G.R. Nos. 149414-15. November 18, 2002
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. ANGEL AMANTE, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.
MENDOZA, J.:
This is an appeal from the decision,[1] dated
April 20, 2000, of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 259, Parañaque City,
finding accused-appellant Angel Amante[2]
guilty beyond reasonable doubt of two counts of rape under Art. 335 of the
Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A. No. 7659, committed against Evelyn
Ocinar and sentencing him in each case to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua and to pay P50,000.00 as
moral damages and to suffer the accessory penalties provided by law.
Two informations were filed against accused-appellant Angel
Amante charging him with rape, allegedly committed as follows:
Crim. Case No. 97-578
That on or about the 28th day of December 1996, in the Municipality
of Parañaque, Metro Manila, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this
Honorable Court, the above-named accused, by means of force and intimidation,
did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously have carnal knowledge
of the complainant Evelyn Ocinar against her will.
CONTRARY TO LAW.
Crim. Case No. 97-579
That on or about the 15th day of February, 1997, in the
Municipality of Parañaque, Metro Manila Philippines, and within the
jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, by means of
force and intimidation, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and
feloniously have carnal knowledge of the complainant Evelyn Ocinar against her
will.
CONTRARY TO LAW.[3]
When arraigned on December 10, 1998,[4]
accused-appellant, with the assistance of counsel, entered a plea of not
guilty, whereupon he was tried.
The prosecution presented complainant Evelyn Ocinar and her
maternal grandaunt Luzanta Barquin as its witnesses. The gist of their testimonies is as follows:
Complainant Evelyn Ocinar is the grandniece of Virginia Viron,
the common-law wife of accused-appellant Angel Amante.[5] At
the time material to these cases, Evelyn was 18 years old. She came to Manila in October 1996 to look
for a job, alternately staying in the houses of her maternal grandaunts,
Virginia Viron and Luzanta Barquin, who both lived on St. Paul Street, Brgy.
Moonwalk, Parañaque City.[6]
Whenever Evelyn stayed in the house of Angel Amante and Virginia
Viron, she would sleep alone in a room on the second floor of the house. The door remained open as an electric fan
was in the doorway. The rest of the
occupants stayed in another room on the same floor. The two rooms were separated by the living room.
On December 28, 1996, the only occupants of the house were
complainant, accused-appellant, four-year old Angelica, the daughter of
accused-appellant by Virginia, and two-year old Irish, Virginia’s grandson by
her daughter Rizalita.[7] At
about midnight of that day, Evelyn was awakened by someone removing her shorts
and panties. She recognized the person
as accused-appellant Angel Amante. Evelyn tried to resist, but accused-appellant pointed a knife at her
neck. Accused-appellant forced her legs
apart and then had sexual intercourse with her. When accused-appellant was through, Evelyn saw a whitish
substance come out of his penis. Then,
accused-appellant left, but not before he had threatened her with harm if she
told anyone about the incident. In
fact, accused-appellant repeatedly threatened Evelyn with harm whenever he had
opportunity, warning her not to tell anybody about what he had done. Evelyn could only cry.[8]
The second rape took place at around 11 o’clock in the evening on
February 15, 1997. Her Lola Virginia
had earlier taken one of her grandchildren to the hospital. Evelyn was awakened when she felt someone
removing her shorts. She found it was
accused-appellant again. She resisted
in vain as accused-appellant, threatening her with a knife poised at her neck,
undressed her and had sexual intercourse with her once more. She was told not to tell anyone about the
incident or else she would be killed.[9]
Evelyn had no friends to whom she could ask for help. She did not tell her Lola Virginia because
she was afraid accused-appellant would make good his threats and that her Lola
Virginia would stand by accused-appellant and allow him to escape. Evelyn became absent-minded and merely stared
during conversations (natutulala). One time she held a sharp pointed object as if in rebellion
against something.[10]
After the second incident, Evelyn left her Lola Virginia’s house to live with her other
relatives in Bulacan.[11] When
she returned to Parañaque in June 1997, she stayed in the house of her other
grandaunt, Luzanta Barquin. She was
pregnant and, when pressed by Luzanta to tell the truth, Evelyn broke down and
recounted how she was twice raped by accused-appellant. Luzanta reported the incidents to the
barangay authorities. Later, she took
Evelyn to the barangay captain.
