THIRD DIVISION
[G.R. No. 206830. April 21, 2014.]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ALBERTO V. ESTRELLA, accused-appellant.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Third Division, issued a Resolution dated April 21, 2014, which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 206830 (People of the Philippines v. Alberto V. Estrella). — The Provincial Prosecutor of Calapan City charged accused-appellant Alberto V. Estrella (Alberto) with rape under Republic Act 8353 before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of that city, Branch 39, in Criminal Case CR-05-8126. 1
RJC, 2 a 16-year-old Mangyan from Sitio Minolo when the incident happened, testified that at 8:00 p.m. on May 29, 2005 she left their house to buy kerosene from a store. On her way back, she met accused Alberto along the road. She had previously worked for him for two months as a housemaid and babysitter but she resigned because he kissed her.
When accused Alberto asked her to approach him, she did so thinking that he would pay her the remaining balance of her wages. Instead, he offered financial assistance in her studies provided she agreed to have sexual intercourse. When she declined, Alberto dragged her towards a dark corner where he forcibly laid her down and undressed her. He then took off his clothes and sexually abused her. She struggled to get free but Alberto was too strong for her. When they heard someone shouting, accused Alberto ran away. Rattled and confused, RJC ran towards home, leaving her slippers behind. She cried and stayed in the woods behind their house.
RJC's mother, VRC, testified that, she became worried when her daughter did not return from the store. So, she decided to follow her. On the way, VRC heard some noise and walked toward that direction. Before she could decipher what the noise was about, accused Alberto came running out shouting, "natae ako, natae ako!" She asked him if he had seen RJC but Alberto said he did not and invited her to his house. She decided, however, to go home instead.
Together with her husband, VRC continued to search for their daughter. They returned to the area where she met Alberto and they found RJC's slippers. They then reported their daughter's disappearance to the police. The police officers accompanied them back to the location where they found the slippers. Alberto later arrived with his wife and denied having seen RJC.
When VRC arrived home, she found her daughter crying at the back of their house. RJC confided that Alberto dragged her to a secluded place and violated her. A medical examination revealed lacerations on her hymen.
RJC also testified that some emissaries from Alberto offered their family P30,000.00 to settle the case with an affidavit of desistance. Because of intimidation and threats they received, they signed the affidavit. TCacIA
For his defense, Alberto denied the charges against him and professed that on the day of the incident, he was with his wife at the Pacific Dive Shop in White Beach, Puerto Galera from 7:00 a.m. to midnight. He testified that he was attending to a customer at 8:00 that evening. Hence, it was physically impossible for him to have committed the rape of which he had been accused.
Alberto also testified that he never indicated any sexual desire for RJC during her employment. The only reason he could think of for implicating him in this crime was that he was not able to lend her family P10,000.00. He said that RJC's family visited him while he was at the San Teodoro Municipal Jail to ask P30,000.00 from him to end his incarceration. He agreed because he wanted to end his agony. His wife corroborated his testimony and confirmed his alibi. She clarified that they agreed to the settlement not as an admission of guilt but to avoid a prolonged trial.
On September 21, 2010 the RTC found Alberto guilty of the crime charged and sentenced him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua and to pay RJC P50,000.00 as civil indemnity and P50,000.00 as moral damages. On June 1, 2012 the Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed in CA-G.R. CR-HC 04818 the RTC Decision, hence, the present appeal.
The Court agrees with the CA's Decision Contrary to Alberto's claim the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that he had carnal knowledge with RJC. It is said that due to its intimate nature, the proof of rape usually rests on the credibility of the victim's testimony, a matter that largely depends on the trial court since it had the opportunity to watch and listen to her as she testified. 3 From the record, this Court and the CA found her testimony to be straightforward, convincing, and consistent with human experience. It is unflawed by any material or significant inconsistency. 4 Cross-examination did not disconcert her.
Alberto claims that RJC's family was ill-motived and fabricated the evidence against him. But this claim is unsubstantiated. It would moreover be hard to believe that parents would use their daughter for such purpose when it would subject them and her to shame and stigma. 5 It is not likely that a young woman, who was a virgin prior to the incident, would subject herself to a medical exam and her family to a public trial, if she were not motivated by the desire for justice. 6
Alberto's alibi does not persuade the Court. He contradicted his own June 15, 2005 Sinumpaang Salaysay where he said that RJC was his girlfriend and that they met on the night of May 29, 2005 to have consensual sex. He also said that RJC did not mind that he had a wife. 7 He testified in court, however, that he had never had lust for RJC and that he did not meet her on the night in question.
What is more, as the trial court said, "[As the distance between] White Beach, Puerto Galera, the place where the accused claimed to be at the time of the incident, . . . [and] Sitio Minolo, Puerto Galera, where the rape was committed . . . are . . . in same locality, and the distance between them can be traversed in less than an hour even on foot. Clearly, it was not physically impossible for accused to be at the locus criminis at the time of the rape." 8 In addition, Alberto's alibi cannot prevail over the prosecution witnesses' positive identification of him and they had no motive to lie.
Based on prevailing jurisprudence, the award of P30,000.00 as exemplary damages is warranted in order to serve as an example to those who play have aberrant sexual tendencies. 9
WHEREFORE, the Court AFFIRMSin toto the Court of Appeals Decision dated June 1, 2012 in CA-G.R. CR-HC 04818 that found accused-appellant Alberto V. Estrella GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape. In addition to the damages awarded below, the Court DIRECTS accused-appellant to pay the victim P30,000.00 as exemplary damages. DCTHaS
SO ORDERED."
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) LUCITA ABJENA SORIANODivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1. The Anti-Rape Law of 1997.
2. The real name of the victim is withheld pursuant to Republic Act 7610 and Republic Act 9262.
3. People v. Dela Cruz, G.R. No. 183091, June 19, 2013.
4. Id.
5. People v. De los Reyes, 383 Phil. 801, 813 (2000).
6. See People v. Sanchez, 320 Phil. 60, 70 (1995).
7. Sinumpaang Salaysay, records, p. 22.
8. Rollo, p. 14.
9. People v. Araojo, G.R. No. 185203, September 17, 2009, 600 SCRA 295.