PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELEE, VS. HUGO YLARDE Y DELA CRUZ, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.

This is an appeal from
the decision of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 38, Lingayen, Pangasinan, in
Criminal Case No. L-4340, finding appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of
rape (Article 335, Revised Penal Code) and sentencing him to suffer the penalty
of reclusion perpetua and to pay costs. The trial court also ordered appellant to pay P20,000.00 as moral
damages, without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency.

The information filed
against appellant reads as follows:

“That on or about the 30th day of June, 1990 in the afternoon (sic)
in the municipality of Tayug, province of Pangasinan, Republic of the
Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named
accused, with deliberate intent to perform lewd and lust desire did then and
there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously have carnal knowledge of Dessa
Castillo y Morden, a five (5) year old girl and who is under twelve years of
age, thereby forcibly have (sic) sexual intercourse with the said victim, to
the damage and prejudice of the said Dessa Castillo y Morden” (Rollo, p. 18).

At his arraignment, appellant pleaded not guilty and thereafter
trial ensued.

After trial, the court a quo found that on June 30,
1990, at about 2:00 P.M., Dessa Castillo, a five-year old girl, was playing
with several playmates in front of Farmacia Yanse at the public market of
Tayug, Pangasinan. Appellant, who was
then drunk, pulled Dessa and placed her on his lap. When Dessa told appellant that she wanted to urinate, appellant
brought her to the comfort room inside the public market (TSN, February 28,
1991, pp. 4-5).

When they were inside the
comfort room, appellant removed her panty. He then brought out his penis and inserted it into the victim’s vagina
while she was in a standing position. Dessa felt pain but no blood came out from her vagina. She wanted to shout but was ashamed to do so
(TSN, February 25, 1991, pp. 6-7, 12­-14).

Dessa told her mother, Vivina Castillo, what appellant did to
her. Vivina immediately confronted
appellant and haled him to the police station, where Pat. Alexander Sevidal and
Pat. Oscar Lopez conducted an investigation. Vivina then brought Dessa to the Eastern Pangasinan District Hospital,
where Dr. Eufracio Jovellanos conducted a medical examination. The medical findings were:

“1.     contusion on the left lateral labia minora
and there is swelling on that part of the vagina which is outside the vaginal
canal;

2.        
presence of small laceration near the left side of the
ureteral orifice which is near the vaginal canal;

3.        
no hymenal laceration noted;

4.        
vaginal orifice noted;

5.        
negative for presence of spermatozoa on microscopic
examination x x x” (Decision, p. 4; Rollo, p. 21).

The doctor testified that the contusion suffered by the victim
was probably caused by a blunt object, like a penis touching the vagina. Likewise, the laceration could have been
caused by a male organ (TSN, March 7, 1991, pp. 9-10).

Appellant denied the accusation against him and claimed that he
was on his way home when he saw Dessa fall from the table. He then helped her stand-up. However, when Dessa’s mother saw what he
did, she immediately cursed him and had him arrested by the police. It was only then that he learned he was being accused of raping Dessa
(TSN, March 5, 1991, pp. 6-7).

In this appeal,
appellant, interposes a lone assignment of error, to wit:

“THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN FINDING THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT HUGO YLARDE
GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT OF THE CRIME OF RAPE” (Appellant’s Brief, p. 4).

In support thereof, he contends that: (1) it was highly improbable that the rape would be committed
under such circumstances of time and place, which were at daytime and in a
public toilet; (2) it was highly inconceivable for appellant to have raped the
offended party while he was in a standing position for the latter is shorter
than him; and (3) that if he raped the victim, she should have shouted for help
(Appellant’s Brief, p. 5).

Appellant’s plea for acquittal rests on shaky grounds. It is not hard to believe that the incident
happened inside a public toilet for at that place (a small town) and that time
of day (2:00 P.M.) there were very few people near the area. Besides, rape can be committed even in
places where people congregate, or in places which to some, would appear to be
unlikely (People v. De los Reyes, 203 SCRA 707 [1991]).

The second point raised
by appellant is misleading. A careful perusal of the record does not
indicate the position of appellant when he inserted his penis into the
complainant’s vagina. What the record
disclosed was that it was the
offended party who was standing at that time. The victim testified that:

“Q.   You
said (sic) were raped by the accused inside the comfort room?

A.      Yes,
sir.

Q.     You
were made to lay (sic) down?

A.      No,
sir.

Q.     You
were standing?

A.      Yes,
sir” (TSN, February 25, 1991, pp. 13-14; Underlining supplied).

So, as correctly observed by the Solicitor General, appellant
could have lowered his body to enable him to insert his penis into the vagina
of the complainant while the latter was in a standing position.

Appellant’s allegation that complainant’s testimony is contrary
to human experience because of her failure to shout when she was sexually
abused, is untenable. The fact that
there was no outcry from the offended party is immaterial in the rape of a
child below twelve years of age (People v. Bacani, 181 SCRA 393 [1990]).

The elements of statutory rape as provided for in Article 335,
paragraph 3 of the Revised Penal Code are the following: (1) that the offender had carnal knowledge
of a woman; and (2) that such woman is under (12) years of age. All these elements are present and have been
established by the evidence.

What must be proven in
the crime of rape is merely the introduction
of the male organ into the labia of the pudendum and not the full
penetration of the complainant’s private part (People v. Castillo, 197 SCRA 657
[1991]). In this case, the
uncontroverted medical evidence clearly showed that indeed, there was an entry
of the sexual organ of the accused on the labia minora of the offended party.

The defense that appellant did not sexually molest the victim but
merely helped her when she fell from the table is, in effect, a denial. Denial, like alibi, is inherently a weak
defense and cannot prevail over the positive testimony of the witnesses that
the accused committed the crime (People v. Payumo, 187 SCRA 64 [1990]).

As correctly noted by the
trial court:

“It is a well-settled rule in this jurisdiction that this kind of
defense is weak and flimsy not only because it is easy to fabricate but
oftentimes comes from a biased and
polluted source. In order to be worthy
of credit and value, denial should be proven and established by strong, convincing, and credible evidence and that it should be conformable to reason,
logic and common sense, for there is no adequate test for the truth of human
testimony, except its conformity to human knowledge, logic and experience”
(Decision, p. 6; Rollo, p. 23).

In this case, an eye-witness, Susana Gonzales, positively
identified appellant as the one who brought the victim to the toilet. The victim also positively identified
appellant as the one who had carnal relations with her.

If appellant merely succored the victim when she allegedly fell
from a table, her mother, Vivina, would have been grateful to him for coming to
the aid of her daughter. Lastly, a
mother would not subject her child to a
public trial with its accompanying stigma on her as the victim of rape, if said
charge is not true (People v. Rio, 201 SCRA 702 [1991]).

The fact that appellant
did not flee from the crime scene does not negate his guilt for after learning
of the rape, the victim’s mother immediately accosted him and did not give an
opportunity to flee.

WHEREFORE, the decision appealed from is AFFIRMED in toto except with regard to the indemnity which should be increased to
P50,000.00 (People v. Alegado, 201 SCRA 37 [1991]).

SO ORDERED.

Cruz, (Chairman), Grino-Aquino, and
Bellosillo, JJ., concur.