Accused-appellant was later taken to the barangay captain, to
whom he allegedly admitted his guilt in the presence of both Evelyn and
Virginia. Accused-appellant allegedly
said Evelyn should not have complained to the barangay captain but should have
talked to him instead because he would give the child to his sibling in the
United States.[12]
On June 12, 1997, Evelyn executed a Sinumpaang Salaysay[13]
at the police station. She was examined
by a medico-legal officer whose report (Exh. B) contained the following
findings:
FINDINGS:
GENITAL:
There is scanty growth of pubic hair. Labia majora are full, convex and gaping, with dark brown labia
minora presenting in between. On
separating the same disclosed an elastic, fleshy type hymen with shallow healed
lacerations at 2, 4, 6, and 9 o’clock positions, and [a] deep healed laceration
at 7 o’clock position. External vaginal
orifice offers moderate resistance to the introduction of the examining index
finger and the virgin-sized vaginal speculum. Vaginal canal is narrow with prominent rugosities. Cervix is normal in size, color and
consistency.
CONCLUSION:
Findings are compatible with 24 to 25 weeks pregnant state. There are no external signs of recent
application of any form of violence.[14]
On September 3, 1997, Evelyn Ocinar gave birth to a girl, whom
she named Phalyn Jewel. Evelyn
testified she did not have any boyfriend nor any sexual experience prior to the
rape incidents.[15]
The defense presented accused-appellant Angel Amante, his
common-law wife Virginia Viron, and the latter’s daughter Rizalita Viron as
witnesses. Luzanta Barquin was
presented as an adverse witness.
Angel Amante admitted that complainant Evelyn Ocinar stayed in
his house for some time but he denied raping her. He claimed that at the time of the alleged rapes, he was asleep
in their house with his common-law wife Virginia, her daughter Rizalita, and
her niece Emerita Devino[16] and
Emerita’s daughter Evangeline. (He did
not mention the presence of his daughter Angelica, nor that of Rizalita’s son,
Irish.) Accused-appellant said that as
complainant Evelyn Ocinar also stayed sometimes with her Lola Luzanta in the
same neighborhood, he could not recall if she slept in his house on December
28, 1996 and on February 15, 1997.[17]
Accused-appellant claimed that the rape charges against him were
not true and that they were brought by Luzanta Barquin, his common-law wife’s
sister, because of a misunderstanding over a roof gutter. According to accused-appellant, in August
1996, Danilo Cantanero, a neighbor, removed the gutter from Amante’s house and
placed it on Barquin’s. Amante became
angry as his house was badly affected whenever it rained hard. On the other hand, he said, Virginia often
scolded Evelyn for not doing household chores and had in fact asked her to
leave the house.
Angel Amante said he was invited to go to the office of the
barangay captain on June 3, 1997, after which he was taken to the police
precinct near the Coastal Road in Parañaque City. Police Officer Dominador Nipas conducted the investigation and
tried to help accused-appellant and Evelyn settle the case. Accused-appellant was released from custody
after Luzanta and Evelyn had signed the following statement written on the
police blotter:[18]
RE: [Illegible] for page 0411 (Alleged
rape)
Complainant/victim in this particular case (Evelyn Ocinar) with the
conformity of her grandmother (Luzanta Barquin) requested that their case be
held in abeyance and consented [to] the release of subject, Angel Amante as
[evidenced by] their signatures appearing below. Subject person was released from the custody of this office in
good physical condition and likewise without complaint [against] any member of
this office as well as the arresting barangay tanods.
