PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. PAULINO AQUINO AND ALEJANDRO AQUINO, ACCUSED-APPELLANTS.

Before Us is an appeal from the judgment
of the Regional Trial Court of Rosales, Pangasinan,
Branch 53, involving three (3) cases of rape filed by Maria Eliza S. Jorique against the brothers Paulino
Aquino and Alejandro Aquino.  Upon her sworn complaint, Second Assistant
Provincial Fiscal Jovito C. Peralta filed two informations against Paulino Aquino and one against Alejandro Aquino
which read as follows:

CRIM.
CASE NO. 2070-R

“That on or about the 25th day of June,
1985, in Brgy. Cabalaoangan
Norte, Municipality of Rosales,
Province of Pangasinan, New
Republic of the Philippines
and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused,
by means of force or intimidation, did then and there, wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously have sexual intercourse with Maria Eliza S. Jorique
against her will and consent and to her damage and prejudice.

Contrary to Article 335, Revised Penal
Code.”

CRIM.
CASE NO. 2086-R

“That on or about the 12th day of September, 1985, in Brgy.
Cabalaoangan, province of Pangasinan, New
Republic of the Philippines
and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused,
by means of force, or intimidation, did then and there, wilfully,
unlawfully and feloniously have sexual intercourse with Maria Eliza S. Jorique against her will and consent and to her damage
and prejudice.

“Contrary to Article 335, Revised Penal
Code.”

CRIM.
CASE NO. 2071-R

“That on or about the 15th day of June,
1986, in Brgy. Cabalaoangan,
Norte, municipality of Rosales,
province of Pangasinan, New
Republic of the Philippines
and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused,
by means of force or intimidation, did then and there, wilfully,
unlawfully and feloniously have sexual intercourse with Maria Eliza S. Jorique against her will and consent and to her damage and
prejudice.

“Contrary to Article 335, Revised Penal
Code.”

(pp. 21-22, Rollo)

Upon arraignment both accused pleaded not guilty to the crime charged and trial proceeded
accordingly.  The court a quo
jointly heard the said criminal cases. 
On July 28, 1988,
after trial on the merits, the lower court rendered its consolidated Decision,
the dispositive portion of which reads as follows:

“WHEREFORE, judgment is hereby rendered as follows:

1.  In Criminal Case No.
2070-R, the Court hereby finds Paulino Aquino GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape
without any mitigating or aggravating circumstance and sentences him to suffer
the penalty of Reclusion Perpetua; to
indemnify Ma. Eliza S. Jorique in the amount of P30,000.00 as and for moral damages; and to pay the costs.

2.  In Criminal Case No.
2071-R (sic:  should be Criminal Case No.
2086-R), the Court finds Paulino Aquino
NOT GUILTY and consequently acquits him on reasonable doubt, with costs de oficio.

3.  In Criminal Case No.
2086-R (sic:  should be Criminal Case No.
2071-R), the Court finds Alejandro Aquino GUILTY
beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape and sentences him to suffer the
penalty of Reclusion Perpetua; to
indemnify Maria Eliza S. Jorique in the amount of P30,000.00 as and for moral damages; and to pay the costs.

“SO ORDERED.”

(p. 3, Brief for the Appellee; p. 98, Rollo)

Not satisfied therewith, the accused interposed the present
appeal alleging three (3) errors committed by the court
a quo but only in so far as Criminal Cases Nos. 2070-R and
2071-R, respectively, are concerned and these are the following:

I

THE LOWER
COURT ERRED IN GIVING CREDENCE TO THE TESTIMONIES
OF COMPLAINANT MA. ELIZA JORIQUE.

II

THE LOWER
COURT ERRED IN CONVICTING ACCUSED PAULINO AQUINO
DESPITE HIS ACQUITTAL IN CRIM. CASE NO. 2086-R.

III

AND IN BOTH CASES,
THE LOWER COURT ERRED IN
HOLDING ACCUSED GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT.

