332 Phil. 855
PANGANIBAN, J.:
"The undersigned, MARIJUN[3] MONTALBA, the offended party herein, after having been duly sworn, accused JERRY GUMAHUB[4] of the crime of RAPE, committed as follows:Preliminary investigation of the offense was waived by appellant in a motion signed by him.[5] An information was then filed by the prosecutor, adopting in full the allegations of the aforequoted complaint and charging that "accused took advantage of nighttime and much more the girl was alone in the house."[6]
That on the 18th day of October 1993, at 6:30 o’clock in the evening more or less, at Hubangon, Mahinog, Camiguin, Philippines and within the preliminary jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, with deliberate intent to have sexual intercourse, did, then and there, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously RAPE the undersigned Offended party, by means of force (and) succeded (sic) in having sexual intercourse against my will.
That in the commission of the crime the following circumstances were present, to wit: (1) With the use of superior stren(g)th (2) It was committed during night time to better accomplish his purpose (3) It was committed inside the house of my uncle and once inside he delivered fistic blows in deffirent (sic) parts of my body rendering me unconscious as a result.
Medical certificate hereto attached.
CONTRARY TO LAW."
"WHEREFORE, finding the accused Gerry Gumahub guilty of rape beyond reasonable doubt, the Court hereby strikes a verdict of conviction, and accordingly sentences the said accused to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua with all its accessory penalties under Article 41, Revised Penal Code.Accused managed to file a timely notice of appeal and elevated the case before this Court.
The said accused, Gerry Gumahub, is further ordered to indemnify the complainant, Marijun Montalba, in the jurisprudential sum of P50,000.00 in damages, and to pay the costs."
"x x x the complainant, Marijun Montalba, stays in the house of his (sic) uncle, Florentino Montalba, in Hubangon, Mahinog, Camiguin, while pursuing her studies at the local high school. Her father, Adriano Montalba, and the rest of her family reside in El Salvador, Misamis Oriental.
In that house of her uncle there are three occupants, namely: Florentino Montalba and Loreto Pantanosas, both of whom are Marijun’s uncles, and Marijun herself. The house is about thirty-five (35) meters away from the seashore, on the east, and about ten (10) meters away from the Hubangon Barangay road on the south. To the north of said house are the houses of Tata Badana, Primitiva Jala and Rico Tabamo, respectively. To the south is the house of Boy Galvizo.
At about 6:00 in the early evening of 18 October 1993 Marijun was left alone in the house, because her uncles went out somewhere. The description of the house is shown in a sketch drawn by Marijun (x x x). It has a ground floor, above or over which is a second floor - 5 steps up. It was raining that night.
Marijun was whiling away her moments in bed in her room upstairs. As she stood up or arose from bed she saw the accused Gerry Gumahub standing at the veranda. The accused had nothing on. He was naked. As Marijon approached the door of her room the accused grabbed her, covered her mouth, and forced her against the wall. In that position the accused boxed her in the abdomen several (about 5) times. Then the accused tore Marijun’s white straight-cut whole dress, followed by the accused tearing Marijun’s bra. The accused forced Marijun down the floor inside her room, and once down, the accused slid Marijun’s pair of panties down and off her feet. The accused then placed himself on top of Marijun, inserted his penis into her vagina, at the same time telling her he had long wanted to get and have her sexually, and warned and threatened her not to report the matter to her uncle or he will kill her. Marijun felt pain and lost her consciousness.
When she recovered her consciousness Marijun found herself already wearing a ‘city short’ pants which she did not herself put on. Her whole dress and panties were missing. Her organ was wet and slippery. Her tattered bra was there (Exh. B). The accused, Gerry Gumahub, was no longer there; he was gone.
Marijun changed and dressed up. When her uncle returned or arrive home she did not report the matter to him because of fear.
Marijun very well knows the accused personally. He resides in one of the stalls inside the public market of Hubangon, Mahinog, Camiguin.
Marijun first confided her experience on the following day, 19 October 1993 to her classmate, Maripaz Rañiego, who in turn relayed the same to her sister, Lourdes Rañiego, who is the Sangguniang Kabataan Chairman of their barangay. Later in the afternoon of 19 October 1993 Marijun confided and related the details of how she was sexually assaulted by the accused to SK Chairman Lourdes Rañiego who in turn reported the matter to policeman Ivanhoe Tabamo. Policeman Tabamo picked up the accused Gerry Gumahub and brought the latter to the police station.
