PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. ALBERTO TORREVILLAS Y ABALARAO, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

This is an appeal from the decision of the Regional Trial Court,
Branch 124, Caloocan City, in Criminal Cases Nos. C-31436 and C-31437,
convicting the appellant, Alberto Torrevillas y Abalarao, of two counts of rape
and sentencing him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua in
each case, to indemnify the offended party, Evelyn Quinez y Aguilar, in the
total amount of P50,000, and to pay the costs. The dispositive portion of the decision reads:

“WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, this Court finds the accused
ALBERTO TORREVILLAS Y ABALARAO GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of
rape committed on April 6, 1988 with the use of force and intimidation as
charged in the Information (C-31436) and as penalized under Art. 335 of the
Revised Penal Code and hereby sentences said accused to suffer imprisonment of Reclusion
Perpetua; to indemnify the victim, Evelyn Quinez, in the amount of
P25,000.00 and to pay the costs.

“This Court likewise finds the accused ALBERTO TORREVILLAS Y
ABALARAO GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape committed on May
4, 1988 with the use of force and intimidation as charged in the second
Information (C-31437) and as penalized under Art. 335 of the Revised Penal Code
and hereby sentences said accused to suffer imprisonment of Reclusion Perpetua;
to indemnify the victim Evelyn Quinez in the amount of P25,000.00 and to pay
the costs.

“The accused shall be credited with the period of time he has
undergone preventive imprisonment in the service of his sentence(s) under Art.
29 of the Revised Penal Code.” (pp. 23-24, Rollo.)

The facts of the case, as set forth in the decision of the trial
court, are quoted below:

“Evelyn Quinez was 20 years old at the time of the incidents
on April 6, 1988 and on May 4, 1988. She grew up under the custody of her grandmother, Marceline Aguilar but
she went to live with her mother, Leticia Aguilar, when she started to work at
the Island Biscuit Factory in about the month of January, 1988. She was living in the same house with her
mother and stepfather, Alberto Torrevillas, at the time of the incidents in
question.

“At about 8:00 o’clock in the evening of April 6, 1988, Evelyn
was inside her house. Her mother had
left for Nueva Ecija early in the morning of said date to earn a little by
helping in the harvesting of palay. While Evelyn was cooking food for supper, Alberto called her. When Evelyn approached Alberto who was
inside the bedroom, the latter suddenly pointed a knife which was almost a foot
long at Evelyn’s neck. Alberto warned
Evelyn not to shout and pushed her towards the bed. Evelyn was hurt because her back hit the sidings of the bed. Alberto then used his right hand in removing
the blouse, skirt and the panty of Evelyn while he held the knife in his left
hand. Evelyn tried to struggle but it
was useless. She got sick of polio
while she was a child and as a result, her left leg is very much smaller and
weaker than her right leg. She found it
also fruitless to use her arms to resist the advances of Alberto because of the
knife pointed at her. She could not
shout as she was afraid. Alberto
thereafter removed his pants and his brief and placed himself on top of Evelyn. He later managed to insert his male organ
inside Evelyn’s female organ. Alberto
remained on top of Evelyn for a long time. Evelyn could not estimate how long Alberto actually performed the
intercourse. After consuming his
desire, Alberto stood up and warned Evelyn not to tell her mother or
grandmother about the incident. He then
left the house.

“At about 8:00 o’clock
in the evening of May 4, 1988, Evelyn was alone inside the house located at
Petronia Street, Camarin, Kalookan City. She was sitting on a chair beside the window waiting for her
mother. Her mother returned from Nueva
Ecija a few days earlier but left the house to go to the market at
Camarin. Alberto, who was inside the
house, called Evelyn and the latter approached him, Alberto pointed a knife on
the right side of Evelyn’s body. It was
the same knife Alberto used in the evening of April 6, 1988. Alberto warned Evelyn not to shout and laid
Evelyn forcibly on the same bed. Evelyn
cried as she could not offer any resistance. Alberto again removed the clothes of Evelyn and after doing so, he shed
off his pants and brief. He then
forcibly placed himself on top of Evelyn and inserted his male organ inside the
organ of Evelyn. After satisfying his
desire, Alberto dressed up and again threaten Evelyn not to tell the matter to
anybody. Evelyn was already sleeping
when her mother arrived from the market at about 10:00 o’clock in the evening
of May 4, 1988.

