378 Phil. 315
KAPUNAN, J.:
That on or about the 8th day of November, 1994, in Quezon City, Philippines, the said accused, by means of force and intimidation, to wit: by then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously at knife point undress the undersigned, a minor 13 years of age, and then and there placed himself on top her and thereafter have carnal knowledge with the undersigned complainant against her will and without her consent.Now on automatic review by this Court, Atty. Roberto Abad from the Law Firm, Abad & Associates entered his appearance in cooperation with the Free Legal Assistance Group (FLAG) to take up the cause of appellant.
Appellants faults the trial court for making a sweeping statement that "Filipino women will not testify to being raped unless it was the case" pursuant to the ruling in People v. Caballes.[20] According to appellant, "if women can now muster the courage to complain of rape when it happens, it should stand to reason that, when driven by sufficient motivation, some women can also feign charges or rape."[21] In this case, the cry for rape was motivated by the blind jealousy of Ma. Cristina's mother.
- Whether or not the rule of sufficiency of evidence in rape cases applied by the trial court amounts to a denial of the presumption of innocence accorded by the Constitution to the accused;
- Whether or not, given the serious inconsistencies in Ma. Cristina's testimony, the evidence is sufficient to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt;
- Whether or not the testimonies of the other witnesses in the case buttress the testimony of Ma. Cristina; and
- Assuming the evidence of guilt is sufficient, whether or not the Court may recommend executive clemency considering that a strict enforcement of the provisions of Republic Act 7659 would result in the imposition of a clearly excessive penalty of death on the accused.[19]
Appellant further contends that the medical findings reveal that the healed lacerations in the victim's hymen were already existing prior to the alleged date of rape, in which case, there is really no evidence to prove that appellant raped Ma. Cristina on November 8, 1994.
- ) Ma. Cristina testified that she readily obeyed the accused when he asked her to enter the room because he had something to tell her but in her sworn statement, she stated that after her father sent the other children out of the house, he pulled her towards the bedroom, implying the use of force.
- ) In her testimony in court, Ma. Cristina said that the accused forced her to undress and she did so. But, in her sworn statement, she said that the accused undressed her himself.
- ) She testified in court that the accused sucked her breast and then entered her. In her sworn statement, however, she stated that he touched her breast with his hand, then her genitalia before entering her.
- ) She testified that after the accused raped her, she told her brothers Jesus and Lito about it and they in turn went to inform their mother. On the other hand, she said in her sworn statement, that she herself informed her mother of the rape when she came back at about noon.
- ) Ma. Cristina testified that the accused remained on top of her for one hour. This, of course, is contrary to common experience as to the time it takes to consummate sexual acts. Ma. Cristina makes no claim that the accused repeatedly ravished her right that time.[22]
The number of men waiting to be put to death at the National Bilibid Prisons for rape is a growing number, outpacing the growth of murder said the study. As of December 1995, 53% of the inmates at the death row were convicted for rape and rape-related crimes, while only 35% were convicted for murder and murder-related crimes. The rest are for kidnappings and drugs smuggling at 6% each. A further research should reveal that many of those held at the death row for rape charges are for incestuous rapes. Surely, where the penalty of death is specially excessive, the Court can recommend executive clemency for the commutation of such penalty.[23]In the main, appellant questions the credibility of the witnesses: the victim herself and her mother who allegedly have an ill-motive to take revenge against him for all the maltreatment he has caused Rosario and the family. But when it comes to the issue of credibility the time honored rule is that appellate courts will generally not disturb the findings of the trial court unless it has plainly overlooked certain facts of substance and value that, if considered, might affect the result of the case.[24] The trial court indeed enjoy this badge of respect since they have the advantage of observing the demeanor of witnesses as they testify in court and are able to detect whether they are telling the truth or not.[25]
The trial court further described Ma. Cristina to be young, decent, shy and soft spoken. The way she answered the questions propounded on her indicated that she would not undergo the travails of a public trial thereby exposing herself to humiliation and embarrassment if her accusations against her father were not true for her natural instinct would be to protect her honor. We agree with the observation that it is rather unthinkable for a daughter to falsely impute the crime of rape against her own father if it was not real. To a great degree, the misdeed of her father is shocking to one's moral conscience, and her only purpose in revealing her plight is to obtain justice.[28]
FISCAL TOBIA- Miss Witness, how are you related to the accused Agapito Flores? A- My father, sir. Q- Now, at about 10:00 o'clock in the morning of November 8, 1994, where were you? A- We were at home, sir. Q- And this is at 168 Road I, Barangay Bagong Pag-asa, Quezon City? A- Yes, sir. Q- Now, was your mother with you at that time? A- No, sir. Q- Who was then with you at your residence? A- My siblings and my father, sir. Q- Now do you remember of anything unusual that happened at that time?
