G.R. No. L-40436. May 25, 1984
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. ARTURO TALARO, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
DE CASTRO, J.:
former Court of First Instance of Ilocos Norte (laoag City), Arturo
Talaro y Hernandez appealed the sentence of conviction.
For its accuracy, the statement of facts in the decision of the lower
court was quoted as its counter-statement of facts by the Government,
and which for the purpose of this decision, may as well also be quoted:
“It appears from the evidence of the prosecution that complaining
witness Aida Ines, aged 16 and an honor student, was sometime in the
evening of March 22, 1969, an usherette in an operetta presentation at
St. Jude High School in Pagudpud, Ilocos Norte, where she was in the
second year; that the program having ended at about 11:00 p.m., she went
to look for her cousin Marcos Leonador who promised to accompany her
home to Canait, a barrio of Pagudpud, more than a kilometer away; that
unable to locate Marcos, she met accused Arturo Talaro who inquired who
she was looking for and she told him her predicament; that Arturo then
asked who was to accompany her, and Aida having answered no one Arturo
volunteered to accompany her home which Aida accepted because he was a
second degree cousin; that the two proceeded home with Salvacion Rabi, a
friend of Aida and a small boy named Miguel de los Reyes but Salvacion
and Miguel who lived in the poblacion and were neighbors dropped at
their respective houses while Aida whose house was still one (1)
kilometer away proceeded to the barrio road with Arturo; that while thus
walking on the road, Arturo suddenly placed his right hand at the mouth
of Aida and tried to lift her from behind with his left hand above her
waist and dragged her to about six (6) meters to the eastern part of the
road; that Aida cried aloud: ‘My father, my mother, come and help me,’
and tried to free herself by moving her body from his hold, that Arturo
unsheathed his imoco (small sharp pointed bolo) and pointed it at her
and wanted Aida to lie down saying: “Vulva of your mother, if you do not
like I am going to thrust you”; that then Aida fell to the ground while
struggling and Arturo removed her skirt, Exh. A, which was torn when
she was running on the thick thorny bushes and became soiled and dirty
in the struggle; that she also had a coat on, Exh. B, which became dirty
when she rolled in the struggle; that also she had a pantilet, Exh. C,
which got dirty also when she struggled; also a pantie, Exh. G, which
Arturo tried to remove when he removed the pantilet but he did not
succeed in doing so because she pulled it back; that it was on when
Arturo had sexual intercourse with her and she only removed it after the
incident; she had on also a pair of shoes, Exhs. D and D-1, black and
low-heeled, Exh. D being the left the right side of which is torn
because of the struggle; she had also stockings which were removed,
Exhs. E and E-1, flesh color, seamless with garters, 2 feet and 6 inches
from toe to upper portion with a tear on the toe of Exh. E which was
rubbed against the ground when she struggled; also she had a necktie on,
Exh. F; that after the blouse and pantie were removed by Arturo, Aida
ran away but bumped a tree on her left temple and she fell so Arturo
held her again but she bit him on the shoulder and Talaro again
unsheathed his bolo at which Talaro said: “Vulva of your mother, if you
don’t like I will kill you,” and kissed her many times on the face, neck
and nape but Aida again succeeded in running to the field and stumbled
several times and Arturo was able to get hold of her again, embraced
her, kissed her several times and forced her to lie down; that when Aida
was able to get hold of the imoco of Arturo which was at his back and
she threw it away; that then Arturo went on top of Aida but she released
herself at which Arturo boxed her at the solar plexus with his right
hand and she fell to the ground and lost consciousness; that when she
regained consciousness, the penis of Arturo was inside her vagina and
moving his buttocks up and down for about one (1) minute after which he
sat down and took hold of Aida’s hand who was lying on her left side;
that Aida tried to stand up but Arturo forced her down and took her ring
from her left hand and said; “I will take this,” at which Aida
retorted: “Don’t take it, you robber, you illmannered”; that Aida
pleaded to Arturo to return her ring but he said he did not like; that
then she appeared good to him and cried and asked him to gather her
clothes and the moment he did so Aida ran away towards their house about
100 meters away and reported the matter to her parents; that she
arrived home with no shoes, no blouse, no stockings, her shirt was torn
and wet, her hair dishevelled and crying; that her father who was very
angry wanted to look for Talaro so Jesus Ines, Aida’s brother, went to
the scene of the crime forthwith, gathered the garments and shoes of
Aida which were scattered near the balete tree and proceeded to report
the incident to the chief of police of Pagudpud at 4:00 in the morning;
that upon receiving this report, the chief of police and companions,
accompanied by Jesus, went to the place of the incident and there as
indicated by Jesus, they found the garments and shoes of Aida arranged;
that the party proceeded to the house of Aida and interviewed her at
which she reported to the chief that she was raped by accused Talaro;
that that same morning, Aida went to the Provincial Hospital at Laoag
City where she was examined by Dr. Domingo Samonte who issued a
medico-legal certificate on his findings, Exh. I, who testified to and
confirmed the same, as follows:“I. Physical Examination:
a. Abrasions linear forearm right, lateral aspect; abdomen right side, thigh lower third, right side anterior aspect.
b. Multiple abrasions linear, knee left, punctate abrasions, knee right; linear abrasion left anterior aspect.
II. Vaginal Examination:
– the presence of enormous pubic hair especially at the symphysis pubes.
– labia majora and minora are well coaplated.