|
(Sgd.) |
(Sgd.) |
(Sgd.) |
|
Evelyn H. Ocinar |
Luzanta Barquin |
Angel S. Amante, Jr.[19] |
Virginia Viron testified that she and accused-appellant Angel
Amante had been living together for 16 years and that Evelyn Ocinar is the
daughter of her niece Elizabeth Ocinar. She vouched for Angel Amante’s innocence, claiming that she was in their
house on the dates of the alleged rapes. On December 28, 1996, she said, she was in their house on St. Paul
Street, with her daughters Rizalita and Angelica, her grandson Irish, and her
niece Emerita Divino. On February 15,
1997, she was also in their house the whole day with accused-appellant and
Rizalita. She said that the rape
charges had been filed against accused-appellant because of a misunderstanding
between him and her sister Luzanta Barquin regarding a roof gutter.[20]
On cross-examination, Virginia admitted she could not remember
whether Evelyn stayed in their house on December 28, 1996 and on February 15,
1997. She also admitted she habitually
played tong-its on the ground floor
of her house until the wee hours of the morning and, therefore, could not have
known the whereabouts of accused-appellant during the entire 24-hour
period. Accused-appellant himself did
not gamble, but only financed her habit. Virginia stated that she did not know of any misunderstanding between
accused-appellant and Luzanta Barquin.[21]
Rizalita Viron, Virginia’s daughter, also testified. Contrary to her mother’s testimony, Rizalita
said she was with accused-appellant on the dates and times in question.[22]
On December 28, 1996, she was with accused-appellant, along with her sister
Angelica, her mother Virginia, her cousin Emerita and complainant Evelyn
Ocinar, in their house. She went to
sleep at 10 o’clock in the evening of that day. On February 15, 1997, she was in their house with
accused-appellant the whole day, together with Virginia, Angelica, and
Irish. She watched television until one
o’clock in the morning of the following day. She also surmised that a fight over a roof gutter with her aunt Luzanta
could have been the reason for the filing of these criminal cases against
accused-appellant.[23]
Luzanta Barquin was presented by the defense as an adverse
witness. She confirmed that there was a
misunderstanding over a roof gutter, but she claimed it was between her and
their neighbor Danilo Cantanero. Luzanta said that Evelyn told her the cause of her pregnancy and asked
to be accompanied to the barangay captain on June 8, 1997. It was only when they sought the assistance
of the barangay captain that Luzanta learned the dates of the rape
incidents. Luzanta said that
accused-appellant Angel Amante offered to pay her P40,000.00 to P60,000.00
to convince Evelyn to withdraw the charges. Luzanta said she told him to talk to Evelyn, but the latter was angry
and refused to speak with accused-appellant.
On rebuttal, complainant Evelyn Ocinar testified that
accused-appellant Angel Amante’s testimony that there were several people in
their house when the rapes occurred was not true because only two children were
there at the time of the first rape. It
was upon the suggestion of the police investigator, Nipas, that she delayed in
filing a criminal complaint against accused-appellant. Because of the document[24]
which Nipas convinced her to sign, accused-appellant was released from
custody. However, accused-appellant’s
sibling, who was supposed to make a settlement with Evelyn, did not
arrive. Criminal cases against
accused-appellant were therefore filed.[25] A
warrant of arrest was later issued on August 14, 1997,[26]
but accused-appellant could not be found.[27] He
was finally arrested at 2:30 o’clock in the afternoon of November 14, 1998 in
Bani, Pangasinan by SPO2 Teodoro Papa, SPO1 Dominador Nipas, and SPO1 Maximo
Austria.[28]
He was committed at the Parañaque City Jail on November 17, 1998.[29]
On the basis of the evidence presented, the trial court rendered
a decision on April 20, 2001, the dispositive portion of which reads:
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, finding accused Angel Amante GUILTY
beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape (two counts), as defined and
penalized under Art. 335 by the Revised Penal Code as amended by RA 7659, he is
hereby sentenced to suffer imprisonment of reclusion perpetua (two
counts) in the absence of any mitigating or aggravating circumstance. He is
further ordered to payP50,000.00 for each count as moral damages and to
suffer the accessory penalties provided by law specifically Art. 41 of the
Revised Penal Code.
The Clerk of Court is directed to prepare the Mittimus for the
immediate transfer of Angel Amante to the New Bilibid Prisons, Muntinlupa City
from Parañaque City Jail.
SO ORDERED.[30]
Hence this appeal.
Accused-appellant assigns the following errors as having been
allegedly committed by the trial court:
I. THE COURT A QUO GRAVELY ERRED IN FINDING THAT THE GUILT OF THE
ACCUSED-APPELLANT FOR THE CRIME CHARGED HAS BEEN PROVEN BEYOND REASONABLE
DOUBT.
II. THE COURT A QUO GRAVELY ERRED IN GIVING CREDENCE TO THE
UNRELIABLE TESTIMONIES OF THE WITNESSES FOR THE PROSECUTION.
The question is the weight to be accorded the testimonies of
witnesses, particularly those presented by the prosecution.