Meanwhile, Marijun reported her sad experience to her two uncles, Florentino Montalba and Loreto Pantanosas, who at first brought the matter up to the attention of the Barangay Captain of Hubangon, Mahinog, Camiguin. Then from there Marijun and her two uncles proceeded to report the incident to the PNP Station in Mahinog, Camiguin, where Marijun was investigated by a certain Policeman Galochino. An Affidavit was taken of her (x x x), which she subscribed and sworn to before MCTC Judge Eduardo E. Chan. Also, upon advise (sic) of Policeman Galochino(,) Marijun had herself examined by Dr. Jocelyn B. Pulvera at the Camiguin Island Hospital. That was on 20 October 1993 - or two (2) days after the incident.
Dr. Pulvera’s examination of Marijun’s genitalia involved no instrumentation, as she used only her fore and middle fingers. Dr. Pulvera told the Court that upon her examination of Marijun she found ‘hymenal tear of four (4) points (12 o’clock; 9 o’clock; 6 o’clock; and 3 o’clock)’ which findings she reflected in the Medical Certificate (x x x) which she issued on 21 October 1993. The hymenal tear were of two (2) days' duration, and may have been caused by any of several causes, like insertion of the male organ, masturbation, and others.
Dr. Pulvera, in her testimony, told the Court that upon her examination she found Marijun’s hymen x x x could easily be lacerated. It had lesser blood vessels such that even if lacerated bleeding is minimal or there may be no bleeding at all, or that the bleeding could be unnoticed."
"For his defense(,) the accused, Gerry Gumahub, alone and no others, took the stand to tell the Court that the present accusation of rape is a lie.Appellant alleges that complainant’s behavior and testimony appear to be inconsistent with her accusation of rape, that appellant courted the complainant and she accepted him, and that the incident took place as a result of their mutual consent.[12]
Alone and without anybody else to testify in his defense the accused Gerry Gumahub told the Court that he had known the complainant, Marijun Montalba, for about a year prior to 18 October 1993.
In substance, Gerry’s testimony, conveyed to the Court the idea that he went to the house where Marijun stays at about 6:00 (sic) in the evening of 18 October 1993, because it was Marijun herself who arranged that meeting.
x x x x x x x x x
At about 10:00 in the morning of 18 October 1993 he went to the school where Marijun is studying. His purpose was to see and meet and talk with Marijun over snacks. When Marijun came out of the school, Marijun asked him ‘Why are you here? I’m afraid we might be seen by somebody.’ Marijun further hatched the idea that Gerry should go to her house in the evening of that day, Marijun further assuring Gerry that she will not go with her uncle in seeing or watching the betamax show in a neighbor’s (Efren Pacuribot’s) house.
So, at about 6:00 in the evening Gerry first went to the house of Efren Pacuribot to find out if Marijun’s uncle was already there. Seeing Marijun’s uncle already inside the house of Efren watching the betamax show, Gerry proceeded to see Marijun in her uncle’s house -- where he was met by two dogs. He knocked at the door which Marijun promptly opened. Marijun let him in. Once inside he embraced and kissed her. She did not resist. Marijun was then wearing a thin white duster. Marijun held him and invited him to go up ‘lest we be seen by other people.’ In Marijun’s room he embraced her, took off her duster and unfastened her bra -- to which Marijun cooperated.
Then he removed Marijun’s panties with one of his hands. Marijun cooperated by assisting him with one of her hands in sliding or rolling down her panties off her feet. Marijun then lay down on the floor. Gerry took off his short pants (a city shorts). He kissed her lips and breasts and touched her vagina, at the same time asking Marijun if she would agree to sex, to which Marijun answered ‘not now’ because ‘I’m afraid I might become pregnant.’
Reacting to Marijun’s protestations(,) Gerry stood and dressed up and left after telling Marijun that they will not see each other for a time.
Cross-examined, Gerry told the Court that while he was on top of Marijun who was already naked he had no erection yet, although he noticed Marijun was already very excited. He further testified that he started courting Marijun in August 1993. Marijun accepted him immediately.
