Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
We note, however, that the charge had been formulated in this manner:
"COMPLAINT
TheundersignedaccusesLEOECHEGARAYYPILOofthecrimeofRAPE,committed
asfollows:
ThatonoraboutthemonthofApril1994,inQuezonCity,Philippines,theabovenamed
accused,bymeansofforceandintimidation,didthenandthere,wilfully,unlawfullyand
feloniouslyhavecarnalknowledgeoftheundersignedcomplainanthisdaughter,aminor,
10yearsofage,allagainstherwillandwithoutherconsent,toherdamageandprejudice.
CONTRARYTOLAW."[if!supportFootnotes][2][endif]
Upon being arraigned on August 1, 1994, the accused-appellant, assisted by his
counsel de oficio, entered the plea of "not guilty."
These are the pertinent facts of the case as summarized by the Solicitor-General
in his brief:
"Thisisacaseofrapebythefatherofhistenyearolddaughter.
ComplainantRODESSAECHEGARAYisatenyearoldgirlandafifthgrader,bornon
September11,1983.Rodessaistheeldestoffivesiblings.Shehasthreebrothersaged6,
5and2,respectively,anda3montholdbabysister.HerparentsareRosalieandLeo
Echegaray,thelatterbeingtheaccusedappellanthimself.Thevictimliveswithher
familyinasmallhouselocatedatNo.199FernandezSt.,BarangaySanAntonio,San
FranciscoDelMonte,QuezonCity(pp.59,Aug.9,1994,TSN).
SometimeintheafternoonofApril1994,whileRodessawaslookingafterherthree
brothersintheirhouseashermotherattendedagamblingsessioninanotherplace,she
heardherfather,theaccusedappellantinthiscase,orderherbrotherstogooutofthe
house(pp.1011,ibid.).Assoonasherbrothersleft,accusedappellantLeoEchegaray
approachedRodessaandsuddenlydraggedherinsidetheroom(p.12,ibid).Beforeshe
couldquestiontheappellant,thelatterimmediatelyremovedherpantyandmadeherlie
onthefloor(p.13,ibid.).Thereafter,appellantlikewiseremovedhisunderwearand
immediatelyplacedhimselfontopofRodessa.Subsequently,appellantforcefully
insertedhispenisintoRodessa'sorgancausinghertosufferintensepain(pp.1415,
ibid.).Whileappellantwaspumpingonher,heevenuttered:'Masarapba,masarapba?'
andtowhichRodessaanswered:'TamanaPapa,masakit'(p.16,ibid.).Rodessa'splea
provedfutileasappellantcontinuedwithhisact.Aftersatisfyinghisbestialinstinct,
appellantthreatenedtokillhermotherifshewoulddivulgewhathadhappened.Scared
thathermotherwouldbekilledbyappellant,Rodessakepttoherselftheordealshe
suffered.Shewasveryafraidofappellantbecausethelatter,mostofthetime,washigh
ondrugs(pp.1718,ibid.).Thesamesexualassaulthappeneduptothefifthtimeandthis
usuallytookplacewhenhermotherwasoutofthehouse(p.19,ibid.).However,afterthe
fifthtime,Rodessadecidedtoinformhergrandmother,AsuncionRivera,whointurntold
Rosalie,Rodessa'smother.RodessaandhermotherproceededtotheBarangayCaptain
whereRodessaconfidedthesexualassaultsshesuffered.Thereafter,Rodessawas
broughttotheprecinctwheresheexecutedanaffidavit(p.21,ibid.).Fromthere,shewas
accompaniedtothePhilippineNationalPoliceCrimeLaboratoryformedical
examination(p.22,ibid.).
Rodessatestifiedthatthesaidsexualassaultshappenedonlyduringthetimewhenher
motherwaspregnant.Rodessaaddedthatatfirst,hermotherwasonherside.However,
whenappellantwasdetained,hermotherkeptontellingher:'KawawanamanangTatay
mo,nakakulong'(pp.3940,ibid.).
WhenRodessawasexaminedbythemedicolegalofficerinthepersonofDra.Ma.