First. In
determining the guilt or innocence of the accused in rape cases, this Court has
been guided by three principles to wit: (a) an accusation of rape can be made
with facility; it is difficult for the complainant to prove and even more
difficult for the accused, though innocent, to disprove; (b) in view of the
intrinsic nature of the crime of rape, where only two persons are involved, the
testimony of the complainant must be scrutinized with utmost caution; and (c)
the evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merit and cannot
draw strength from the weakness of the evidence for the defense.[31]
The lone testimony of a rape victim, by itself, is sufficient to
warrant a judgment of conviction if found to be credible. Because of the very nature of the offense,
the sole evidence that can usually be offered to establish the accused’s guilt
is the complainant’s testimony.[32] In
these cases, Evelyn was direct, unequivocal and consistent in answering the
questions propounded to her, whether by the prosecution, the defense or the
trial judge. She testified:
Q Di ba nagreklamo ka ng
dalawang beses na panggagahasa na diumano ginawa ng akusado na si Angel
Amante. Isa noong December 28, 1996 at
noong February 15, 1997?
A Opo.
Q At sinabi mo mga bandang
alas-12:00 ng hatinggabi?
A Opo.
Q Noong December 28, 1996,
alas-12:00 ng hatinggabi, sinu-sino ang nandun sa bahay ninyo?
A Bale apat (4) lang po kami.
Iyong dalawang (2) bata, ako at saka si Angel Amante.
. . . .
Q At paano siya nakapasok
sa kuwarto, kung alam mo. Ito bang kuwarto mo ay may pintuan na sarado o walang
pintuan?
A May pintuan po siya pero
hindi ko na isinarado kasi iyong electric fan ho nasa may pintuan.
Q So ibig mong sabihin,
nakaharang iyong electric fan sa may pintuan kaya bukas ito, ganun ba?
A Opo.
Q Bago maganap iyong
insidente, ano ba ang suot mo nun, kung natatandaan mo?
A Naka-shorts po ako at
t-shirt.
Q So kamo natutulog ka at
nakapasok siya. Paano mo nalaman na
nakapasok siya dun sa kuwarto mo?
A Nagising lang ho ako
nang hinuhubad niya na ho iyong shorts ko.
Q At noong magising ka na
hinuhubad niya iyong shorts mo, ano’ng ginawa mo?
A Nagpumiglas po ako kaso
lang ho, may hawak siyang kutsilyo.
Q At ano’ng ginawa niya dun
sa kutsilyong dala-dala niya?
A Itinutok po niya sa leeg
ko.
Q Ano’ng kamay ang ginamit
niya sa paghawak sa kutsilyo at pagtutok sa leeg mo?
A Kanan po.
Q Ano ba ang puwesto mo
noong tututukan ka ng kutsilyo?
A Nakahiga po ako.
Q Habang tinututukan ka ng
kutsilyo at hinuhubad niya kamo iyong shorts mo, ano pa ang ginagawa niya sa
iyo kung meron?
A Pilit niya rin hong
hinuhubad iyong panty ko.
Q At nahubad niya ba iyong
shorts mo at saka panty mo?
A Opo.
Q Maliban dyan sa pagtutok
ng kutsilyo at pagtanggal ng iyong shorts at panty, siya ba ay nagsasalita o
hindi?
A Sabi niya po sa akin na
huwag daw akong magsumbong kahit kanino.
Q So habang ginagawa niya
sa iyo iyon, iyong panunutok, pagbabanta na huwag magsumbong kahit kanino, at
paghuhubad ng iyong saplot pang-ibaba, ano naman ang ginawa mo?
A Wala po, umiiyak na lang
po ako pero wala akong magawa.
Q At pagkatapos niyang
matanggal ang pang-ibaba mo, ano’ng sumunod na ginawa ni Angel Amante?
A Ano na po, ipinapasok
niya iyong ari niya.
Q Ang ibig mong sabihin,
noong pagpasok niya sa kuwarto mo ay wala na siyang damit?
A Meron ho, naka shorts po
siya.
Q Saang pagkakataon niya
tinanggal iyong kanyang shorts bago ka niya galawin?
A Doon na po sa kuwarto.
Q Di ba kamo nakatutok
iyong kutsilyo sa leeg mo at hinubad niya na iyong pang-ibaba mo, di ba?
A Opo.