Gerry further declared that he was surprised at being picked up by the police upon complaint of Marijun. He was also brought before the Barangay Captain of Hubangon, Mahinog, Camiguin, before being brought to the Police Station. He did not tell the Barangay Captain; neither did he tell the police nor anybody else, that what happened in this case was a product of an agreement between him and the complainant.
In rebuttal, complainant Marijun Montalba vehemently denied Gerry Gumahub’s assertions: that he courted her; that she accepted his love; that she ever had any agreement with the accused, much less an agreement for him to come to her home."The Issue
Appellant, through counsel, raises a single issue in this appeal:[11]
"The trial court erred in finding accused-appellant Jerry Gubahob (sic) guilty beyond reasonable doubt despite implied consent of victim Marijon Montalba to the sexual act."
"FISCAL VIVARES:Complainant after being boxed in the stomach by appellant could no longer prevent the latter from forcibly removing her panty because she was weakened by the blows and in fact passed out.[19] What further stopped complainant from resisting was that appellant threatened her with death while in the process of consummating his evil design. In her testimony she stated:[20]
Q Now can you inform this Honorable Court if there was any unusual incident that happened in the evening of October 18, 1993, - in the evening? A Yes, sir. Q What was that incident all about? A While I was in the house of my uncle, my mouth was suddenly covered and I was choked, and my stomach was boxed. xxx xxx xxx Q Now, did you recognize who was that fellow whom you said suddenly covered your mouth, choke(d) you and box(ed) your abdomen: A Jerry (sic) Gumahub (sic). xxx xxx xxx Q What happened when you said that after Jerry (sic) Gumahub (sic) closed your mouth, choked you and boxed your stomach? A Jerry used his strength, and he has no more pants this time, he tore my dress, and my panty. xxx xxx xxx Q What happened next? A Then he lie (sic) down on top of me and he placed his organ in my organ; and he took advantage on (sic) me. Q What did he say, if any, while he was doing this (sic) things? A He said that he wanted me longed (sic) before. Q What about you, what did you do, when the accused did all these things to you? A I struggled but he covered my mouth. Q What happened next after Jerry (sic) Gumahub did this? A He also boxed my abdomen, my hands and my thighs. Q What happened to you after he delivered his blow on your body? A I lost consciousness. Q Were you able to regain consciousness later? A Yes, sir. Q What did you discover when you regained consciousness later? A I noticed that my organ was wet." (underscoring ours)
"FISCAL VIVARES:Besides, considering the very young age of the offended party, she may have been overcome by fear of physical harm or death, especially since appellant had already inflicted several blows upon her person. We have already held that "(t)he law does not in this instance impose a burden on the rape victim to prove resistance. The argument that complainant did not exert sufficient resistance is bereft of merit for in rape cases it is not necessary that the victim should have resisted unto death. 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 embrace because of fear for life and personal safety."[21] We have also stated before that the workings of the human mind placed under a great deal of emotional and psychological stress (such as during rape) are unpredictable, and different people react differently. There is no standard form of human behavioral response when one is confronted with a strange, startling, frightful or traumatic experience -- some may shout, some may faint, and some may be shocked into insensibility.[22]
Q What was the threat all about? A He said that he will kill me if I report the matter. Q When did this threat made by Jerry (sic) Gumahob, was it before the incident? A The threat was made at the time he lay on top of me."
"The Court strains its efforts and energies in vain for any reason why the complainant in her pristine youth and innocence should undergo the travails of filing a complaint and exposing herself to the concomitant shame and ridicule and even submit herself -- her private parts -- to be examined, if it were not to bring her tormentor to justice.WHEREFORE, premises considered, the assailed Decision is AFFIRMED in toto. No costs.
xxx xxx xxx
In the present case, x x x, the Court is faced with the simplicity and innocence of a barrio lass, a young second year high school student in whose personality and in whose testimony the Court has found no adulteration and concoction but the naked and simple truth engendered by her spontaneous and straightforward declarations.
On the other hand, the defense version only exhibited accused’s perversity and callousness, and serves nothing less than (to) add insult to the natural injuries the complainant has suffered in this case. For, while the accused testified that this was his first experience with the complainant, he portrayed the latter as having cooperated in his sexual advances, which is most unnatural."