CristinaB.Preyna,[if!supportFootnotes][3][endif]thecomplainantwasdescribedasphysicallyona
nonvirginstate,asevidencedbythepresenceoflacerationofthehymenofsaid
complainant(TSN.,Aug.22,1995,pp.89)."[if!supportFootnotes][4][endif]
On the other hand, the accused-appellant's brief presents a different story:
"xxxthedefensepresenteditsfirstwitness,RosalieEchegaray.Sheassertedthatthe
RAPEchargeagainsttheaccusedwasonlythefigmentofhermother'sdirtymind.That
herdaughter'scomplaintwasforceduponherbyhergrandmaandtheanswersinthe
swornstatementofRodessawerecoached.ThattheaccusationofRAPEwasmotivated
byRodessa'sgrandmother'sgreedoverthelotsituatedattheMadrigalEstateNHA
Project,BarangaySanAntonio,SanFranciscodelMonte,QuezonCity,whichher
grandmother'sparamour,ConradoAlfonsogavetotheaccusedinordertopersuadethe
lattertoadmitthatRodessaexecutedanaffidavitofdesistanceafteritturnedoutthather
complaintofattemptedhomicidewassubstitutedwiththecrimeofRAPEattheinstance
ofhermother.Thatwhenhermothercametoknowabouttheaffidavitofdesistance,she
placedhergranddaughterunderthecustodyoftheBarangayCaptain.Thathermother
wasneverarealmothertoher.
Shestatedthathercomplaintagainstaccusedwasforattemptedhomicideasherhusband
pouredalcoholonherbodyandattemptedtoburnher.Sheidentifiedthecertification
issuedbytheNHAandTagNo.870393(Exh.2).ThattheCertificationbasedonthe
Masterlist(Exh.3)indicatesthatthepropertyiscoownedbyaccusedandConrado
Alfonso.ThatRodessaisherdaughtersiredbyConradoAlfonso,thelatterbeingthe
paramourofhermother.ThatConradoAlfonsowaivedhisrightandparticipationover
thelotinfavoroftheaccusedinconsiderationofthelatter'sacceptingthefactthatheis
thefatherofRodessatosimulatethelovetriangleandtoconcealthenauseatingsex
orgiesfromConradoAlfonso'srealWife.
Accusedtestifiedinhisbehalfandstatedthatthegrandmotherofthecomplainanthasa
verystrongmotiveinimplicatinghimtothecrimeofRAPEsinceshewasinterestedto
becomethesoleownerofapropertyawardedtoherliveinpartnerbytheMadrigal
EstateNHAProject.Thathecouldnothavecommittedtheimputedcrimebecausehe
considersRodessaashisowndaughter.Thatheisapaintercontractorandonthedateof
theallegedcommissionofthecrime,hewaspaintingthehouseofoneDivinaAngof
BarangayVitalis,Paraaque,MetroManila(Exh4).Thetraveltimebetweenhiswork
placetohisresidenceisthree(3)hoursconsideringtheconditionoftraffic.Thatthe
paintingcontractisevidencedbyadocumentdenominated'ContractofServices'duly
accomplished(seesubmarkingsofExh.4).Heassertedthathehasabigsexualorgan
whichwhenusedtoagirl11yearsoldlikeRodessa,thesaidfemaleorganwillbe
'mawawarak.'Thatitisabnormaltoreporttheimputedcommissionofthecrimetothe
grandmotherofthevictim.
Accusedfurtherstatedthather(sic)motherinlawtrumpedupachargeofdrugpushing
earlierandhepleadedguiltytoalesseroffenseofusingdrugs.Thedecretalportionofthe
judgmentofconvictionorderingtheaccusedtobeconfinedattheBicutanRehabilitation
CenterirkedthegrandmotherofRodessabecauseitwasherwishthataccusedshouldbe
metedthedeathpenalty.
