PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. JESUS PARAGAS CRUZ, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.

People versus Cruz

The Case

This is the People of the Philippines against Jesus Paragas Cruz, a criminal appeal from a conviction for statutory rape — rape committed against a child below twelve years of age. The accused was charged with having carnal knowledge of a nine-year-old girl by means of force and intimidation. The case matters to the reviewee because it gathers, in one decision, the working rules on the credibility of a child complainant, the requisites of statutory rape, the defense of impotence, the defense of alibi, and the civil liability that follows conviction. It is a compact review of the evidentiary framework that governs rape prosecutions.

Procedural History

The Regional Trial Court of Parañaque City, Branch 259, tried the case and found Cruz guilty beyond reasonable doubt. It sentenced him to reclusion perpetua and ordered him to pay one hundred thousand pesos as actual and moral damages. Cruz filed a notice of appeal. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction but modified the awards, ordering fifty thousand pesos as civil indemnity, fifty thousand pesos as moral damages, and twenty-five thousand pesos as exemplary damages, and deleting the one hundred thousand peso award. The case then reached the Supreme Court by appeal. The Court required supplemental briefs, but the parties manifested their willingness to submit the case on the records already submitted.

Facts

On the afternoon of June 6, 1998, the victim, a nine-year-old girl, was at home watching television with her cousin. When the cousin left, Cruz entered the house, turned off the television, closed the windows, and told the child to remove her shorts. He kissed her, touched her private parts, and inserted his penis into her vagina. She felt pain but did nothing because she was afraid. Cruz threatened to kill her if she reported what happened, then left hurriedly.

Terrified that Cruz would return and kill her, the child kept the rape a secret for a few months before finally telling her mother. The mother informed Cruz's wife, then brought her daughter to the barangay hall and to the police station. A medical examination showed two healed hymenal lacerations.

Cruz denied the charge and claimed alibi. He said he was in Multinational Village, Parañaque City, conducting a land survey with a companion from about eleven in the morning until about five-thirty in the afternoon. He also claimed that he had been sexually impotent since 1995, and he pointed to a land dispute with the victim's family as a possible motive for a fabricated charge. His wife testified that they seldom had sexual intercourse after 1995 because of his condition, and a doctor diagnosed him with erectile dysfunction in 2001.

Issues

• Whether or not the hymenal lacerations of the victim could have been caused by a non-sexual act, and whether this raises reasonable doubt as to the rape.
• Whether or not the accused's erectile dysfunction made it impossible for him to commit the rape.
• Whether or not the defense of alibi, corroborated by other witnesses, deserves more weight than the prosecution's evidence.
• Whether or not the awards of damages were proper.

Applicable Provisions

Paragraph 1 of Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act Number 8353, defines rape and provides:

Rape is committed by a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances: 1) Through force, threat, or intimidation; 2) When the offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; 3) By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority; and 4) When the offended party is under twelve years of age or is demented, even though none of the circumstances mentioned above be present.

This provision supplies the elements of statutory rape: carnal knowledge of a woman who is under twelve years of age, even without force, threat, or intimidation.

Ruling

On the first issue, the Court held that the claim of a non-sexual cause of the lacerations is distinctly speculative and does not cast doubt on the fact of rape. Proof of hymenal laceration is not even an element of rape, so long as there is sufficient proof of entry of the male organ into the labia of the pudendum. The Court found the victim's testimony credible, straightforward, and categorical in identifying Cruz, and it respected the trial court's findings on the candor and demeanor of witnesses, especially as these were sustained by the Court of Appeals.

On the second issue, the Court held that impotence as a defense is both a physical and a medical question that must be satisfactorily established with the aid of expert and competent testimony, and must be proved with certainty to overcome the presumption in favor of potency. The diagnosis in 2001 came three years after the 1998 rape, so it could not establish impotence at the time of the crime. The Court added that even assuming impotence since 1995, this would not discount the possibility of erection aided by medication, and that the wife's testimony of infrequent intercourse actually contradicted the claim of total impossibility.

On the third issue, the Court held that alibi must establish the physical impossibility of the accused to be present at the scene of the crime at the time of its commission. The corroborating testimonies did not show such impossibility, since Cruz was in the same city as the victim and could easily have committed the rape.

On the fourth issue, the Court held that civil indemnity of fifty thousand pesos and moral damages of fifty thousand pesos are automatically granted in rape cases without need of proof other than the commission of the crime. Exemplary damages were properly awarded by way of public example and to protect the young from sexual predators, and the Court increased them to thirty thousand pesos in accordance with prevailing jurisprudence.

Doctrine

A conviction for rape may rest solely on the credible, natural, convincing, and consistent testimony of the complainant. In statutory rape, the essential elements are carnal knowledge of a woman and that she is below twelve years of age; sexual congress with a girl under twelve is always rape. Proof of hymenal laceration is not an element of rape, so long as entry of the male organ into the labia of the pudendum is shown. Impotence as a defense must be proved with certainty through expert testimony and must relate to the time of the crime, because the law presumes potency. Alibi requires proof of physical impossibility of presence at the scene. Civil indemnity and moral damages are awarded automatically upon conviction for rape, and exemplary damages may be imposed to protect the young from sexual predators.

Disposition

The appeal was denied. The Court of Appeals decision finding Cruz guilty of statutory rape was affirmed, with the modification that the award of exemplary damages was increased to thirty thousand pesos.

Remember This

Memorize the line that proof of hymenal laceration is not an element of rape so long as entry is shown, and that impotence must be proved with certainty as of the time of the crime. Examiners use this case to test the requisites of statutory rape, the standards for the defenses of impotence and alibi, and the automatic award of civil indemnity and moral damages.