(p. 4, Brief for the Appellee; p. 99, Rollo)

The facts, as narrated in the People’s Brief, are as follows:

“1.  Liza was born on December 7, 1970. 
In June, 1985, she was living with her aunt Ester Salimbay
who is the mistress of Alejandro Aquino.  They lived in a rented home in Cabalaongan Norte, Rosales, Pangasinan. 
With them in the same house are the two minor children of Ester Salimbay namely, Madonna, 10 years old, and Renier, 8 years old, and Liza’s cousin named Oliver Soto, 11 years old.

Liza was enrolled at the Rosales
National High School.  She was in the third year.

Paulino Aquino
is the younger brother of Alejandro Aquino.  They are natives of Nueva
Ecija.  Some
few days before June 25, 1985,
Paulino Aquino arrived in
his brother’s rented home in Cabalaoangan Norte,
Rosales, Pangasinan, where he sojourned for several
days.

On June 25, 1985,
in the morning, Liza and Paulino
Aquino were left alone in the house.  The house is a bungalow with three bedrooms,
a bathroom, a sala and a terrace.  At about 9:00
o’clock that day, Liza took a bath in the
bathroom.  When she came out from the
bathroom, she was only clad with a towel. 
She saw Paulino Aquino
standing at the terrace.  Not long after
she had entered her bedroom, and while she was getting her clothes from the
cabinet, Paulino Aquino
opened the door.  She was astonished and
dumb-founded.  Her immediate reaction was
to run towards the door to get out.  Paulino Aquino blocked her way
and pushed her to the bed.  She landed
astride.  The towel with which she was
clad dropped.  She was nude.

Paulino Aquino
pinned her down.  He strangled her with
his right hand even as he held her right hand with his other hand.  She wanted to shout but she could not owing
to her strangulation.  For ten minutes
she struggled to free herself.  It was futile, Paulino Aquino was heavy and strong.  Her legs were spread apart by his two legs
placed between her legs.  She felt
excruciating pain as his private organ was being driven into her genitalia. 
Paulino Aquino drove
her buttock up and down for five
minutes.

Copulation was consummated.  Paulino Aquino stood up and
warned Liza not to report the matter to her aunt or
to anyone or else something would happen to her and the whole family.

When Paulino Aquino
left her, she scrutinized her private parts. 
It was bleeding.  She cannot do anyting but cry her misfortune.

2.  In the afternoon of September 12, 1985, Liza was sleeping inside her bedroom.  At about 4:00
o’clock of that day, she was roused by Madonna Gozon
who told her that Paulino Aquino
arrived.  After Madonna left her room, Paulino Aquino entered and
started to undress himself.  She was scared and surprised.  She cried because she was afraid and
speechless.  She did not resist because
she thought it was useless and futile. 
He removed her panty and mounted her. 
It took him about five minutes to consummate coition.  Paulino Aquino enjoined her not to report the matter to anybody or
else he would kill her and the members of her family.

3.  On June 15, 1986, at about 7:00 o’clock in the morning, Liza
was in the kitchen cooking breakfast. 
Earlier that day, her aunt left for Umingan,
Pangasinan.  The
children were still asleep in their room. 
Alejandro Aquino approached her from behind,
held her by the shoulder, and instructed her to follow him to the master’s
bedroom because he would tell her something. 
She obliged.  As she entered the
room, Alejandro Aquino pushed her back.  He went on top of her.  She struggled to extricate herself but he was
too strong.  He removed her panty and
inserted his sexual organ into her private part.  Then he made a push and pull
movement until he reached orgasm.

Prior to June 15, 1986,
Liza declared that she was raped by Alejandro Aquino inside a motel in Urdaneta,
Pangasinan. 
That was on February 11, 1986.  This incident was mentioned by her in the
sworn statement she gave to the Rosales Police, marked as Exhibit “F”.  However, she was unable to sue Alejandro Aquino for this act because the venue was in Urdaneta, Pangasinan.  Nonetheless, she confided to her uncle,
Mauricio Salimbay, her horrible experience.  Mauricio Salimbay
accompanied Liza to the police authorities in
Rosales, Pangasinan where she was asked to give a
written statement, marked as Exhibit “F”.