“On September 28, 1988, Evelyn told her mother that her
monthly menstruation failed to come on the expected date. She was therefore brought to Dr. Susana Uy
for a check up by her mother and grandmother at 8:00 o’clock in the evening of
said day. As a result of the medical
examination, Evelyn was found to be pregnant. Her mother began pressing Evelyn to admit who caused her pregnancy but
Evelyn was afraid to do so.

“Early the following day, September 29, 1988, Alberto warned
Evelyn not to tell her mother anything. However, later in the day, Evelyn’s mother and grandmother alternated in
forcing Evelyn to tell the truth. As a
result, Evelyn was forced to reveal what Alberto did to her on April 6, 1988
and May 4, 1988. As a result, Evelyn
was accompanied to the Caloocan Police Headquarters on the very same night by
her grandmother, Marcelina, to file a complaint against Alberto Torrevillas. Evelyn executed a sworn statement before the
police (Exhibit ‘A’). She then had
herself examined at the medico?legal unit of the NBI. Evelyn gave birth to a baby boy, Joel
Quinez, on February 9, 1989.” (pp. 19-20, Rollo.)

On September 30, 1988, the complaining witness, Evelyn Quinez,
filed two separate complaints against Alberto Torrevillas before the Regional
Trial Court, Branch 124, Caloocan City, charging the accused with two crimes of
rape, as follows:

“That on or about the 6th day of April, 1988, in Caloocan
City, MM, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the
above-named accused with lewd designs and taking advantage of his superior
strength, by means of force, threats and intimidation employed on the person of
one Evelyn Quinez y Aguilar, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully, and
feloniously lie with and have sexual intercourse with the undersigned
complainant, against her will and without her consent.” (p. 6, Rollo.)

“That on or about the 4th day of May, 1988 in Kalookan City,
MM, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the
above-named accused, with lewd designs and taking advantage of superior
strength, by means of force, threats and intimidation employed on the person of
Evelyn Quinez y Aguilar, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and
feloniously lie with and have sexual intercourse with the undersigned
complainant, against her will and without her consent.” (p. 7, Rollo.)

Upon arraignment on October 11, 1988, the accused pleaded not
guilty to the charges which were jointly tried.

Evelyn Quinez positively identified the accused during the
trial. The prosecution presented Dr.
Noel Minay, a medico-legal officer of the NBI, who testified that the
complainant was about four months pregnant when she was brought to the NBI for
examination and that she had an old complete laceration in her hymen at 6:00
o’clock position, which were considered by him to be consistent with the
complainant’s claim that she was raped on May 4, 1988.

The appellant, however, denied that he was in his house on April
6 and May 4, 1988. He maintained that
the complainant resided with her grandmother and that the complainant had a
boyfriend in 1988. The complainant’s
mother, Leticia Aguilar, testified for the defendant. She alleged that she did not go to Nueva Ecija on April 6, because
the harvest season was in August and September.

After the trial, the Court a quo rendered judgment
finding the appellant guilty of the crimes charged and sentenced him to suffer
two penalties of reclusion perpetua.