Q Ang pang-itaas mo,
hinubad ba niya o hindi?
A Hindi naman po.
Q So kailan niya tinanggal
ang shorts niya?
A Noong nakahubad na ho
ako.
Q At pagkatapos niyang tanggalin
ang shorts niya, ano’ng ginawa niya sa iyo?
A Iyon nga po, pinipilit
niya pong ipasok iyong ari niya sa ari ko.
Q At ang ibig mong sabihin,
pumatong siya sa iyo?
A Opo.
Q Habang pumapatong siya sa
iyo, ano naman ang ginagawa mo?
A Umiiyak lang po ako.
Q Nagtangka ka bang lumaban
o hindi?
A Hindi po kasi iyong
kutsilyo ay nasa leeg ko, nakatutok.
Q So habang siya’y
nakakubabaw sa iyo, dinapaan ka, naipasok niya ba iyong ari niya sa iyo?
A Opo.
Q Paano mo nasabing siya’y
nagtagumpay na ipasok iyong kanyang ari sa ari mo?
A Kasi po naramdaman ko
pong masakit iyong ari ko.
Q So ibig sabihin, naipasok
niya, ganun ba?
A Opo.
. . . .
Q At habang nakapatong siya
sa iyo ng kalahating oras, maliban sa sakit na naramdaman mo, ano pa ang
naramdaman mo kung meron? May
naramdaman ka bang lumabas sa loob na galing sa ari niya?
A Meron po.
Q Napansin mo ba kung ano
iyon?
A Parang puti po siya.
. . . .
Q Pagkatapos niyang
masarapan, iyong akusado na si Angel Amante, ano na ang sumunod na nangyari?
A Umalis na po siya tapos
sinabi niya sa akin na huwag daw po akong magsusumbong kahit na kanino.
Q At sa pagkakataon na
iyon, bago siya umalis, ano naman ang naging pakiramdam mo?
A Umiyak na lang po ako ng
umiyak.
Q At umalis din siya
pagkatapos?
A Opo.
Q Nagkaroon ka ba ng
pagkakataon, pagkatapos ng insidente na iyon noong December 28, 1996, na
tingnan kung ano’ng nangyari sa iyo, lalung-lalo na iyong ibabang bahagi
mo? May nakita ka bang dugo o ano?
A Meron po.
Q So nang bantaan ka ng
ganun bago siya umalis, kinabukasan, ano’ng ginawa mo?
A Wala ho, natutulala lang
po ako.
Q Nagkaroon ka ba ng
pagkakataon na isumbong sa lola mo iyong ginawa sa iyo ng lolo mo?
A Wala po.
Q Bakit?
A Kasi lagi niya ho akong
binabantaan kapag wala ang lola ko. Lagi po siyang nagsasabi na huwag daw akong
magsumbong.
Q Noong February 15, 1997,
mga bandang alas-11:00 ng gabi, may nangyari din ba sa iyo?
A Opo.
Q Saan na naman naulit
iyong ginawa sa iyo ni Angel Amante?
A Sa bahay din po na iyon
ng lola ko.
Q Kaninong kuwarto ulit,
kung alam mo?
A Doon din po sa kuwarto
na tinutulugan ko.
Q Bakit, nasaan na naman
iyong lola mo noong araw na iyon?
A Nagpunta ho sa hospital
kasi iyong isang apo niya, dinala ho sa hospital.
Q So isinugod sa hospital
iyong isang pinsan mo?
A Opo.
Q Ano’ng pangalan ng pinsan
mong isinugod sa hospital noong araw na iyon?
A Si Charlie po.
Q So paano nangyari na
naman iyong ginawa sa iyo ni Angel Amante noong February 15, 1997?
A Kung ano ho ang ginawa
niya noong una, ganun din po noong pangalawa.
Q So paano, pinasok ka na naman
sa kuwarto, ganun ba?
A Opo.
Q At may armas ba ulit siya
o wala?
A Meron din po.
Q Ano’ng klaseng armas ang
dala niya?
A Iyon din hong kutsilyo.
Q At ano’ng ginawa niya sa
kutsilyo?
A Itinutok niya ulit sa
leeg ko, sir.
Q At bago ka pasukin,
natutulog ka ba nun o nakahiga ka lang?
A Natutulog po ako, sir.
Q Iyong suot mo noong
February 15, 1999, ano ang suot mo, kung natatandaan mo?
A Shorts din po kasi lagi
po akong nakashorts pag natutulog po ako.
Q At pinasok ka niya?
A Opo.
Q Bago niya inulit muli
iyong ginawa niyang panggagahasa sa iyo, meron ba siyang sinabi noong
tinututukan ka ng kutsilyo?
A Iyong pananakot niya,
paulit-ulit niyang sinasabi sa akin.
Q At ano naman ang naging
reaction mo?
A Natatakot po ako.
Q Iyong pangalawang
pagkakataon na iyon, hindi ka ba nagmakaawa sa kanya na huwag niya nang gawin
iyong ginawa niya sa iyo noong una?
A Kahit naman po
magmakaawa ako sa kanya, hindi naman po siya nakikinig.
. . . .
Q At nagtagumpay ba siya sa
gusto niyang nangyari sa iyo nang halayin ka noong February 15, 1997, mga
alas-onse ng gabi?
A Opo.
Q Naipasok niya iyong ari
niya sa ari mo ulit ng sapilitan?
A Opo.
. . . .
Q At meron na namang
lumabas sa ari niya?
A Opo.
Q At bago siya umalis
pagkatapos kang halayin, ano na naman ang sinabi niya kung meron?
A Ganun din ho, sinabihan
niya akong huwag magsusumbong.
Q Nanlaban ka ba sa kanya
noong unang pagkakataon?
A Hindi po.
Q Bakit hindi ka lumaban sa
kanya?
A Kasi ho iyong kutsilyo,
nakatutok sa leeg ko.
Q Noong pangalawang
pagkakataon, nanlaban ka ba sa kanya?
A Hindi rin po.
Q Bakit?
A Kasi natatakot din po
ako dahil may nakatutok sa aking kutsilyo.[33]
The foregoing testimony proves the elements of rape:
Accused-appellant had carnal knowledge of complainant without her consent on
December 28, 1996 and again on February 15, 1997, and he employed force and
intimidation in carrying out his evil designs.
The fact that the knife which accused-appellant used to threaten
complainant into submission was not presented in court does not affect her
credibility, as the weapon is not essential in the prosecution of rape cases.[34]
The question is whether the threat or intimidation produces in the mind of a
reasonable person such fear that if she resists or does not yield to the
desires of the accused, the threat will be carried out.[35]
Accused-appellant claims the charges against him were trumped up
and that they are the result of a grudge that complainant’s grandaunt bore
against him.
This contention is without merit. As the trial court well observed:
It is the height of absurdity to believe
that a young woman would be prodded by her relatives to file a non-bailable
offense of rape simply because of an alleged misunderstanding over a roof
gutter as what the accused and his witnesses would want the Court to believe. Certainly, she would not be willing to
undergo the humiliation of a public trial and to testify on the details of her
ordeal were it not to condemn an injustice.[36]
Indeed, there is no evidence to show that Evelyn had an improper
motive to falsely testify against accused-appellant. On the other hand, respect for elders is deeply ingrained in our
culture, and this in all probability explains why Evelyn delayed in reporting
the crimes committed against her for nearly six months, not to mention the
threats made by accused-appellant. Considering these circumstances, we cannot say the trial court erred in
relying on the testimony of the complainant Evelyn Ocinar.[37]
In contrast to the prosecution witnesses’ credible, consistent
and positive testimonies, accused-appellant could only offer denial in his
defense. But, like alibi, denial is a
weak defense which must be supported by strong evidence of non-culpability to
merit credibility.[38] It
is negative self-serving evidence which cannot be given greater weight than the
testimony of a credible witness who testified on affirmative matters. Between the positive declarations of a
prosecution witness and the negative statements of the accused, the former
deserves more credence.[39]
It is also noteworthy that accused-appellant, during
cross-examination, admitted that he had indeed offered to settle the case. He said:
Fiscal Ramolete:
Kailan nag-file si Evelyn ng kaso laban sa
inyo?
A Kung matatandaan ko ay
June 3, 1997.
Q Kailan mo nalaman ito?
A Inimbita po ako ng
barangay.
Q Barangay?
A Moonwalk po.
Q At pagkatapos noon ay
dinala ka na sa Coastal ganoon ba?
A Opo.
