PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. ERNESTO VILLANUEVA, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.

This is an appeal of the accused, Ernesto Villanueva, from the
decision dated February 20, 1990 of the Regional Trial Court of Tabaco, Albay,
Branch 15, which found him guilty of rape against the person of Esperanza
Mayor.

As gathered from the records of the case, the facts are as
follows:

On July 30, 1988, at about 9:00 o’clock in the morning, Esperanza
Mayor was gathering firewood in the land of Basilia Casim in Barangay Comun,
Municipality of Malinao, Albay. She
found a coconut on the ground and was trying to unhusk it with her bolo when
suddenly, she heard the accused, Ernesto Villanueva, saying in their native
dialect: “It is good that you are
around because I was looking for you for sometime now and I have something to
do with you” (p. 18, Rollo). The
accused, who was brandishing a bolo, grabbed her by her wrists forcing her to
drop her bolo. He warned her not to
shout or he would kill her. He dragged
her a short distance away and forced her to lie down. The complainant struggled to free herself, but the accused, who
was stronger than her, prevailed. He
pulled down her skirt and panty and thereafter removed his short pants. He lay on top of her and had sexual
intercourse with her. After having
satisfied his lust, the accused got up and warned the complainant not to report
the incident to anyone otherwise harm would befall her family (pp. 8-17, tsn,
May 23, 1989).

Sometime later, in August 1988, the complainant’s husband asked
her to go to the place of the incident to get some vegetables, but she refused
saying that she would not dare go there alone because she did not want the same
incident which befell her in July to happen again. She was thus forced to reveal to her husband the sexual assault
which the accused had committed against her. When her husband learned of it, he was furious and beat her up which
caused her to be hospitalized at the Ziga Memorial Hospital for four (4) days.

The complainant’s family thereafter
moved to San Ramon, Tabaco, Albay. After they had settled in Tabaco, the complainant and her husband were
able to muster enough courage to report to
the police at Malinao, Albay the crime that had been committed against
Esperanza (pp. 23-28, tsn, May 23, 1989).

Appellant was charged with the crime of rape in the following
Information:

“That on or about the 30th day of July 1988, at about 9:00
AM., more or less, in Barangay Comun, municipality of Malinao, province of
Albay, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court,
above-named accused with lewd design and by means of force, violence and
intimidation, while armed with a bolo, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully
and feloniously, take hold the both hands of the herein complainant ESPERANZA
MAYOR and drag her on a grassy place, then threaten her not to shout or else
accused will kill her then forcibly take off her skirt and panty then forced
her to lay down on the grassy place then lay on top of her and forcibly insert
his sexual organ to her vagina and succeeded in having carnal knowledge against
her will and consent and to the damage and prejudice of the herein complainant
to be determined by this Honorable Court.” (p. 7, Rollo.)

Upon arraignment, on April 12, 1989, appellant entered a plea of
not guilty.

After due trial, the lower court found him guilty as
charged. The dispositive portion of the
court’s decision dated February 20, 1990, reads:

“WHEREFORE, in view of
all the foregoing, judgment is hereby rendered finding the accused Ernesto Villanueva
guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of RAPE, and sentencing him to
suffer the penalty of RECLUSION PERPETUA with the accessory penalties provided by law thereof.

“Said accused is further ordered to pay private complainant
Esperanza Mayor the total sum of THIRTY THOUSAND PESOS (P30,000.00) as actual,
moral and exemplary damages and finally to pay the costs hereof.” (p. 29, Rollo.)

Hence, this appeal by the accused, in which he alleges that:

“The trial court
committed grave error in not finding that the prosecution was not able to
establish the guilt of the accused-appellant beyond reasonable
doubt.” (p. 55, Rollo.)

The appeal has no merit.

Rape is a crime which is not normally committed in the presence
of witnesses, hence, courts merely rely on the credibility of the complainant’s
testimony when weighed against that of the accused (People vs. Barranco, 177
SCRA 103).

In the case at bar, we find the complainant’s testimony more
credible than that of the appellant. Appellant’s claim that the manner by which the offended woman was
allegedly raped defies human experience is not meritorious. The appellant based this argument on the victim’s declaration that while
the appellant lay on top of her, holding with his right hand the victim’s right
hand, the appellant at the same time went through the motions of removing the
victim’s skirt and panty and thereafter removed his pants and his underwear.

We do not find that testimony incredible for as found by the
trial court, the appellant is a “husky male of hefty built (sic) and quite
taller and stronger than the victim who is of ordinary built (sic) and
height” (p. 24, Rollo). Being
obviously stronger than his victim, it was not impossible for the accused to
perform the sexual act in the manner narrated by the complainant.

The Court does not agree with the appellant’s contention that
complainant’s conduct during and after the alleged rape was not consistent with
normal human behavior.

While it is true that the complainant was in possession of a
1-1/2-foot-long bolo when the appellant surprised her, the weapon fell from her
hand when the appellant grabbed her wrists (p. 19, tsn, May 23, 1989). Having lost her weapon, she could not use it
to defend her honor.

The silence of the complainant after the rape, and her family’s
departure from Malinao after she disclosed the outrage to her spouse, were not
inconsistent with normal human behavior, for the shock of being so victimized
and her awareness of her husband’s violent temper (as he did react violently
when she disclosed the crime to him) and the appellant’s threats against her
and her family, naturally restrained her from immediately reporting the crime
to the authorities and impelled her and her husband to move to another
municipality before taking action against the appellant.

That the complainant was mauled by her husband when he learned of
the incident was irrational but not an unnatural
human reaction. In one case, this Court
held that the anger of the rape victim’s father at his daughter when he was
told about the rape, did not negate the commission of the offense. People act irrationally under shocking
circumstances (People vs. Malabad, 133 SCRA 392).

The victim’s delay
in reporting the rape to her husband was due to appellant’s threat that he
would harm her family if she revealed the incident to anyone. The victim’s husband testified that they let
some days pass before reporting the matter to the police in order that they
could first leave Barrio Comun (the place of the incident) and move to San
Ramon, Tabaco, Albay, because they were afraid of the appellant’s threats (pp.
6-7, tsn, May 31, 1989).

It has been held by this Court that the victim’s delay in
reporting the rape, due to death threats made by the accused, should not be
taken against the victim (People vs. Lucas, 181 SCRA 316).

Appellant maintains that the complainant had an ulterior motive
in falsely charging him with rape because he caught her taking coconuts from
his plantation. However, it appears
highly unthinkable for a married woman to concoct a false charge of rape and
prefer to be exposed to the embarrassment and humiliation of a public trial for
rape, if such were not the truth. Complainant would not risk ruining her future and exposing herself and
her family to ridicule if her charges were not true (People vs. Cariño, Sr.,
167 SCRA 285).

Appellant’s alibi cannot save him. For this defense to prosper, he must prove that he was at a place
so far removed from Barangay Comun that it was physically impossible for him to
have been at the scene of the crime when the same was committed (People vs.
Hortillano, 177 SCRA 729). The trial
court observed in this case that the mountain of Ogob, Malinao, Albay where the
accused, with four others, was supposedly stripping abaca when the complainant
was raped, is only four (4) kilometers distant, or less than two (2) hours walk
away from the scene of the crime (p. 138, Rollo). Therefore, it was not physically impossible for him to have
committed it.

IN VIEW OF ALL
THE FOREGOING, we find no reversible error in the appealed decision, hence,
hereby AFFIRM it in toto, with costs against the accused-appellant,
Ernesto Villanueva.

SO ORDERED.

Cruz, (Chairman), Medialdea, and
Bellosillo, JJ., concur.