People v. ZZZ

THIRD DIVISION

[G.R. No. 238121. July 17, 2019.]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs.ZZZ1CA-G.R. CR-HC NO. 01373-MIN [CRIMINAL CASE NO. 2006-3410], accused-appellant.

NOTICE

Sirs/Mesdames :

Please take notice that the Court, Third Division, issued a Resolution dated July 17, 2019, which reads as follows:

"G.R. No. 238121 (People of the Philippines vs. ZZZ CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 01373-MIN [Criminal Case No. 2006-3410]). — This is an appeal 2 from the Court of Appeals' (CA) Decision 3 dated August 18, 2017, which was rendered in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 01373-MIN. In this decision, the CA affirmed the judgment of conviction of accused-appellant ZZZ for the crime of Rape, punishable under Article 266-A, paragraph 1 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC). Thus, subject to certain modifications, the CA upheld the judgment of conviction rendered by the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of _________________ Misamis Oriental in Criminal Case No. 2006-3410.

Factual Antecedents

On May 29, 2006, ZZZ was charged with the crime of "incestuous rape" in an Amended Information 4 that reads as follows:

That on March 8, 2006, at noon, in _____________________, Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused who is the father of the victim, did then and there wil[l]fully, unlawfully and feloniously commit sexual intercourse with his own daughter, [AAA], 5 17 years old, against her will. With the aggravating/qualifying circumstances of, that the victim, [AAA], is the daughter of the accused, [ZZZ], and that at the time of the commission of the offense the victim was still a minor, 17 years old.

Contrary to and in violation of Article 266-A, par. 1 of the Revised Penal Code. 6

The arraignment was set on June 14, 2006, 7 during which, ZZZ pleaded not guilty to the offense. Thereafter, the RTC set the case for preliminary conference on July 18, 2006. 8

At the scheduled preliminary conference, the parties entered into the following stipulations: (a) AAA, the victim, is the daughter of accused ZZZ; and (b) AAA was born on May 26, 1988. 9 The minutes of the preliminary conference were also later adopted as the pre-trial order of the case. 10 CAIHTE

During the presentation of the prosecution's evidence, AAA was the first witness. In her direct testimony, she identified ZZZ as the assailant in this case. 11 She alleged that at around noon of March 8, 2006, she was at the back of their house when ZZZ approached her and directed her to go upstairs, and inside their room. She acquiesced, and when she went to the room, ZZZ directed AAA to lie down. Afraid of getting hurt, AAA complied. ZZZ then kissed AAA and proceeded to molest his daughter by inserting his finger inside the vagina. 12

Soon after, they heard a person calling from outside, intending to buy something from their store. ZZZ instructed AAA to go tend to the customer, and immediately come back afterwards. AAA then went downstairs and into the store. Rather than returning to the room right away, AAA decided to strike up a conversation with the customer, who was also her friend. Her father became impatient and called her to come back. AAA's friend heard this, so she advised AAA to get going before her father gets angry. 13

Instead of returning to the room upstairs, AAA went to the kitchen, where she was surprised to find ZZZ. ZZZ then instructed her to go back to the room. Once there, ZZZ again sexually abused AAA; this time, by inserting his penis into her vagina. Afterwards, ZZZ told AAA to get dressed and go downstairs. 14

At that time, AAA's mother was not home, having left for the market before the abuse took place. When AAA's mother arrived in their house, AAA confided to her mother that ZZZ "touched" her again. 15 Consequently, AAA's mother took her to Cagayan de Oro City, and went directly to the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) to report what happened. 16

On March 9, 2006, AAA was medically examined by the NBI's then attending physician, Dr. Agnes B. Cagadas. Her findings reveal that the hymen of the victim was tall, thick, estrogenized with healed lacerations at the 6 o'clock and 9 o'clock positions. 17

ZZZ, for his part, denied the accusations against him. According to him, he worked as a security guard for the __________________________. He was also in the business of delivering sand, gravel, and hollow blocks. From 8:00 p.m. of March 7, 2006 until 8:00 a.m. of the following day (i.e., March 8, 2006), he was on duty as a security guard. He arrived at their house at around 9:00 a.m. of March 8, 2006. 18

