THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE, VS. PORFIRIO TAÑO, ET AL., DEFENDANTS. PORFIRIO TAÑO AND DIONISIO CANTONG, DEFENDANTS AND APPELLANTS.

Appeal from a judgment of the Court of First Instance of Iloilo, Hon.
Hilarion Y. Jarencio, presiding, finding Porfirio Taño, Guillermo Camina and
Roman Caldito guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Robbery in Band
with Rape, and sentencing each of them to suffer the penalty of reclusion
perpetua, and to indemnify jointly and severally the offended parties in
the amount of P210.00, and also finding Dionisio Cantong and Maximino Calico
guilty of the crime of simple robbery in band and sentencing them also for said
offense. Porfirio Tano and Dionisio Cantong appealed from the judgment, but
while the case was pending in this Court, the latter withdrew his appeal. The
present appeal, therefore, refers to that of Porfirio Taño.

It is not disputed by the appellant, as found in the decision appealed from,
that on July 25, 1955, at 8:00 in the evening, some persons called at the house
of the spouses Leodegario Domingo and Herminigilda Domingo in barrio Talacuan,
municipality of Loon, province of Iloilo, informing the inmates of the house
that there was a letter for Leodegario. As soon as Leodegario reached the
ground, carrying a lamp with him, Camina struck his hand holding the lamp and
the lamp fell down and the light was put out. Then Taño pointed a rifle at
Leodegario, while Camina tied his hands at the back. After giving a blow on the
face of Leodegario, Taño ordered his companions to take Leodegario to the river
bank 40 meters away. Then Taño, Camina and Caldito went up the house, each
carrying with him a firearm. They searched the house, and upon seeing a trunk
forced it open and took away some pieces of men’s and women’s apparel and an
envelope containing P210.00.

The evidence shows that after the money had been taken away Taño dragged
Herminigilda, pushing her down the floor. Taño then placed himself on top of
Herminigilda, while his companions held her legs apart. He gave a blow at her
left thigh and tore her “panty” away and then had intercourse with her. After
this Camina also had access to her, while his companions held her down. Caldito
also did this. After raping her, they went down the house and, thereafter, all
of them ran away.

Counsel for appellant Taño argues that there is no sufficient evidence to
sustain the finding that appellant had access to the offended party, for the
reason that the physician who examined her made no examination of her private
parts. That no such examination was made is true; the physician who examined
Herminigilda found a contusion on the face of her left thigh (Exhibit “M”), but
made no mention of having examined her private parts or having found evidence
involving intercourse forced on her.

We have, however, carefully examined the evidence in this respect and we
found that Herminigilda testified that when Taño placed himself on top of her,
she scratched his face, but Camina came and took hold of, and then stretched her
legs apart to aid Taño; that Taño hit her on the lap and tore away her “panty”;
that her “panty” had a coloration at the lower part caused by the semen of Taño
while on top of her (t.s.n. pp. 16-18). Her testimony is corroborated by the
finding of a contusion on her left thigh and of a coloration of her “panty”
which was produced to the court. Besides, the offended party expressly declared
that Taño was able to have carnal knowledge of her (Id, pp. JS-19). It is a
well-known fact that women, especially Filipinos, would not admit that they have
been abused unless that abuse had actually happened. This is due to their
natural instinct to protect their honor. We can not believe that the offended
party would have positively stated that intercourse took place unless it did
actually take place.

Another circumstance which supports the claim that rape was committed is the
fact that following the day of the commission of the crime of rape, the offended
party stated in her affidavit that the three accused, including appellant Taño,
had taken turns in committing the crime of rape on her. The imputation of rape
is not, therefore, the prpduct of fabrication, because no appreciable time had
elapsed between the commission of the rape and the execution of tile
affidavit.

Lastly, the trial judge who heard the offended party testify believed her
testimony and found that rape was actually committed. We find nothing to
indicate that the court’s findings in this respect are not correct. We are,
therefore, forced to the conclusion that the claim of appellant Taño that the
rape imputed to him was not sufficiently proved, is without merit.

We also agree with the trial court that four aggravating circumstances,
namely, commission by a band, taking advantage of nighttime and dwelling, and
use of superior strength attended the commission of the offense. There being no
mitigating circumstance in appellant’s favor, the penalty should be imposed in
its maximum degree.

The judgment of conviction appealed from should, therefore, be as it hereby
affirmed. With costs against appellant.

Paras, C.J., Bengzon, Padilla, Bautista Angela, Reyes, J.B.L., Barrera,
Gutierrez David, and Paredes, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed.