PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. PONCIANO OYDOC, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

This is an appeal from the decision of the Court of First Instance
of Baguio and Benguet,
Branch III, at La Trinidad, Benguet, finding
appellant Ponciano Oydoc guilty
beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape and sentencing him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua, and to indemnify the offended party Jane Oydoc alias Jane Bangyod, the sum
of TWELVE THOUSAND (P12,000.00) PESOS, and to pay the costs.

In a criminal complaint filed by complainant and offended party
Jane Oydoc alias Jane Bangyod,
dated June 18, 1979,
appellant Ponciano Oydoc
was charged with the crime of rape, as follows:

xxx                xxx                   xxx

“That on or about the 28th day of April, 1979, at Sangilo Mines, Municipality
of Itogon, Province of Benguet,
Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Hono­rable Court, the said
accused by means of force and intimidation, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully, and feloniously have a carnal
knowledge with the undersigned complainant and offended party, against her will.”

When arraigned on October
25, 1979, the accused-appellant entered a plea of not guilty. After
due hearing, the trial court rendered the above-mentioned decision.

The prosecution’s evidence which the lower court relied upon to
make its finding of guilt beyond reasonable doubt is narrated in the People’s
brief, as follows:

“Complainant Jane Bangyod also known
as Jane Oydoc resided with her mother, Emilia Oydoc, and stepfather, Ponciano Oydoc (herein appellant)
at Sangilo Mines, Pico, La Trinidad. Appellant was
the first cousin of complainant’s father, the late Mauricio Bangyod. Their mothers were sisters. Complainant and the spouses Oydoc stay in one room of a bunkhouse (tsn., pp. 6-8, 19-20, 36, June 17, 1980; tsn.,
pp. 57, 64-65, September 11, 1980;
tsn., p. 107, February
26, 1981).

“At around 10:00 o’clock
in the morning of April 28, 1979,
the then 14-year old complainant happened to be alone with appellant and a
one-year old brother in the house. Her mother was on a business trip to Lepanto, Mankayan while her
one-year old brother was in deep slumber. Their neighbor at the left portion of
the bunkhouse, Roberto Colpe, was on vacation in Nueva Ecija (tsn., pp. 8-9, 17, 19-21, 36, July 17, 1980). Complainant was washing clothes at that
time. She went inside their house to get more clothes to wash. Appellant,
scantily clad in his brief, pulled her to the bed. Then he unceremoniously laid
her down the bed, with her face up (tsn., pp. 8-9; 30, July
17, 1980). Complainant screamed for help only to find herself
silenced by his right hand over her mouth. Appellant unzipped her brown pants (tsn., pp.
10-11, 25, July 17, 1980).
Complainant struggled and held on to her pants but appellant brought out a more or less foot long knife and thrust it at the upper portion of
her breast. Then he forcibly pulled her pants down, tearing the seams thereof
(Exhibits “A”, “A-1” to “A-2”; tsn., pp. 11-15, July 17, 1980; tsn.,
pp. 75-76, November 19, 1980) and divested complainant of her panty (tsn., pp. 12-13, Ibid). Complainant struggled but appellant
menacingly poked the knife on her heart. She shuddered in horror. She was not
able to shout or make a sound. Her efforts to move and shout were futile.
Appellant had his legs in between the eagle-spread legs of complainant. While
on top of her, both hands of the victim were pressed down at the back while the
forearms were held by the left hand and the right hand was pressed down by the
right hand of the accused, holding the knife (tsn., 11. 13, 31, Ibid). Appellant pulled his brief down
and inserted his hardened penis inside the vagina of complainant (tsn., pp.
29-32, Ibid). Thus, he succeeded in consummating his carnal desires on her (tsn., p.
29, Ibid). After satisfying his bestial instincts, appellant threatened to kill
her and all her brothers and sisters should she tell her mother of what had
happened to her. Thereafter, he hurriedly left (tsn., pp. 41-42, Ibid; tsn., pp. 74-75, November 19, 1980). Complainant felt pain
in her private organ and saw blood flowing there­from.
She touched her vagina and her hand was smeared with blood (tsn., p. 16, July 17, 1980).
She picked up her brown pants and wiped her vagina with it. She saw the whitish
substance therein which she believed to be appellant’s semen (tsn., p.
15, July 17, 1980).

“Appellant had earlier ravished her twice on different
occasions. The first time was when her mother went to Baguio
to buy food stuffs while the second tine was when she went to the Kaingin (tsn., p. 39, July 17,
1980). She tried to divulge to her mother everything appellant did but she
never had the chance. Appellant was continuously watching her. His threat of
death to her and other members of the family stilled her tongue (tsn., pp.
40-42, July 17, 1980).

“It was only on May 1, 1979 or 2 days later, after appellant
left for work that complainant took the chance to see her aunt, Marciana Luken, at Acupan, Itogon and confided to her and Erlinda
Dicang that appellant had raped her thrice. It took
her sometime from the first sexual assault to reveal the outrage because of the
continuing threat made by appellant. Everyday, since the first sexual abuse,
appellant threat­ened to kill
her. In fact, complainant became virtually a prisoner in their own house.
Appellant did not even allow her to go out nor to go to school for apprehension that she might reveal his
dastardly crime to other people.
Complainant was in the sixth grade then (tsn., pp.
24, 38-42, July 17, 1980, tsn., pp. 51-52, 63,
September 11, 1980; tsn., pp. 70 & 73, November
19, 1980). With complainant, Marciana Luken and Erlinda Dicang immediately proceeded to Baguio
City and consulted a relative. There was a family council presided over by
complainant’s grandfather at Sabangan and they
reached the consensus to file a criminal complaint against appellant because
‘what he did was wrong.’ Even appellant’s own father agreed to the filing of
criminal charges for rape against him (tsn., pp. 53,
65-66, September 11, 1980; tsn., p. 70, November 19,
1980). They reported the incident to the police authorities at Binanga and their sworn statements were taken down.
Complainant signed a complaint for rape against appellant (Exhibits
“B” & “C”; tsn., pp. 46-47,
53-55, September 11, 1980). Accompanied by Engracia Dongael, complainant went to the Baguio
General Hospital and had herself medically examined by Dr. Anecito
Macam (tsn., p. 21, July
17, 1980; Exhibit “D”; tsn., pp. 70-71,
November 19, 1980; tsn., pp. 84-85, January 15,
1981). The examining physician found that there were ‘old healed lacerations’
in her vagina at the one, five, nine and eleven o’clock positions. Her tight
vagina admitted the examiner’s one finger. The doctor concluded that
complainant had lost her virginity more than ten (10) days before the
examination (tsn., pp. 85-86, 89-90, January 15,
1981).”

The accused-appellant raised the following assignment of error in this appeal:

THE COURT A QUO GRAVELY ERRED IN CONVICTING
ACCUSED OF THE CRIME OF RAPE
CONSIDERING THE PRESENCE OF THE ELEMENT OF CONSENT.

The appellant admits having had carnal know­ledge of the offended
party thrice sometime in March and April, 1979 but denies using force. According
to him, the complainant consented to his
proposal to sleep with him and perform sexual intercourse. He cites the following circumstances to support his contention that there
was consent:

“1. The
non-prosecution of the accused for the first two acts of sexual intercourse
commit­ted by him against the aggrieved party. This circumstance gives rise to
the assumption that the investigating officers found no probable cause or prima
facie evidence to the commission of the crime of rape from previous acts of sexual
intercourse, which casts rea­sonable doubt as to the veracity of the existence
of force as an element of rape in the subse­quent third sexual intercourse.

“2. The failure
of the aggrieved party in telling her mother about the three sexual inter­course
committed within the span of two months. The normal conduct or behaviour and reaction of a child who suffered injury is to
run immediately to the mother for comfort and help.

“3. The choice
of the aggrieved party to confess the incident to her aunts instead of her
mother with whom she lives is doubtful. This is an in­dication of a feeling of
guilt and shame for having illicit relation with her mother’s husband such that
her shame made her turn to her aunts in remorse, probably just to discontinue
or refrain from further relations with her stepfather.

“4. The
supplanted narration by the aggrieved party of the use by the accused of a
knife which was absent in her original affidavit or statement. Logic suggests
the explanation that the aggrieved party had been subsequently coached by
knowledgeable persons who realized that her original statement did not contain
an averment of sufficient force used by the accused in order to satisfy the
requirement to sustain a conviction for rape.