When he went home, all four of his children, as well as his wife, were present. He was watching television when someone came to their house seeking to purchase sand from ZZZ. At around 11:00 a.m., he left their house and went to the __________ to collect some sand for delivery. He finished collecting and transporting 80 sacks of sand by 3:00 p.m. 19

Thereafter, another customer sought him out, asking for a delivery of 20 sacks of sand. ZZZ finished this job by 5:00 p.m. He then went home, where he met a couple of people who worked for him as hollow block makers, waiting for their salary. He paid them, but he soon noticed that his family was not home. Later that evening, his family came back with NBI agents, who proceeded to arrest ZZZ for raping AAA. 20

Ruling of the RTC

In a Judgment 21 dated October 7, 2014, the trial court found that ZZZ was guilty beyond reasonable doubt of raping AAA, which is punishable under Article 266-A, paragraph 1 of the RPC, thus:

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Court finds the accused, [ZZZ], GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Qualified Rape and hereby sentences him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua without the benefit of parole. He is hereby ordered to pay [AAA] P75,000.00 as civil indemnity, P75,000.00 as moral damages, and P30,000.00 as exemplary damages.

In the service of his sentence, the accused is hereby credited with the full period during which he has undergone preventive imprisonment, provided that he agreed in writing to abide by the same disciplinary rules imposed upon convicted prisoners.

SO ORDERED. 22

The trial court found AAA's testimony credible because she was able to categorically testify that her father, ZZZ, raped her. The absence of resistance on her part was not considered as exculpatory in favor of ZZZ, as his moral ascendancy over AAA suffices to force and intimidate AAA. The RTC further held that ZZZ's defenses of denial and alibi were unsubstantiated. 23

Considering that the prosecution was able to establish AAA's minority at the time of the rape, as well as her relationship with ZZZ, the trial court held that the crime committed was Qualified Rape. While this crime is punishable by death, the trial court downgraded the penalty to reclusion perpetua in accordance with the suspension of the death penalty. 24 DETACa

Aggrieved, ZZZ filed a notice of appeal with the RTC. 25 The appeal was given due course in the Order dated October 8, 2014. 26

On March 18, 2015, both parties were directed to file their respective briefs. 27 In his brief, 28 ZZZ argued that the testimony of AAA was not credible, especially since their house is tiny, with several occupants. ZZZ further pointed out that AAA could have shouted for help when the rape allegedly occurred, but she did not; AAA did not even run away. 29

The People, on the other hand, answered in the appellee's brief 30 that rape is not a crime committed only in seclusion. The People also argued that rape victims behave differently, and cannot be expected to act in a certain manner. 31 Finally, the People submitted that ZZZ was unable to establish a tight alibi, especially since his supposed location was only 15 minutes away from the locus criminis. 32

Ruling of the CA

In the challenged Decision 33 dated August 18, 2017, the CA upheld the trial court's ruling, which found ZZZ guilty beyond reasonable doubt, subject to certain modifications in the grant of indemnity and damages, towit:

WHEREFORE, in view of all the foregoing, the Court DISMISSES the appeal and AFFIRMS WITH MODIFICATION the Decision dated October 7, 2014 of the [RTC], Branch 27, ________________ in Criminal Case No. 2006-3410, finding appellant ______________________ guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Qualified Rape and sentencing him to (sic) suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua without the benefit of parole. Appellant __________________________ is ordered to pay the private offended party as follows: (1) P100,000.00 as civil indemnity; (2) P100,000.00 as moral damages; and (3) P100,000.00 as exemplary damages, all with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the finality of this judgment until fully paid.

SO ORDERED. 34 (Redaction in the original)

The CA held that the prosecution adequately proved all the elements of Qualified Rape. The testimony of AAA was given credence as she was able to categorically identify ZZZ as her abuser. Furthermore, her inability to resist and shout for help was not considered as a factor affecting her credibility, because the victims of sexual abuse often react differently from one another. 35 The CA also disregarded the defense of alibi since, as the People aptly argued, the situs of the crime was only 15 minutes away from his alleged location. There was, therefore, no physical impossibility to be at the housewhere AAA was raped. 36

Following the affirmation of his conviction, ZZZ appealed to this Court. The parties were then required to submit their respective supplemental briefs, if they so desire. 37 Both ZZZ and the People filed a manifestation, respectively stating that they would not be filing any supplemental brief. 38

Ruling of the Court

The Court is tasked to resolve whether the prosecution was able to establish the guilt of ZZZ beyond reasonable doubt, for the crime of Qualified Rape.