Q At ang nag-imbestiga sa
kasong ito ay si Police Officer Nipas?
A Opo.
Q At nandoon din yung
nagrereklamo na si Evelyn Osinar na kasama ang lola niya na si Lusanta Barquin?
A Opo.
Q At nagkaroon kayo ng
pagkakataon na mag-usap doon sa nasabing stasyon ng pulisya?
A Opo.
Q Dahil sa ginawa mong
pakikipag-usap na makipag-ayos ka kina Evelyn ay hindi ka tinuluyang kasuhan
noon ding buwan na iyon o June 1997, tama?
A Opo.
Q Pero hindi ka tumupad sa
usapan, tama?
A Opo.
Q Sa madali’t sabi
nakahanda ka noon na panagutan ang ginawa mo kay Evelyn Osinar?
A Hindi po.
Q Bakit ka pinalaya ng
pulis kung hindi ka nangako sa kanya at kay Evelyn na pananagutan mo ang ginawa
mo sa kanya?
A Sa dahilan pong pumirma
na ho sila.[40]
Thereafter, accused-appellant fled and could not immediately be
found. His attempt to reach a
settlement of the case and his later flight from the authorities are indicia of
the guilt of accused-appellant.
Nor are the other defense witnesses credible. Virginia Viron is the common-law wife of
accused-appellant, while Rizalita Viron is Virginia’s daughter. They are, therefore, biased in favor of
accused-appellant. What is more,
Virginia admitted that she was addicted to gambling, playing tong-its
until the wee hours of the morning. She
could not, therefore, have seen if accused-appellant did not commit the crimes
in question even if she gambled right in their house. Indeed, Rizalita was presented by the defense after it was shown
that Virginia could not have known the whereabouts of her common-law husband at
the time of the rape incidents. For her
part, Rizalita testified that she could remember who were in their house when the
incidents occurred, but she could not recall when the fight between
accused-appellant Angel Amante and Luzanta Barquin took place.
Indeed, as the issues raised by accused-appellant are factual,
the trial court’s determination carries weight because of its opportunity to
observe the behavior and demeanor of the witnesses while on the stand.[41]
Unless there are facts or circumstances of weight and influence which might
have been overlooked, the findings and conclusions of the trial court on the
credibility of witnesses are not be disturbed on appeal.[42]
As already stated, complainant gave birth to a child on September
3, 1997. On June 12, 1997, when she was
examined, she was found 24 to 25 weeks pregnant. It would therefore seem accused-appellant is the father of the
child, contrary to the trial court’s ruling that there is no conclusive showing
to this effect.
Second. Complainant was twice raped by
accused-appellant, on December 28, 1996 and on February 15, 1997. On June 12, 1997, when she was examined, she
was found to be 24 to 25 weeks pregnant.[43] She
gave birth to a child on September 3, 1997. The presumption is thus the child was begotten as a result of her having
been raped, contrary to the trial court’s ruling that there is no conclusive
showing to this effect. Moreover, it is
not disputed that complainant gave birth within a period of 9.3 months (the
average period of pregnancy) from the date complainant was first raped on
December 28, 1996.[44]
Accused-appellant can overcome the presumption that complainant’s child was
thus begotten only if he can show either that it was physically impossible for
him to have sexual intercourse because of impotence or serious illness which
absolutely prevents him from having sexual intercourse or that complainant had
sexual intercourse with another man. Accused-appellant has not been able to do this.[45]
Accordingly, he should be made to pay support, the amount and terms of which
must be determined by the trial court after notice and hearing.[46]
However, accused-appellant cannot be compelled to acknowledge the
child considering his allegation that he is married and there is no evidence to
the contrary.[47]
When he was asked to state his personal circumstances, accused-appellant said,
among other things, that he is married. The personal data attached to the warrant of arrest issued against him
also described him as married.[48]
These have not been controverted by the prosecution.
Third. The
award of P50,000.00 as moral damages for each count of rape is in accord
with our rulings. Moral damages are
awarded in rape cases without need of proof other than the fact of the rape
itself because it is assumed that the victim has suffered moral injuries
entitling her to such an award. In
addition, complainant must be paid P50,000.00 as civil indemnity in each
case, the same being mandatory upon finding of the fact of rape.[49]
WHEREFORE, the decision of the Regional Trial Court,
Branch 259, Parañaque City, finding accused-appellant Angel Amante guilty of
two counts of rape and sentencing him in each case to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua,
to pay complainant Evelyn Ocinar in each case P50,000.00 as moral
damages and to suffer the accessory penalties provided by law, is hereby
AFFIRMED, with the modification that he is also ordered to pay in each case
civil indemnity in the amount of P50,000.00.
