455 Phil. 810
SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J.:
"That on or about the 26th day of September 1996, at Barangay Pulong Anahao, Municipality of Mabini, Province of Batangas, Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, by means of force and intimidation, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously lay and have carnal knowledge with the said AAA, daughter of the accused and below twelve (12) years old, against her will and consent.Upon arraignment, appellant pleaded not guilty to the crime charged. Trial ensued thereafter.
"Contrary to law."[2]
"Premises considered and upon the evidence, accused Ruben Dalisay y Hernandez is found Guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Statutory Rape as charged in the criminal complaint filed by her minor daughter AAA and defined and penalized under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 7659. Wherefore, he is sentenced to suffer the capital punishment of Death to be made and exacted in the manner provided for under existing law which is by lethal injection. He is further directed to indemnify complainant AAA with the sum of Two Hundred Thousand Pesos (P200,000.00) as moral and exemplary damages and to pay the costs.Hence, this automatic review.
"SO ORDERED."[20]
x x x in giving full weight and credence to private complainant's testimony, which is insufficient to establish the commission of the offense by the appellant; andThe trial court convicted appellant of statutory rape because he had carnal knowledge of AAA who was "below 12 years of age" when the crime was committed."II
x x x in failing to appreciate in appellant's favor the testimony of Dr. Emma Panaligan who physically examined the private complainant."
"Article 335. When and how rape is committed. - Rape is committed by having carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances:"The crime of rape shall be punished by reclusion perpetua.
- By using force or intimidation;
- When the woman is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; and
- When the woman is under twelve years of age or is demented.
"x x x suffice it to state that the demeanor of the complainant, AAA, as she gave her testimony has led this court to give her utmost credibility. She was barely eleven years of age and the manner by which she courageously gave evidence to what her father had done to her showed no taint whatsoever that she was not telling the truth. Her tears which flowed from her eyes as she narrated the `gift' from hell which her father gave her on the very night of her birthday accentuated the truth of her unfortunate and devilish ordeal x x x."[23]In a prosecution for rape, the complainant's credibility becomes the single most important issue, and when her testimony satisfies the test of credibility, an accused may be convicted solely on the basis thereof.[24]
Upon cross-examination, AAA remained steadfast in her story that appellant sexually ravished her against her will on the night in question.
"Q :Now, on September 26, 1996 in the evening while you were in bed, do you remember if there was anything done to you by your father? A: He inserted his organ to my organ, sir. Q: And, that was inside your house? A: Yes, sir. Q: And, where is your house located at that time? A: At Barangay Pulong Anahao, Mabini, Batangas, sir. Q: Now, before your father was inserting his private organ to you, were you wearing any underwear? A: None, sir. Q: Why? A: Because he removed it first, sir. Q: How about your pants, did you wear your pants at that time? A: Yes sir, but it was also removed by my father. Q: Now, was the place where you were undressed by your father lighted? A: It was dark, sir. Q: And, how did you know that the private organ of your father was being inserted in you? A: Because my father asked me to hold his organ, sir. Q: Did you hold his organ when he told you that? A: Yes, sir. Q: And, after it was held by you, what did he do next? A: He touched also my organ, sir. Q: And, what else did he do, if any? A: After touching my private organ he licked it (nilawayan at hinimud). PROS. JUDIT: May we request that the Tagalog answer of the witness be incorporated to the record. Q: After doing that (nilawayan at hinimud), what else did he do?
A: He inserted his organ into my organ, sir. Q: Was his private part able to penetrate yours? A: In the entrance, sir. Q: And what did you feel when his private organ was inserted to you? A: It was painful, sir. Q: Did you complain to your father? A: I cannot complain, sir. Q: Why? A: Because I'm afraid (natatakot po ako), sir. PROS. JUDIT:
May we request to put on record that when the witness answered `natatakot po ako,' she was teary eyed, Your Honor.x x x
Q: And was this the first time that your father inserted his penis to you on September 26, 1996, or was there any other incident?A: There were other times, sir. Q: And previous to this incident, how many times if you can recall? A: What I estimated was seventeen (17) times, sir. Q: And, since when did he first do this to you? A: When I was still in grade 3, sir. COURT: Do you mean to say when you were still in grade 3 your father had already inserted his penis to your organ?
A: Yes, Your Honor."[26] (Emphasis ours)
AAA was fully aware that if her father would be convicted of the crime charged, he would be sentenced to death. Yet, she remained firm in her testimony and wanted him to be penalized with death, thus:
"On Cross-examination: ATTY. ASILO: Q: Was there somebody else who told you to file this instant case against your father? A: None, sir. COURT: You are saying that the filing of this case against your father was of your own initiative? A: Yes, sir. ATTY. ASILO: Q: You were lying down while your father was inserting his private organ to your private organ? A: Yes, sir. Q: And what was the relative position of your father when he was inserting his private organ to your private organ?A: He was kneeling down, sir. COURT:
Did he say anything to you before he inserted his penis to your organ? A: None, sir. ATTY. ASILO: Q: But before he inserted his penis to your private organ, you stated that your father told you to undress yourself? A: Yes, sir. Q: Was it your father who undressed you or you undressed yourself when told by your father? A: It was my father who was trying to remove my pants and panty and I tried to pull them up and resisted.Q: But despite your resistance your father was able to remove your pants and panty?