The Court finds the appeal unmeritorious.

The prosecution was able to

The elements of Qualified Rape are as follows: (a) carnal knowledge of a woman; (b) the act was done through force, or without consent; (c) the victim is below 18 years of age at the time of the rape; and (d) the assailant is a parent, ascendant, step-parent, guardian, relative by consanguinity or affinity within the third civil degree, or the common law spouse of the victim's parent. 39 aDSIHc

Here, ZZZ was charged in the Information with forcibly having carnal knowledge of AAA — his own daughter — who was 17 years old at the time of the rape. His defense is anchored on the credibility of AAA. However, ZZZ was unable to establish, either through the records or through his arguments, that there is justifiable basis for the Court to disturb the factual findings of the trial court. It is well-settled that the Court must vest high respect to the trial court's assessment of the credibility of witnesses. As is often the case in criminal proceedings, the trial court judge has the advantage of observing the physical demeanor and behavior of the witnesses during their testimony. This doctrinal rule was eloquently stated in People v. Agbayani, 40 when this Court explained as follows:

One of the highly revered dicta Philippine jurisprudence has established is that this Court will not interfere with the judgment of the trial court in passing upon the credibility of opposing witnesses, unless there appears in the record some facts or circumstances of weight and influence which have been overlooked and, if considered, would affect the result. This is founded on practical and empirical considerations, i.e., the trial judge is in a better position to decide the question of credibility, since he personally heard the witnesses and observed their deportment and manner of testifying. He had before him the essential aids to determine whether a witness was telling the truth or lying. Truth does not always stalk boldly forth naked; she often hides in nooks and crannies visible only to the mind's eye of the judge who tried the case. To him appears the furtive glance, the blush of conscious shame, the hesitation, the sincere or flippant or sneering tone, the heat, the calmness, the yawn, the sigh, the candor or lack of it, the scant or full realization of the solemnity of an oath, the carriage and mien. On the other hand, an appellate court has only the cold record, which generally does not reveal the thin line between fact and prevarication that is crucial in determining innocence or guilt. 41 (Emphasis Ours and citations omitted)

Again, there is nothing apparent in the records that establishes the RTC and the CA's manifest error in overlooking certain facts or circumstances that would have warranted ZZZ's acquittal. In AAA's testimony before the open court, AAA narrated that ZZZ had carnal knowledge of her by inserting his penis into her vagina. 42 ZZZ took advantage of the absence of his wife when he raped AAA, who was left home alone to attend to their store. 43 The rape was further corroborated by the medico-legal report, which observed the presence of hymenal lacerations on AAA. 44 Apart from AAA's minority at the time of the rape, ZZZ is her father, and as such, possessed moral ascendancy and influence over her. This authority over AAA substitutes for the violence and intimidation generally required in other rape cases. 45

These circumstances, taken together, are sufficient to establish the guilt of ZZZ beyond reasonable doubt. AAA's straightforward testimony positively identified ZZZ as her assailant. The Court has often recognized that a victim of abuse, such as AAA in this case, would not go through the ordeal of accusing her own father with rape, especially since this entails submitting herself — her most intimate parts — to medical and judicial examination, to public scrutiny, and to ridicule. 46

Neither does the size of the house, nor the presence of other occupants within the proximity of the scene of the crime, negate the credibility of AAA and the other prosecution witnesses. "Rape is not a respecter of time or place." 47 It may be committed despite the presence of people within the same room or in the adjoining area. 48 The alleged fact that several people are just outside the house does not automatically render the rape of AAA improbable.

Sexual abuse victims react

ZZZ attempts to erode the credibility of AAA by arguing that she did not act in the manner that sexual abuse victims are supposed to act. According to him, AAA's testimony would show that she did not resist the abuse, or cried for help during the rape.