A- There was, sir. Q- Can you tell the Honorable Court what is this unusual incident all about? A- Yes, sir. He asked me to enter the room as he was going to tell me something. Q- And, who asked you to enter the room? A- My father, sir. Q- Did you go inside the room as asked by your father? A- Yes, sir. Q- Before we proceed, Miss Witness, can you point out to your father, the accused Agapito Flores? RECORD Witness pointing to a male person wearing an orange T-shirt who identified himself as Agapito Flores. FISCAL TOBIA - Now, what happened when you went inside the room as asked by your father? A- He pointed a knife at me, sir. Q- At what particular part of your body did your father point the knife? A- At my neck, sir. Q- Will you describe the knife used by your father? A- A kitchen knife, sir. Q- Can you demonstrate to the Honorable Court how long that knife was, including the handle? RECORD- Witness describing the knife as 10 inches including the handle. ATTY. TABANG- Admitted, Your Honor.
FISCAL TOBIA- Now, why did your father point a knife at you, Miss Witness? A- He was forcing me to undress, sir. Q- Did you undress as forced by your father? A- Yes, sir. Q- What exactly did you remove? A- All my clothes, sir. Q- Did this include your panty? A- Yes, sir. Q- So you were completely naked? A- Yes, sir. FISCAL TOBIA - May we request, Your Honor, to exclude the other people inside the courtroom?
COURT - On account of the delicate testimony of the witness, may I ask the other persons in Court to step out in the meantime? RECORD - All the other persons inside the Courtroom stepped out. FISCAL TOBIA - Now, after you have removed all your clothings, with your father pointing a knife at your neck, what happened next? A- He kissed me, sir. Q- At that time, was he wearing his clothes? A- He had undressed, sir. Q- Nothing was left? A- Yes, sir. Q- So, he was completely naked also? A- Yes, sir. Q- After your father kissed you while he was completely naked, what else happened?
A- He sucked my breast and inserted his private part inside mine, sir. Q- Can you tell the Honorable Court your position at that time you said your father inserted his private part into yours? A- We were lying down, sir. Q- And your father was on top of you? A- Yes, sir. Q- Where did you lie down? A- "Papag", sir. Q- And, did you feel the private part of your father inside you, Miss Witness, at that time? A- Yes, sir. Q- And, how long was your father on top of you at that time? A- One (1) hour, sir. Q- You were then 13 years old at that time, Miss Witness?
A- Yes, sir. Q- Do you understand what the word "orgasm" is? "Labasan." A- No, sir. Q- Miss Witness, while the private part of your father was inside you, did you feel anything other than his private part? A- Yes, sir. Q- What was it that you felt other than his private part? A- It hurts, sir. Q- While your father was on top of you, where was the knife that you mentioned? A- It was pointed at my neck, sir. Q- You mean to say that at the time he was on top of you, he was holding a knife to your neck all the time?
A- Yes, sir. Q- You also mentioned earlier that while your mother was not with you, your other siblings, where were they at that time that your father was on top of you? A- They were outside, sir.[27]
The death penalty shall also be imposed if the crime of rape is committed with any of the following attendant circumstances:The seven (7) modes of committing rape introduced under RA 7659 which warrant automatic imposition of death penalty partake of the nature of a qualifying circumstance under the Revised Penal Code since it increases the penalty of rape to one (1) degree. It would be a denial of the right of the accused to be informed of the charges against him, and consequently, a denial of due process, if he is charged with simple rape only on which he was arraigned, and be convicted of qualified rape punishable by death.[35] Thus, accused-appellant should only suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua in this case.
- 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.
- When the victim is under the custody of the police or military authorities
- When the rape is committed in full view of the husband, parent, any of the children or other relatives within the third degree of consanguinity.
- When the victim is a religious or a child below seven (7) years old.
- When the offender knows that he is afflicted with Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) disease.
- When committed by any member of the Armed Forces of the Philippines or the Philippine National Police or any law enforcement agency.
- When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the victim has suffered permanent physical mutilation.