A: Yes, sir. My father was able to remove my pants and panty because he boxed me on my thigh.Q: And, is it correct that your father told you to hold his private organ before he inserted the same to your private organ? A: Yes, sir. Q: And did you obey your father? A: Yes, sir. I followed him because if not he will again box me on my thigh. Q: But you stated that your father had inserted his penis slightly to your private organ? A: The tip of his private organ was inserted in my private organ, sir. Q: And, your father was moving while the tip of his organ was inside your private organ, is that correct? A: Yes, sir. Q: And could you describe before this Honorable Court the movement of your father while the tip of his organ was penetrating your private organ?A: Siya po ay nakanyog, sir. Q: For how long did your father remain in that movement? A: Quite long, sir. Q: And, when your father was inserting his private organ to your organ you were still holding his penis, is that correct?A: Yes, sir. I was holding his penis because I was trying to pull it out. Q: And, was there something which came out from the penis of your father while the same was inserted in your private organ? A: Yes, sir. Q: And could you tell to this Honorable Court what was that something which came out from your father's private organ. A: It was something sticky, sir. Q: Did it come out while his private organ was being inserted or while the same was outside your private organ? A: When that sticky thing came out, his private organ was outside mine and then he removed it, sir. COURT: After that, what happened? A: He stopped, sir.[27] x x x
On Re-cross examination: Q: And you still maintain your answer that nobody among your relatives from the mother side asked you or initiated you to file this case against your father because of personal grudge against him? A: No, sir. It was my own decision that this case was filed against my father."[28] (Emphasis ours)
Certainly, such statements could only be expressed by an aggrieved daughter who values the sanctity of her womanhood more than the life of his father. We have held that a rape victim's testimony is entitled to great weight especially when she accuses her own father or a close relative of having ravished her.[30] For there can be ascribed no greater motivation for a woman abused by her own kin than that innate yearning of the human spirit to declare the truth to obtain justice.[31]
"COURT: Do you know the gravity of the offense charged to your father? A: Yes, sir. Q: Do you know that if your father is found guilty he might be sentenced to death? A: Yes, sir. Q: Do you want your father to die? A: Yes, sir."[29]
"x x x. For rape to be committed, entrance of the male organ within the labia or pudendum of the female organ is sufficient. Rupture of the hymen or laceration of the vagina are not essential. Entry to the least extent of the labia or the lips of the female organ is sufficient, the victim remaining virgin does not negate rape."As testified to by AAA, "the tip" of appellant's penis was inserted[39] into her vagina,[40] as a result of which she felt pain. In other words, there was no full penetration, and this explains why her hymen remained intact. Nonetheless, carnal knowledge was consummated by the entry of "the tip" of appellant's private organ into the labia or pudendum of AAA's genitalia.[41] It is well-settled that full penetration is not required to consummate carnal knowledge, as proof of entrance showing the slightest penetration of the male organ within the labia or pudendum of the female organ is sufficient.[42] We now come to the second element of statutory rape, i.e., that the woman is under 12 years of age.
"1. The best evidence to prove the age of the offended party is an original or certified true copy of the certificate of live birth of such party.In the present case, the trial court made the following finding:
"2. In the absence of a certificate of live birth, similar authentic documents such as baptismal certificate and school records which show the date of birth of the victim would suffice to prove age.
"3. If the certificate of live birth or authentic document is shown to have been lost or destroyed or otherwise unavailable, the testimony, if clear and credible, of the victim's mother or a member of the family either by affinity or consanguinity who is qualified to testify on matters respecting pedigree such as the exact age or date of birth of the offended party pursuant to Section 40, Rule 130 of the Rules on Evidence shall be sufficient under the following circumstances:"4. In the absence of a certificate of live birth, authentic document, or the testimony of the victim's mother or relatives concerning the victim's age, the complainant's testimony will suffice provided that it is expressly and clearly admitted by the accused.
- If the victim is alleged to be below 3 years of age and what is sought to be proved is that she is less than 7 years old;
- If the victim is alleged to be below 7 years of age and what is sought to be proved is that she is less than 12 years old;
- If the victim is alleged to be below 12 years of age and what is sought to be proved is that she is less than 18 years old.
"5. It is the prosecution that has the burden of proving the age of the offended party. The failure of the accused to object to the testimonial evidence regarding age shall not be taken against him.
"6. The trial court should always make a categorical finding as to age of the victim." (Emphasis ours)
(a) That the complainant is an eleven year-old Grade V student and the eldest daughter of the accused.