that the accused was giving this statement you were always present during that investigation?A Yes, sir, I was all the time present. As a matter of fact, before the statement was taken by the police I requested for opportunity to talk with the suspect alone, before that giving of the statement. I told him the consequences of giving the statement; the gravity of the offense and also informed him about all his right, which if allowed I will quote the right I told him before giving his statement. I told him that he can remain silent if he wish to.
I informed him that he can get the assistance of counsel of his own choice. He told me that it is not necessary because I was called upon by the police to assist in the investigation.
I told him that it is a very grave offense. Because of the gravity of the offense I requested for interview of the suspect.
And I explained to him like the statement that he will give can be used against him.Q And after you interviewed the accused and informed him all about his rights and consequences of his intended giving of voluntary statement to the policemen, what did the accused tell you?
A He said he is giving the statement just the same he was then, I feel during those date, he was in deep remorse because I understand that the victim is a daughter of his live-in-partner.Q Now, in this statement that was given by the accused wherein you assisted the accused there was a signature over the typewritten name Atty. Juanito Atienza, whose signature is that?A This is my signature.”[32]
"T: | Sino ang pinagsusutpetsahan mo na maaring pumatay sa iyong anak? |
S: | Ang kinakasama ko pong si Deorito Porio. |
T: | Bakit mo nasabi ito? |
S: | Kasi po noong minsan hindi ko lang matandaan kung anong taon ay may nagpatulong sa akin na manghingi ng gamot sa Landfield at nagaatubili akong sumama dahil sa walang kasama ang anak kong si Riza subalit pinilit akong pasamahin nitong si Deorito. Pagbalik ko makaraan ang isang oras ay nakasara ang pintuan namin kaya ito ay itinulak ko at nakita ko itong anak ko na nakahiga sa pagitan ng dalawang hita ni Deorito na naka walker lang at ang anak kong si Riza ay walang panty. Ang ginawa ko ay sinugod ko itong si Deorito at sinabihan na “Gusto Mong Pagsamantalahan ang Anak Ko Ano?” at sinabi niya na inaayos lang daw niya ito. Binantaan pa po niya ako na kung magsusumbong ako sa pulis o sa barangay ay papatayin niya ako. |
T: | Ilang beses mo siyang nahuli na gustong pagsamantalahan ang anak mo? |
S: | Ang natatandaan ko po ay may tatlong beses na niyang ginawa ito. (Records, pp. 150-151) |