SO ORDERED.
Bellosillo, (Chairman), Quisumbing,
and Callejo,
Sr., JJ., concur.
Austria-Martinez, J., on leave.
[1]
Per Judge Zosimo V. Escaño.
[2]
Also referred to as “Angel Amante, Jr.”
[3]
Records, pp. 1, 4; Rollo, pp. 6-7.
[4]
Records, p. 14.
[5]
Also referred to as “Virginia Beron.”
[6]
TSN (Angel Amante), p. 23, May 30, 2000; TSN (Evelyn Ocinar), p. 22, Dec. 4,
2000.
[7]
Also referred to as “Riza” or “Rizalita Beron.”
[8]
TSN (Evelyn Ocinar), pp. 6-15, 30-33, Oct. 27, 1999.
[9]
Id., pp. 16-19, 33-35.
[10]
Id., pp. 22-24, 35-38; TSN (Luzanta Barquin), p. 17, Feb. 15, 2000.
[11]
TSN (Evelyn Ocinar), p. 22, Dec. 4, 2000.
[12]
TSN (Luzanta Barquin), pp. 5-7, 10, 13, 16-17, Feb. 15, 2000.
[13]
Records, p. 2.
[14]
Id., p. 3.
[15]
TSN (Evelyn Ocinar), p. 29, Oct. 27, 1999; TSN (Evelyn Ocinar), p. 9, Dec. 4,
2000.
[16]
Also referred to as “Emerita Divino.”
[17]
TSN (Angel Amante) pp. 3-7, May 30, 2000.
[18]
Exhs. D and 1; Records, p. 81.
[19]
Records, p. 81.
[20]
TSN (Virginia Viron), pp. 5-17, June 19, 2000.
[21]
Id., pp. 19-28.
[22]
TSN (Rizalita Viron), p. 4, July 6, 2000l; TSN (Virginia Viron), pp. 3, 7-11,
June 19, 2000.
[23]
TSN (Rizalita Viron), pp. 5-12, July 6, 2000.
[24]
Exhs. D and 1; Records, p. 81.
[25]
TSN (Evelyn Ocinar), pp. 6-8, 11-16, Dec. 4, 2000.
[26]
Records, p. 5.
[27]
Id., pp. 6-7.
[28]
Id., p. 9.
[29]
Id., p. 8.
[30]
Decision, p. 6; Records, p. 21; Rollo, p. 97.
[31]
People v. Quintal, 125 SCRA 734 (1983).
[32]
People v. Rivera, G.R. No.
139180, July 31, 2001.
[33]
TSN (Evelyn Ocinar), pp. 7-21, Oct. 27, 1999.
[34]
People v. Vitancur, 345 SCRA
414 (2000).
[35]
People v. Maglente, 306
SCRA 546 (1999).
[36]
Decision, p. 5; Records, p. 20; Rollo, p. 96.
[37]
People v. David, 177 SCRA 551 (1989).
[38]
People v. Martinez, 325 SCRA
601 (2000).
[39]
People v. Fraga, 330 SCRA
699 (2000).
[40]
TSN (Angel Amante), pp. 12-14, May 30, 2000.
[41]
People v. Castillo, 335
SCRA 100 (2000).
[42]
People v. Aloro, 340 SCRA
346 (2000).
[43]
Records, p. 3.
[44]
People v. Gonzales, G.R. Nos.
139445-6, June 20, 2001; People v.
Dichoson, 352 SCRA 56 (2001); People v. Malapo, 294 SCRA 579 (1998);
People v. Bayani, 262 SCRA 660 (1996).
[45]
People v. Malapo, supra; The
Family Code, Art. 166.
[46] The Family Code, Art. 201.
[47]
People v. Adora, 275 SCRA 441 (1997); People v. Javier, 311 SCRA 122 (1999).
[48]
TSN (Angel Amante) p. 3, May 30, 2000, Records, p. 11.
[49]
People v. Catubig, G.R. No.
137842, Aug. 23, 2001.