It is elementary that victims of sexual abuse, including rape, react differently to the situation. While others may attempt, successfully or otherwise, to defend themselves from their attacker, there are victims who are intimidated and coerced into silent submission. Whatever the victims' reaction, this cannot, by itself, taint their credibility. As the Court held in People v. Palanay: 49

Rape victims react differently. Some may offer strong resistance while others may be too intimidated to offer any resistance at all. There is no standard form of reaction for a woman when facing a shocking and horrifying experience such as a sexual assault. The workings of the human mind placed under emotional stress are unpredictable, and people react differently some may shout, some may faint, and some may be shocked into insensibility, while others may openly welcome the intrusion. However, any of these conducts does not impair the credibility of a rape victim. 50 (Citations omitted)

The Court's observations in People v. Villamor51 are also enlightening, specifically with respect to the rape committed by perpetrators related to the victim, thus: ETHIDa

Neither does AAA's silence on the incident nor failure to shout or wake up her siblings affect her credibility. The Court had consistently found that there is no uniform behavior that can be expected from those who had the misfortune of being sexually molested. While there are some who may have found the courage early on to reveal the abuse they experienced, there are those who have opted to initially keep the harrowing ordeal to themselves and attempted to move on with their lives. This is because a rape victim's actions are oftentimes overwhelmed by fear rather than by reason. The perpetrator of the rape hopes to build a climate of extreme psychological terror, which would numb his victim into silence and submissiveness. In fact, incestuous rape further magnifies this terror for the perpetrator in these cases, such as the victim's father, is a person normally expected to give solace and protection to the victim. Moreover, in incest, access to the victim is guaranteed by the blood relationship, magnifying the sense of helplessness and the degree of fear. 52 (Emphasis Ours and citations omitted)

AAA testified during cross-examination that when ZZZ started kissing her, she was in a state of shock and out of her mind. When ZZZ was initially interrupted by someone calling from outside to buy from their store, AAA contemplated running away. After AAA attended to the customer, she did not immediately return to the room. Instead, she went to the kitchen, where, to her surprise, ZZZ was waiting. She also testified feeling as if she was "floating in the air," and not knowing what to do. 53

It was clear from AAA's testimony that she was overwhelmed by the situation. Her harrowing ordeal, with her father as her own abuser, rendered her speechless, unable to shout for help. However, this reaction does not make her less credible than the other rape victims who offered strong resistance against their assailants. Verily, the CA correctly upheld the findings of the trial court. It cannot be emphasized enough that there is no uniform reaction expected of victims of rape and sexual abuse.

The twin defense of denial and alibi is

In order to deserve consideration, the alibi of the accused must establish that he or she was somewhere else when the offense was committed, and demonstrate that it was physically impossible for the accused to be present at the place of the crime (locus criminis) or its immediate vicinity at the time of the commission of the offense. 54 Thus, as applied in the present case, ZZZ must not only show that he was outside the house when AAA was raped, but he should similarly establish that it was impossible for him to be present at the house.

In this case, ZZZ testified that he was asked to deliver sand to a client, which necessitated his absence from the house between 10:45 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. ZZZ particularly alleged that he went to the _____________, in order to shovel and collect the sand from the area. By 3:00 p.m., another client needed a delivery so ZZZ had to extend. He finished his job at 5:00 p.m. 55

On cross-examination, ZZZ stated that the _____________ was only two kilometers from their house. 56 This means that ZZZ could easily travel back to his house and rape AAA. In other words, it was not physically impossible for ZZZ to be at the locus criminis. Consequently, the Court cannot give much weight to his defense.

Finally, ZZZ's bare denial deserves scant consideration. ZZZ did not even offer any clear and convincing evidence to support his defense, simply stating that he loves his daughter and he could not rape her. 57 This denial does not hold water especially when held against the straightforward and positive testimony of AAA. 58

In conclusion, the Court does not find any basis to reverse the findings of the trial court, which were later affirmed by the CA on appeal. The testimony of AAA was candid and straightforward, and consistent with the result of her medical examination. Her categorical identification of ZZZ as her rapist certainly prevails over ZZZ's self-serving defense of alibi and denial. cSEDTC

Since it was duly established that ZZZ, the accused, is the father of the minor victim, the trial court correctly found ZZZ guilty of the crime of Qualified Rape, punishable under Article 266-A, paragraph 1, in relation to Article 266-B, paragraph 1, of the RPC. The imposable penalty is indeed death, which should be reduced to reclusion perpetua pursuant to Republic Act No. 9346. 59 Following the case of People v. Jugueta, 60 the CA also properly modified the award of civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary damages, with an interest of six percent (6%) per annum from the date of finality of this judgment.

