PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. MARCELO PEREZ, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

People versus Perez

The Case

This is the appeal of Marcelo Perez, convicted of raping his sixteen-year-old sister-in-law in the early morning of 30 June 1998 in a town in Albay. The prosecution charged that he had carnal knowledge of the girl against her will and consent, through force, threat, and intimidation. The case matters to a reviewee because it gathers, in one decision, the settled rules on the credibility of a rape victim, the weight of medico-legal findings, the treatment of minor inconsistencies, and the damages that follow a conviction for simple rape.

Procedural History

The Regional Trial Court of Legazpi City, Branch 8, tried the case after the accused entered a plea of not guilty. On 24 August 2007, the trial court rendered judgment finding him guilty beyond reasonable doubt of rape and sentencing him to reclusion perpetua, with an order to pay the victim 50,000 pesos as civil indemnity and 50,000 pesos as moral damages. The accused filed a notice of appeal.

The Court of Appeals, in its decision of 8 July 2009, denied the appeal and affirmed the trial court's decision in its entirety. The case then reached the Supreme Court by appeal. The Court required the parties to submit supplemental briefs, but both manifested that they would merely adopt the briefs they had filed before the Court of Appeals.

Facts

At around four o'clock in the morning of 30 June 1998, the victim, sixteen years of age, was asleep in the family home when she was awakened by the accused, her brother-in-law, who dragged her to the bathroom outside the house. Inside, he covered her mouth with a piece of cloth, undressed himself, and undressed her. He placed his brief inside her mouth, forced her down, and inserted his penis into her vagina. He then slashed her wrist with a knife, and she lost consciousness.

She explained that she offered no resistance and did not shout for help because the accused had threatened to kill her and was holding a knife. When she regained consciousness, she found herself beside her mother. Her mother testified that she had been in Manila, that she was informed by telephone that her daughter had been raped, and that she and the victim went to the police station to report the incident. She saw the wound on her daughter's wrist and the brief that had been placed in her mouth.

A medico-legal officer examined the victim two days after the incident. His findings noted no abnormalities in the labia, no hymen seen, a normal-looking vaginal canal, and no lacerations. The accused never testified, and the defense rested without presenting any documentary or testimonial evidence.

Issues

• Whether or not the testimony of the victim, despite alleged incredulities and inconsistencies, is credible enough to sustain a conviction for rape.
• Whether or not the failure of the victim to shout for help or offer resistance negates the element of force or intimidation.
• Whether or not the absence of lacerations or signs of trauma in the medico-legal report prevents a finding of rape.
• Whether or not the penalty and the awards of damages were correctly imposed.

Applicable Provisions

Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code defines the crime and provides:

Article 266-A. Rape, When and How Committed. Rape is committed - 1. By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following: a. Through force, threat, or intimidation; b. When the offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; c. By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority; and d. When the offended party is under twelve (12) years of age or is demented, even though none of the circumstances mentioned above be present.

The Court used this provision to test whether carnal knowledge was accomplished through force, threat, or intimidation, which the prosecution established through the victim's own testimony.

Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code fixes the penalty, and the Court cited it in this wise:

Under Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code, rape under paragraph 1 of Article 266-A is punishable by reclusion perpetua.

This provision supplied the basis for affirming the penalty of reclusion perpetua imposed by the trial court.

Ruling

On the first issue, the Court affirmed the finding of guilt. In a prosecution for rape, the credibility of the victim is the single most important issue, and the trial court is in the best position to decide it because it heard the witnesses and observed their deportment. The Court found that the victim did not waver in identifying the accused and was straightforward and unequivocal in narrating the rape. The inconsistency on whether her mother was in the house at the time was immaterial, since her presence was not an essential element of rape, and the discrepancy could be attributed to the confusion of the moment.

On the second issue, the Court held that the failure to shout for help did not negate rape. The accused had threatened to kill the victim and was holding a knife, so she was cowed into silence and submission. The Court quoted her testimony that she had no courage to shout because he was already holding a knife.

On the third issue, the Court ruled that the medico-legal findings were merely corroborative and not an element of rape. A medical examination is not indispensable, and the victim's testimony alone, if credible, is sufficient to convict.

On the fourth issue, the Court affirmed the penalty of reclusion perpetua and the awards of 50,000 pesos as civil indemnity and 50,000 pesos as moral damages. Civil indemnity is mandatory when rape is committed, while moral damages are awarded without need of proof other than the fact of rape. The Court added an award of 30,000 pesos as exemplary damages, and imposed interest at six percent per annum on all damages from the finality of judgment until fully paid.

Doctrine

A Bar candidate should retain these rules. First, in rape, the credibility of the victim is the single most important issue, and when a woman says she was raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to show that rape was committed. Second, the failure of the victim to shout for help or resist does not negate rape when the accused employed threat or intimidation, as when he threatened to kill her and held a knife. Third, the absence of lacerations or trauma in the medico-legal report is not fatal, because medical findings are merely corroborative and the victim's credible testimony alone suffices to convict. Fourth, minor inconsistencies on trivial and immaterial matters, such as the presence of a family member at the scene, do not destroy credibility. Fifth, under Article 266-A, rape is committed by a man who has carnal knowledge of a woman through force, threat, or intimidation, and under Article 266-B it is punishable by reclusion perpetua. Sixth, a conviction for simple rape carries civil indemnity of 50,000 pesos, moral damages of 50,000 pesos, and exemplary damages of 30,000 pesos, with interest at six percent per annum from finality of judgment.

Disposition

The Court affirmed the conviction of Marcelo Perez for rape and the penalty of reclusion perpetua, modifying the judgment only to add 30,000 pesos in exemplary damages and interest at six percent per annum on all damages from finality of judgment until fully paid.

Remember This

The line worth memorizing is that when a woman says she was raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to show that rape was committed, and her credible testimony alone can convict. Examiners use this case to test the weight of medico-legal findings, the effect of a victim's failure to resist, and the correct damages for simple rape.