– presence of hymenal laceration at five o’clock corresponding to
the point of the clock, with moderate amount of bleeding from the
laceration.– Vagina admits one finger easily.
III. Breast show them to be conical in shape, well formed, nippled cuboid shape and the areola is not prominent.
IV. Examination for Spermatoza – positive (four pluses).
V. Conclusion: Presence of hymenal laceration fresh in nature
show indication of penetration. The presence of spermatozoa in enormous
amount (four pluses) show consummation of act.” (pp. 182-187, Rec.).[1]
The sexual intercourse is not disputed by appellant, but he denies
having raped complainant whom he alleged to be his sweetheart and
therefore consented to the sexual act. To prove the relationship, he
presented her ring[2] which
he alleged was given to him by complainant as a token; in return for
which, he gave her a dagger. He also alleged previous acts of
intercourse, on February 1969 in his house, which was repeated around
12:00 midnight after a Valentine’s dance under the balete tree about 6
meters away from complainant’s house, when they came the Poblacion. The
sexual intercourse in question was performed in the same balete tree,
that is, on March 22, 1969 after an affair in the night held at St. Jude
High School which he attended upon complainant’s invitation. They
walked home together. While on the way, they agreed to have intercourse
under the balete tree which they did. Because after the act, somebody
flashed his flashlight towards where they were, each of them ran towards
his or her respective home. Appellant thus denies having used force or
intimidation in any of the sexual intercourse he had had with
complainant.
Appellant presented Adriano Tangco as the person who flashed a
flashlight in the place where the trysting lovers had carnal relations
for he was then looking for his lost carabao.
Complainant denied appellant’s claim of being his sweetheart, or having
invited him to the St. Jude affair. If appellant was to escort her home,
she would not have left the school premises looking for her cousin,
Marcos Leonador, who was really the one to escort her home. She would
have just waited for appellant inside the school premises if he was
invited and was to escort her home as was supposedly the understanding.
Appellant also argues that if he was not complainant’s sweetheart, the
latter should not have consented to take the longer route to her home,
or would have slept with her friend Salvacion Rabi considering having to
pass through thick bushes. The garments and other belongings of
complainant were well arranged under the balete tree would tend to show
that the injuries sustained by her were not inflicted by him but were
caused by the thick bushes she ran through when she sensed the presence
of someone around. Appellant further contended that complainant ran
towards home without her garments and shoes to avoid the hatred of her
parents and brothers.
Complainant did not spend the night with her friend Salvacion Rabi
because she assured her parents she was going home that night. They
would be worried if she did not go home, so she braved the darkness of
the night and went with appellant whom she considered as a relative. She
also preferred to take the longer way to avoid the thick bushes and
trees, it already being late and dark, and that at any rate, she thought
she had a gentleman for a companion. Her brother was sick then.
The garments and other belongings of complainant were well-arranged
because complainant’s brother Jesus Ines had arranged them when he went
to the balete tree before going to the police to report the incident.
The established facts negate a consented carnal relation that night of
record. Complainant upon reaching home, and leaving behind some of her
clothing items at the place of her harrowing experience told her parents
what appellant did to her. Before going home, she would have dressed
herself up as she was in a smart usherette uniform to avoid any
suspicion that she was the victim of a forced copulation. Instead, the
matter was reported to the police, and she subjected herself to a
physical and medical examination the result of which was positive not
only for copulation but with marks of violence. It is naive for
appellant to say that he let Aida run away in the darkness of the night
through the bushes and in the rice paddies to avoid the possibility that
they would be found copulating. As the lower court said, the discovery
would be more likely than if the two just stayed together silently, as
that is what appellant would have done to stay by his sweetheart and
walk together as if nothing happened, if the tryst was previously agreed
upon. It becomes evident that if complainant ran away, it was to free
herself from her attacker and get away from him, instead of to avoid
being suspected having committed an indiscretion. For in her condition,
on being seen by her parents, the latter would not only suspect
indiscretion on her part, but be convinced of it. For what else would be
suggested by the fact that she arrived home not only breathless because
she ran all the way and in extreme fear, but without shoes and
stockings, blouse, pantilet and tie also missing, and her other garments
wet and dirty, her hair dishevelled?
When a barrio girl told her parents a story of forced copulation, her
very first in her youthfulness, allow herself to be examined in her
private parts just after the harrowing experience, and later to be the
object of curiosity and cynosure of all eyes in a public trial, she is
motivated in doing all these acts to bring the culprit to justice, which
she never would do to a sweetheart to whom she has given her ring as a
token of her love, and for which she was given in exchange a dagger, a
very unique symbol of love, as is the incredible story of appellant in
his defense.[3]
WHEREFORE, the judgment appealed from being in accordance with law and
the evidence, except the amount of moral damages which should be raised
from P10,000 to P20,000 is hereby affirmed with costs.
SO ORDERED.
Makasiar, (Chairman), Aquino, Guerrero, Abad Santos, and Escolin, JJ., concur.
Concepcion, Jr., J., on leave.
[1] pp. 2-5, Appellee’s Brief, p. 34, Rollo.
[2] Exh. 2, p. 6, Decision.
[3] People vs. Federico Beso
Jr., 117 SCRA 299, 308 citing People vs. Gan, 46 SCRA 667, People vs.
Francisquite, 56 SCRA 764, and People vs. Baylon, 57 SCRA 114.