“5. The
fabrication of evidence in the form of torn pants with false semen
stains.”

With respect to the first contention of the appellant, we agree
with the Solicitor-General that the non-prosecution of the two previous sexual
assaults committed against the complainant does not affect her credibility.
Said circumstance instead remonstrates the sexual perversity of the appellant.
The error committed by police officers relative to the number of charges to be
instituted against him is not attributable to the complainant.

Regarding the second and third theories presented by the
appellant, the Solicitor-General maintains that the victim did not reveal first
to her mother the grievous outrage committed against her because she was afraid
that appellant would make good his threat to kill her and members of their
family. There is the circumstance that the appellant is the complainant’s
stepfather. Jane Oydoc, only 14 years old had special
problems reporting to her mother, the rape and the threats of the latter’s own
husband. The threats were made everyday from the first sexual assault.
Furthermore, the appellant kept her closely guarded that she never had the
opportunity of talking with her mother. She was not allowed to leave the
bunkhouse nor go to school. It was only when the appellant left for the mines
that the complainant was emboldened to go to Acupan, Itogon and report the outrage committed against her.

One should not expect a fourteen-year old girl to act like an
adult or mature and experienced woman who would know what to do under such difficult
circumstances and who would have the courage and intel­ligence to disregard a
threat on her life and the members of her family and complain immediately that
she had been forcibly deflowered. It is not uncommon for young girls to conceal
for sometime the assaults on their
virtue because of the rapists’ threat on their lives, more so when the rapist
is the child’s own stepfather living with her.

Concerning the fourth argument of the appellant, that the complainant
testified that when she was holding on to her parts, the appellant brought out
a knife and poked the same on her breast but she did not say so in her original
affidavit, we see no error in the lower court’s appreciating the testi­mony
given before it. By their very nature, there can be no exact congruence between
the affidavit in support of the complaint for rape and the testi­mony given
during the trial on the merits. The latter is necessarily more extensive
because the witness is exposed to questions propounded not only in direct but
also in cross-examination and by the court as well. The complainant appended an
expla­nation as to why the police investigator omitted the portion about a
knife. The affidavit was prepared in English not in the dialect with which the
com­plainant is well-versed and acquainted. Generally, an affidavit is not
prepared by the affiant himself and could contain certain inaccuracies in the
typist’s or interrogator’s interpretations of the affiant’s declarations.

As to the negative findings of the crime laboratory relative to
the stains in the complainant’s torn brown pants submitted for examination, the
Solicitor-General argues that the absence of spermatozoa in the stains found on
the pants submitted for chemical analysis after the lapse of time from the date
of the rape is no obstacle to hold that rape has been com­mitted because it is
of judicial notice that sper­matozoa have one of the shortest spans of life
among living things.

We find the stand of the Solicitor-General to be well-taken. We
find no reason from the records and the appellant’s arguments to reverse the
trial court’s factual findings and its appreciation of the credibi­lity of
witnesses. Appellant’s contention of consent is unworthy of credence. He failed
to give convincing evidence of amorous relationships between him and the
complainant as to lead her to have voluntary sexual intercourse with her own
stepfather who is inciden­tally a first cousin of her late father. (People v. Beso, Jr., 117 SCRA
299). The complainant’s failure to
disclose to her mother the details of her defoliation should be viewed in the
light of the mental shock and trauma that must have overwhelmed her. (People
v. Santos, 94 SCRA 277).

Furthermore, the complainant, a young girl who was still
possessed of the traditional and proverbial modesty of the Filipina, would not
have filed a complaint for rape
and suffered the torment if not the
ignominy of having to testify in a court of justice about the wrong done to her
by her stepfather, if in truth she was not really raped. (People v. Sacabin, 57 SCRA 707; People v. Ignacio, 60 SCRA 11; People
v. Tejada, 107 SCRA 176; People v. Tampus, 88 SCRA 217).

The lone assignment of
error which is premised on consent has no merit.

WHEREFORE, the trial court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

SO ORDERED.

Teehankee, (Chairman), Melencio-Herrera, Plana, and Relova, JJ., concur.