AccusedremainsteadfastinhistestimonyperoratingthestrongmotiveofRodessa's
grandmotherinimplicatinghiminthisheinouscrimebecauseofhergreedtobecomethe
soleownerofthatpieceofpropertyattheNationalHousingAuthorityMadrigalProject,
situatedatSanFranciscodelMonte,QuezonCity,notwithstandingrigidcross
examination.Heassertedthattheimputedoffenseisfarfromhismindconsideringthat
hetreatedRodessaashisowndaughter.Hecategoricallytestifiedthathewasinhis
paintingjobsiteonthedateandtimeoftheallegedcommissionofthecrime.
Mrs.Punzalanwaspresentedasthirddefensewitness.Shesaidthatsheisthelaundry
womanandparttimebabysitterofthefamilyofaccused.Thatatonetime,shesaw
RodessareadingsexbooksandtheBulgarnewspaper.Thatwhilehangingwashed
clothesonthevacantlotshesawRodessamasturbatingbytinkeringherprivateparts.
Themasturbationtooksometime.
ThissexualflingofRodessawerecorroboratedbySilvestraEchegaray,thefourthand
lastwitnessforthedefense.Shestatedthatshetriedhardtocorrecttheflirtingtendency
ofRodessaandthatshescoldedherwhenshesawRodessaviewinganXratedtape.
Rodessaaccordingtoherwasfondofgoingwithfriendsofillrepute.That(sic)she
corroboratedthetestimonyofMrsPunzalanbystatingthatsheherselfsawRodessa
masturbatinginsidetheroomofherhouse."[if!supportFootnotes][5][endif]
We find no flaws material enough to discredit the testimony of the ten-year old
Rodessa which the trial court found convincing enough and unrebutted by the
defense. The trial court not surprisingly noted that Rodessa's narration in detail of
her father's monstrous acts had made her cry.[if !supportFootnotes][11][endif] Once again, we
rule that:
"xxxThetestimonyofthevictimwhowasonly12yearsoldatthetimeoftherapeasto
thecircumstancesoftherapemustbegivenweightfortestimonyofyoungandimmature
rapevictimsarecredible(Peoplev.Guibao,217SCRA64[1993]).Nowomanespecially
oneoftenderage,practicallyonlyagirl,wouldconcoctastoryofdefloration,allowan
examinationofherprivatepartsandthereafterexposeherselftoapublictrial,ifshewere
notmotivatedsolelybythedesiretohavetheculpritapprehendedandpunished(People
v.Guibao,supra)."[if!supportFootnotes][12][endif]
The accused-appellant points out certain inconsistencies in the testimonies of the
prosecution witnesses in his attempt to bolster his claim that the rape accusation
against him is malicious and baseless. Firstly, Rodessa's testimony that the
accused-appellant was already naked when he dragged her inside the room is
inconsistent with her subsequent testimony that the said accused-appellant was
still wearing short pants when she was dragged inside the room. Secondly,
Rodessa's sworn statement before the police investigator which indicated that,
while the accused was executing pumping acts, he uttered the words "Masarap
ba?", differ from her testimony in court wherein she related that when the
accused took out his penis from her vagina, the accused said "Masarap, tapos
na." Thirdly, the victim's grandmother, Asuncion Rivera, recounted in her sworn
statement that it was the accused who went to see her to apprise her of the rape
committed on her granddaughter. However, in her testimony in court, Asuncion
Rivera claimed that she was the one who invited the accused-appellant to see
her in her house so as to tell her a secret.[if !supportFootnotes][13][endif] These alleged
discrepancies merely pertain to minor details which in no way pose serious doubt
as to the credibility of the prosecution witnesses. Whether or not the accused
was naked when he dragged Rodessa inside the room where he sexually
assaulted her bears no significant effect on Rodessa's testimony that she was
actually raped by the accused-appellant. Moreover, a conflicting account of
whatever words were uttered by the accused-appellant after he forcefully
inserted his penis into Rodessa's private organ against her will cannot impair the
Lastly, the third assigned error deserves scant consideration. The accusedappellant erroneously argues that the Contract of Services (Exhibit 4) offered as
evidence in support of the accused-appellant's defense of alibi need not be
corroborated because there is no law expressly requiring so. [if !supportFootnotes][21][endif] In
view of our finding that the prosecution witnesses have no motive to falsely testify