While AAA revealed in her testimony that ZZZ has raped and sexually assaulted 61 her in the past, the prosecution charged ZZZ only for the rape on March 8, 2006. Unfortunately, without a separate information accusing ZZZ of the past incidents of rape and sexual assault, the Court cannot include these other incidents in his conviction. Otherwise, ZZZ's right to due process and the right to be informed of the charges against him would be violated.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the appeal of accused-appellant ZZZ is DISMISSED. The Court of Appeals' Decision dated August 18, 2017, rendered in relation to CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 01373-MIN, is hereby AFFIRMED in toto.

SO ORDERED."

 

Very truly yours,

(SGD.) WILFREDO V. LAPITAN

Division Clerk of Court

 

Footnotes

1. At the victim's instance or, if the victim is a minor, that of his or her guardian, the complete name of the accused may be replaced by fictitious initials and his or her personal circumstances blotted out from the decision, resolution, or order if the name and personal circumstances of the accused may tend to establish or compromise the victims' identities, in accordance with Amended Administrative Circular No. 83-2015 (III [1] [c]) dated September 5, 2017.

2. CA rollo, pp. 104-105.

3. Penned by Associate Justice Ronaldo B. Martin, with Associate Justices Edgardo A. Camello and Louis P. Acosta concurring; id. at 90-102.

4. Records, p. 25.

5. The real name of the victim, her personal circumstances and other information which tend to establish or compromise her identity, as well as those of her immediate family, or household members, shall not be disclosed to protect her privacy, and fictitious initial shall, instead, be used, in accordance with People v. Cabalquinto (533 Phil. 703 [2006]) and the Amended Administrative Circular No. 83-2015 dated September 5, 2017.

6. Records, p. 25.

7.Id. at 27.

8.Id. at 30.

9.Id. at 42.

10.Id. at 53.

11. TSN, April 19, 2007, p. 5.

12. Records, p. 161.

13.Id.

14.Id. at 161-162.

15. TSN, December 15, 2009, p. 8.

16.Id. at 10.

17. TSN, May 3, 2012, p. 11.

18. TSN, December 10, 2012, p. 7.

19.Id. at 8-13.

20.Id. at 15-16; see also records, p. 14.

21. Rendered by Presiding Judge Giovanni Alfred H. Navarro; CA rollo, pp. 49-58.

22. Id. at 57.

23.Id. at 53-55.

24.Id. at 55-56.

25.Id. at 19.

26. Records, p. 221.

27. CA rollo, p. 21.

28.Id. at 38-48.

29.Id. at 43-45.

30.Id. at 73-85.

31.Id. at 80-82.

32.Id. at 83.

33.Id. at 90-102.

34.Id. at 101.

35.Id. at 97-98.

36.Id. at 99.

37.Rollo, p. 21.

38.Id. at 23, 33.

39.People v. Lagbo, 780 Phil. 834, 842 (2016).

40.348 Phil. 341 (1998).

41.Id. at 363-364.

42.TSN, August 19, 2008, pp. 13-14.

43.TSN, December 15, 2009, pp. 6 and 16.

44.TSN, May 3, 2012, p. 11.

45.People v. Agbayani, supra note 40, at 366; and People v. Agustin, 418 Phil. 145, 151-152 (2001).

46.People v. Descartin, 810 Phil. 881, at 892 (2017), citing People v. Canoy, 459 Phil. 933 (2003).

47.People v. Catubig, Jr., 396 Phil. 345 (2000).

48.Id. at 354; and People v. Managaytay, 364 Phil. 800, 806-807 (1999).

49.805 Phil. 116 (2017).

50.Id. at 126-127.

51.780 Phil. 817 (2016).

52.Id. at 830-831.

53.TSN, August 19, 2008, pp. 10-13.

54.People v. Lascano, 685 Phil. 236, 243 (2012).

55.TSN, December 10, 2012, pp. 11-15.

56.Id. at 20.

57.TSN, December 10, 2012, p. 16.

58.People v. Burce, 730 Phil. 576, 588 (2014); and People v. Chingh, 661 Phil. 208, 219 (2011).

59.AN ACT PROHIBITING THE IMPOSITION OF DEATH PENALTY IN THE PHILIPPINES (Approved: June 24, 2006).

60.783 Phil. 806, 848 (2016).

61.Punishable under Article 266-A, paragraph 2 of the RPC.