PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE, VS. HERMENEGILDO PASCUAL, RICARDO CORPUS AND ROMAN NICOLAS, DEFENDANTS. HERMENEGILDO PASCUAL AND RICARDO CORPUS, DEFENDANTS AN…

At about midnight of 22 September 1950 while Ciriaco Labrador, his
wife Elisa Bagay and their children Leandra, Simona, Ines and Felipe,
the first 15 and the last 5 years old, were sleeping in their house
located in barrio No. 57, Ligsay, municipality of Laoag, province of
Ilocos Norte, Dionisio Tapia came to the house and asked for a match
stick. After a while Hermenegildo Pascual and Roman Nicolas forced open
the door, the first aiming his gun at Ciriaco Labrador and asking for
money. Roman Nicolas held a flashlight and took a club in the house and
with it threatened Ciriaco Labrador. As the latter said that he had no
money because he had loaned it (P1,000) to Martina Ancheta,
Hermenegildo Pascual told him that if he did not give his money he would
kill him. Ciriaco Labrador begged not to be killed and asked them to
have a pity on his small children. Hermenegildo Pascual and Roman
Nicolas told him “Go ahead and open the trunk.” Hermenegildo Pascual
took from the trunk a chest or savings box containing P10. He also
asked Ciriaco to open the two drawers of the sewing machine but found no
money there. Then Roman Nicolas brought Ciriaco down and guarded him
while Ricardo Corpus went up. Meanwhile Ricardo Corpus asked Elisa
Bagay to let him have sexual intercourse with her. Elisa told him that
he should not do it because she was six months on the family way.
Ricardo Corpus in answer to that refusal pushed her, took her son from
her, threw her on the trunk, Elisa falling on a mat on the floor, and
there after pulling down her panties lay with her, Hermenegildo Pascual
holding her hands. After Corpus had satisfied his lust, Hermenegildo
took his turn and while he was having sexual intercourse with her,
Ricardo Corpus approached and caressed Leandra Labrador by touching her
breast and genitals, but she pleaded not to be abused because she had
menses. After Hermenegildo Pascual got through he and Ricardo Corpus
went down and left the place. After the malefactors had left Ciriaco
Labrador went up the house and inquired from his what the malefactors
had done while he was down and his wife revealed to him that she had
been raped by Ricardo Corpus and Hermenegildo Pascual. The following
day seized by fear that the malefactors might do them some more harm,
they left their house in Ligsay and moved to Curarig, municipality of
Bacarra, Ilocos Norte, and on 5 October they went to seek the advice of
attorney Rabago on who brought them and their daughter Leandra to the P.
C. Headquarters and there signed affidavits recounting what happened to
them in their house at midnight of 22 September. These affidavits were
sworn to before the Justice of the Peace of Laoag and an information
for robbery with rape was filed against Hermenegildo Pascual, Ricardo
Corpus and Roman Nicolas. After trial the court found them guilty of
the complex crime charged, except Roman Nicolas who was found guilty of
robbery only and sentenced to suffer 4 years of prision correccional
to 8 years and 6 months of prision mayor, and Hermenegildo
Pascual and Ricardo Corpus sentenced to suffer reclusion perpetua,
and all the three defendants sentenced to pay jointly and severally an
indemnity of P26 and the costs. Only Hermenegildo Pascual and Ricardo
Corpus have appealed.

All the arguments and reasons advanced in support of this
appeal revolve around the point of improbability that the witnesses for
the prosecution had recognized the appellants. But there is no
improbability in their having been recognized by the victims because
even if there was no light in the sala and in the room of the house the
flashlight which Roman Nicolas held and used to locate Ciriaco Labrador
and the trunk reflected upon their faces. Besides, the appellants were
known to the inmates of the house. Hermenegildo Pascual had been to the
house of Ciriaco Labrador to buy carabao meat and Ricardo Corpus is
Ciriaco’s third degree nephew and as carpenter had helped build
Ciriaco’s house.

Going over the transcript of the oral testimony given by the
witnesses for the prosecution we noticed differences in some details,
but some of these were due to the fact that the questions were not
understood well and the answers were corrected after the questions were
understood and the other differences instead of being badges of
untruthfulness constitute signs of veracity. Witnesses react
differently on what they see and hear depending upon their situation and
state of mind. On the other hand, uniformity in details is a badge of
untruthfulness.

The alibi set up by the appellants cannot be believed.
Hermenegildo Pascual attempted to prove that on the night in question he
was with Dominga de la Cruz and slept with her in barrio No. 2 of
Laoag. But the testimony of Dominga de la Cruz cannot be relied upon
because she is a common prostitute and of low morals. She gave the
story that she had sexual intercourse three times with Hermenegildo
Pascual that evening in a room of 5-1/2 square meters of Alejandra
Asuncion where four other persons were sleeping. Ricardo Corpus
testified that he went to bed at 9:00 o’clock and slept until 4:00
o’clock in the morning in his house located on the west side of the
provincial high school at Laoag. To corroborate him Ricardo Corpus
presented as witness Juan Maximo, the barrio lieutenant of Ligsay. But
the testimony of Juan Maximo also cannot be believed. He testified that
he never had revealed to anyone what he was to testify in court, not
even to attorney Prieto who called him to the witness stand in the
morning of the 10th of January.

There is no evidence that a bolo, a plow, a scythe and a chisel
were taken by the appellants except the affidavit Exhibits 1 and 2 of
Ciriaco Labrador and Elisa Bagay, respectively. But such exhibits were
not presented in evidence by the prosecution but by counsel for
Hermenegildo Pascual for the purpose of impeaching the testimony of
Ciriaco Labrador and Elisa Bagay.

The commission of the crime was attended by the aggravating
circumstance of nocturnity purposely sought.

The judgment appealed from being in accordance with law is
affirmed, except as to the amount of indemnity which should be reduced
to P10 only, with costs against the appellants.

Paras, C. J., Pablo, Bengzon, Tuason, Montemayor, Reyes,
Jugo, Bautista Angelo and Labrador, JJ., concur.
Feria, J., no part.