425 Phil. 264
PER CURIAM:
“That on or about the 15th day of August, 1996, at around 11:30 o’clock in the evening, at Barangay Liminangcong, Municipality of Taytay, Province of Palawan, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the said accused, with lewd design, and with force, threat and intimidation, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously have carnal knowledge with his own daughter, one JUDELYN ABAÑO, a six (6) year old girl, against her will and consent to her damage and prejudice.On January 31, 1997, appellant, with the assistance of counsel, pleaded not guilty to the charge.[3] Thereupon, trial ensued.
CONTRARY TO LAW.”[2]
“Complainant Judelyn Abaño is the daughter of accused-appellant Doroteo Abaño and Erlinda Areglado. Erlinda, the mother, died when complainant was only three (3) years old. Accused-appellant single-handedly took care of Judelyn and her younger brother, Jonathan. They lived at Barangay Liminangcong, Taytay, Palawan (TSN, Nov. 11, 1997, pp. 3-4; April 28, 1998, p. 4; Sept. 15, 1998, pp. 3-4 and 11).Appellant denied the charge that he raped his own daughter. He testified that on the night of August 15, 1996, he and his two children, Judelyn and Jonathan, watched Betamax at the house of his Tiyo Doring Anteza. At around 11:00 p.m., they decided to go home. Appellant, Judelyn and Jonathan then slept, with appellant sleeping in the middle of his two children. Appellant claimed that he and Jonathan were roused from their sleep when Judelyn began to shout as she was apparently having a nightmare. Judelyn then went back to sleep again. The morning after, August 6, 1996, appellant went to his work as a “cargador” (stevedore) at the pier.
At 11:30 in the evening of August 15, 1996, Judelyn was awakened when she felt accused-appellant was undressing her. He was already naked. Then, he mounted her and forced himself on her. Due to intense pain, she shouted “Ate Annabelle, tulungan mo ako.”
Annabelle Fuentes was a neighbor, married with five (5) children. Upon hearing Judelyn’s anguished plea, she rushed to their house, which was only a meter away. Accused-appellant told her that Judelyn merely had a bad dream. When he went back to Judelyn, he threatened to kill her should she report the incident to anybody (TSN, Nov. 11, 1997, pp. 8-13; April 28, 1998, pp. 17-19).
The next day, Annabelle Fuentes saw Judelyn walking with difficulty (“paika-ika”) with her legs spread quite apart. Annabelle confronted Judelyn of her peculiar gait, who simply replied “masakit, mahapdi.” She recalled that, in the previous nights, Judelyn shouted, too. Eventually, Judelyn confided to her what accused-appellant did to her (TSN, April 28, 1998, p. 19-24).
On August 18, 1996, Sister Nena Labrague (or Labrate) of the Agustinian Order borrowed Judelyn from accused-appellant on the pretext that Judelyn had to be examined for her skin disease. However, on August 20, 1996, she was brought to the Taytay District Hospital for physical and medical examination. Dr. Nestor A. Reyes, Chief Resident, found old healed hymenal lacerations at 3 o’clock and 9 o’clock (Exh. C). Judelyn gave her sworn statement to the police; she was assisted by her maternal aunt Dionisia Areglado and Annabelle Fuentes (TSN, Nov. 11, 1997, pp. 13-16; April 28, 1998, pp. 22-23; Sept. 15, 1998, p. 13).”[4]
“WHEREFORE, premises considered, judgment is hereby rendered finding the accused Doroteo Abaño guilty beyond reasonable doubt as principal of the crime of rape and appreciating the qualifying circumstance that the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age and the accused is the legitimate father of the victim and pursuant to Section 11 of R.A. No. 7659, he is hereby sentenced to Death by Lethal Injection with the accessory penalties provided under Article 40 of the Revised Penal Code. For the civil liability he is further ordered to indemnify the victim the amount of P50,000.00 in line with existing jurisprudence, P50,000.00 as moral damages and to pay the costs.Appellant now seeks his acquittal on the sole ground that:
SO ORDERED.”[5]
“THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN FINDING THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT OF THE CRIME OF RAPE.”[6]Appellant maintains that he is innocent of the crime charged. He insists that the trial court failed to apply the three principles in reviewing evidence in rape cases, to wit:
“(1) an accusation for rape can be made with facility; it is difficult to prove but more difficult for the person accused, though innocent, to disprove it; (2) in view of the intrinsic nature of the crime of rape where only two persons are usually involved, the testimony of the complainant must be scrutinized with extreme caution; (3) the evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the evidence for the defense.”[7]Appellant implores us to apply the foregoing principles to this case.
Judelyn’s testimony undoubtedly shows that appellant had carnal knowledge of her. At the time Judelyn testified, she was only seven years old, and yet, she withstood the rigors of testifying in court to give a plain account of the rape. Judelyn’s entire testimony can only be described as forthright. At one point, the child-victim even broke down and cried. We have repeatedly held that the testimonies of rape victims who are of tender age are credible.[11] The revelation of a six-year old child whose chastity was abused deserves full credit as her willingness to face police investigation and to undergo the trouble and humiliation of public trial is eloquent testimony of the truth of her complaint.[12]
“FISCAL ESTOLANO: Do you know that you have filed a case for rape against your father Doroteo Abaño?A: Yes, sir.Q: This incident happened in the evening of August 15, 1996?
A: Yes, sir.COURT: (Take note that the witness is crying).FISCAL ESTOLANO: And because of this you filed a case against him?A: Yes, sir.Q: And that complaint is in writing?
A: Yes, sir.Q: You said you filed a case against your father, here is a complaint, is this the complaint you are referring to?
A: Yes, sir.FISCAL ESTOLANO: For purposes of identification we move that the complaint sheet be marked as Exhibit A, Your Honor.COURT: (to clerk of court) Mark it.FISCAL ESTOLANO: In your complaint there are two (2) thumbmarks above the name Judelyn Abaño, is this your thumbmark?A: Yes, sir, that is my thumbmark.FISCAL ESTOLANO: And the two (2) thumbmarks above the name Judelyn Abaño be marked as Exhibit A-I, Your Honor.COURT: (to clerk of court) Mark it.FISCAL ESTOLANO: You have an auntie by the name of Dionisia Areglado?A: Yes, sir.Q: Is this her signature that appears above her name?
A: Yes, sir.Q: Did you see her when she signed her name?
A: Yes, sir.FISCAL ESTOLANO: (to court) And the handwritten name above the typewritten name Dionisia Areglado be marked as Exhibit A-2, Your Honor.COURT: (to clerk of court) Mark it.FISCAL ESTOLANO: This complaint sheet is in English, was this interpreted to you in Tagalog by your auntie Dionisia Areglado?A: Yes, sir.FISCAL ESTOLANO: (to court) The facts of the case Your Honor be bracketed and marked as Exhibit A-3.COURT: (to clerk of court) Mark it.FISCAL ESTOLANO: This complaint when explained to you, you said that these were the actual things that happened to you?A: Yes, sir.Q: As it says here August 15, 1996 at around 11:30 in the evening at Liminangcong that the accused committed the rape against you?
A: Yes, sir.Q: How did your father Doroteo Abaño abuse you?
A: He removed my dress.FISCAL ESTOLANO: Were you wearing panty that night?A: Yes, sir.Q: How about your panty, did Doroteo Abaño remove your panty?A: Yes, sir.Q: After your dress and panty were removed by Doroteo Abaño, what did Doroteo do to you?
A: He placed his male organ into my female organ.Q: When you said he placed inside, he inserted inside?
A: Yes, sir.Q: After that what did he do?
A: He placed himself on top of me.Q: Aside from placing himself on top of you, what else was he doing?
A: I shouted.Q: When you shouted, what did he tell you?
A: I asked help from my auntie Anabel our neighbor.FISCAL ESTOLANO: Is it near your house, the house of Annabel?A: Yes, sir.Q: Where you are now, how far is the house of your auntie Annabel from your house?NOTE: Witness pointed to a distance almost 1 meter.FISCAL ESTOLANO: You shouted for help from your auntie Annabel, did your auntie help you?A: Yes, sir.Q: Was she able to enter your house or only outside?
A: She just stayed outside our house because my father closed the door and she cannot enter the house.Q: After your father as you said inserted his penis into your vagina and placed himself on top of you, did he make any pumping motion?
A: Yes, sir.FISCAL ESTOLANO: What did you feel when your father inserted his penis inside your vagina and made pumping motion?A: I felt pain inside my vagina.Q: How long did the pumping motion of your father last?
A: It did not last for a long time.Q: After your father made pumping motion, what happened?
A: He told me that if I will report this matter to anybody, he will kill me.Q: After a few days, do you remember that sister Nena Labrate took you from your father?
A: Yes, sir.Q: That you were brought before a doctor?
A: Yes, sir.Q: And the doctor examined your vagina?A: Yes, sir.”[10]
“ART. 335. When and how rape is committed. - Rape is committed by having carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances.Hence, when the victim is under twelve years old, carnal knowledge alone is rape.[20] To prove the charge of rape in this case, all that the prosecution must establish is appellant’s carnal knowledge of his six-year old victim.
- By using force or intimidation;
- When a woman is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; and
- When the woman is under twelve years of age or is demented.
xxx.”
Judelyn’s credible testimony and the physician’s findings of lacerations sufficiently establish the essential requisite of carnal knowledge.
“Q: This laceration 3 and 9 o’clock, what could have caused this laceration of the hymen?
A: Hard object.Q: Could it be caused, the laceration by insertion of an adult penis?A: It is possible.”[22]
“Section 11. The death penalty shall also be imposed if the crime of rape is committed with any of the following attendant circumstances:The minority of the victim and her relationship to the offender are special qualifying circumstances that elevate the penalty to death. To be properly appreciated, these twin circumstances must be both alleged in the Information and proven with certainty.[31]xxx”
- 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.
“Q - Do you know a person by the name of Judelyn Abaño?As to Judelyn’s age, appellant declared:
A - Yes, sir.
Q - How are you related to her?
A - She is my daughter.”[36]
“Q - Do you know the age of your daughter Judelyn?There is no more need to present the live birth certificate of Judelyn or other equally acceptable official document concerning her date of birth to determine Judelyn’s age. Such independent proof can be dispensed with in cases where the court can take judicial notice of the victim’s tender age in view of the manifest minority of the victim.[38] Judicial notice of the victim’s age may be taken when the victim is 10 years old or below.[39] With the concurrence of the special qualifying circumstances of the victim’s minority and her relationship with appellant, the rape committed by appellant is qualified as heinous. The imposition of the death penalty is thus warranted.
A - She is six (6) years old.”[37]