In this appeal, the appellant ascribes to the trial court the
following errors:

1. in unquestioningly accept­ing the uncorroborated testimony of
the alleged victim;

2. in convicting the accused of the crime charged despite the
failure of the prosecution to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

The appellant, through counsel, contends that the trial court
blindly accepted the uncorroborated testimony of the complaining witness
although her evidence did not clearly and convincingly show that the carnal
acts were perpetrated on her person against her will. Appellant discredits Evelyn’s allegation that he pointed a knife
at her neck for as a matter of fact she was not wounded. He argues that the victim’s declaration
that:

“x x x at akin naramdaman na ang
kutsilyo ay medyo bumaon sa aking tagiliran. x x x (Sinumpaang salaysay,
September 29, 1988, Sagot sa Tanong bilang 5; underscoring supplied.)” (p.
9, Appellant’s brief.)

is contradicted by the finding in the
Medico-legal report that:

“GENERAL PHYSICAL EXAMINATION:

x x x

“No extragenital physical
injury noted.

x x x

“CONCLUSIONS:

“1. No evident sign
of extragenital physical injury noted on
the body of the subject at the time of
examination.” p. 9, Appellant’s brief.)

However, the Solicitor General correctly pointed out that Evelyn
never claimed that she was wounded by the appellant’s knife. Her statement that the knife
“bumaon” (pressed), qualified by the adverb “medyo” which
is equivalent to “somewhat” or “slightly,” means that the
knife was pressed somewhat against her neck.

There is no merit in appellant’s other argument that he could not
have used a knife for if he had poked a knife at the victim’s neck while he
undressed and raped her, she would have been wounded in the neck.

The absence of any wound or injury on the complainant’s neck does
not disprove her allegation that the appellant threatened her with a
knife. “Absence of external signs
or physical injuries does not negate the commission of rape; Intimidation can
be addressed to the mind as well.” (People vs. Abonada, 169 SCRA 530,
533.)

The appellant’s invocation of this Court’s ruling in People vs.
Apat, 114 SCRA 620, that, it can “hardly be envisioned how a man can
successfully consummate the sexual act on an unwilling woman with his left hand
placed over her mouth (supposedly to prevent her from shouting for help) and
with his right hand holding a hunting knife,” is inappropriate because the
factual situations there and here were dissimilar.

The victim’s failure to cry out for help and immediately denounce
her stepfather to her mother and grandmother or the proper authorities did not
imply that she consented to the sexual assault committed against her. As pointed out by the trial court:

“Evelyn explained satisfactorily why she failed to resist the
sexual advances of the accused and why she did not shout to attract her
relatives who were living in nearby houses also inside the compound. She showed her left leg during her
trial. It is very much smaller than her
right leg. Her failure to shout on
account of fear can be appreciated more fully if we come to consider that the
accused exercised moral ascendancy over Evelyn. (See People vs. Molero, 144 SCRA 397.)” (p. 21, Rollo.)

Furthermore, the accused-appellant was armed with a deadly
weapon, and he threatened to kill her if she told anyone about the crime. Evelyn obviously believed that the appellant
could easily carry out this threat, because she lived under the same roof with
him (People vs. Nunag. 173 SCRA 274).

The defendant’s denial and alibi may not prevail over the clear
identification of the accused by the rape victim, his stepdaughter (People vs.
Dumalag, 128 SCRA 158), who had absolutely no ill motive to concoct a false
charge against him (People vs. Ocampo, 143 SCRA 428; People vs. Viray, 164 SCRA
135).

Appellant’s alibi, a weak defense (People vs. Calicdan, 165 SCRA
225), is made even weaker by his omission to explain his whereabouts if, as he
alleged, he was not alone in the house with Evelyn at 8:00 P.M. on April 6,
1988 (p. 7, tsn, May 2, 1989). He did
not bother to state where he was, who he was with, what he was doing, how far
he was from the scene of the crime, nor any such other verifiable details.

WHEREFORE, finding no reversible error in the decision of
the trial court convicting the appellant, Alberto Torrevillas, of two crimes of
rape, the same is hereby affirmed except the award of civil indemnity in the
sum of P25,000 for each count which is hereby increased to P30,000 (People vs.
Barranco, 177 SCRA 103; People vs. Hortillano, 177 SCRA 729), or the total sum of
sixty thousand pesos (P60,000) for both counts. Costs de oficio.

SO ORDERED.

Narvasa, (Chairman), Cruz, Feliciano, and Medialdea, JJ., concur.