5.  On June 17, 1986, Liza submitted
herself to a physical examination by Dr. Reymund S.
Peralta, Municipal Health Officer of Rosales, Pangasinan.  Dr. Peralta found Liza’s
hymen raptured with healed laceration, 0.5 cm. at 6:00 o’clock position.  Her vulva admits two (2) fingers.  Dr. Peralta opined that the laceration in Liza’s hymen may have been caused by sexual
intercourse.” (pp. 5-8, Brief for
the Appellee; pp. 100-103, Rollo)

All the assigned errors raised by the accused-appellants revolve around the issue of credibility of the witnesses,
especially the complaining witness.

Appellants Paulino Aquino
and Alejandro Aquino imputed to the trial court, as
its first error, its giving credence to the
testimony of complainant Ma. Eliza Jorique.  In their attempt to mislead this Honorable
Court and to destroy the credibility of the testimony of herein complainant,
they cite portions of complainant’s testimony which do not pertain to Criminal
Case No. 2070-R (case subject of this appeal) but rather to Criminal Case No.
20866-R, wherein as declared by the court a quo, the prosecution had failed to prove
the element of force and intimidation but not in so far as the issue of carnal
communication is concerned, hence, in said Criminal Case No. 2086-R the
appellant Paulino Aquino
was acquitted.

Such allegations of the appellants deserve no merit.  The aforementioned gross misrepresentation
made by the appellants serves as their desperate attempt to show that the court
a quo erred in its findings of fact and conclusions, but as can
be gleaned from the records of the case, the trial court was morally convinced
and unequivocably stated without doubt, “that
indeed Alejandro and Paulino Aquino
did really had sexual congress with Liza on the
dates specified in the three (3) informations.  Such fact is confirmed by the healed
laceration in Liza’s hymen at 6:00 o’clock position,
and the fact that the vulva can admit two fingers, a circumstance strongly
indicating that she had sexual intercourse more than once” (RTC, Decision,
p. 9, Rollo, 104).

It was not difficult for Alejandro Aquino
to accomplish his bestial act because, like his brother Paulino
Aquino, he was robust and tall, about five (5) feet
and nine (9) inches, against Liza who was small and
short.  It is also important to note that
Alejandro Aquino had an ascendancy over Liza because he was regarded by her as an uncle (being the
common-law husband of her aunt Ester Salimbay).  Under the circumstances, Alejandro Aquino had exercised strong moral and physical influence over Liza which
aided him in consummating sexual intercourse with her with least resistance (Rollo, p. 36, RTC Decision).

In People vs. Savellano, 57 SCRA 328,
it was held that force or violence necessary in rape is naturally a relative
term, depending on the age, size and strength of the parties and their relation
to each other.  It is not necessary that
the force employed be so great or of such character as could not be resisted;
it is only necessary that the force used by the guilty party be sufficient to
consummate the purpose (US vs. Villarosa, 4 Phil.
434).

Appellant Alejandro Aquino asserts that
the rape charges against him were instigated by Liza’s
mother Elena Salimbay, who allegedly was his former
mistress, out of hatred and jealousy, for taking another woman, Ester Salimbay (Elena’s own sister), as his new mistress.

This contention is likewise unmeritorious.  A perusal of the records would reveal that Liza filed the charges by herself, unaided by her
mother.  In fact it was not to her mother
that she revealed her horrible experience, rather she sought the assistance of
her uncle Mauricio Salimbay.  There is therefore no possible motive on the
part of this young and unsophisticated girl in bringing this suit, but only to
seek justice and vindication of the wrong committed against her honor (Rollo, p. 39, RTC Decision).

Moreover, this court has, time and again, stated in similar cases
of rape that no woman, especially one of tender age, would willingly expose
herself to the embarassment and humiliation of a
public trial wherein she would have not only to admit but also to narrate the
violation of her person, unless such was really the case.

Another argument interposed by the appellants is that the alleged
incidents of rape are unbelievable because of the actuations of the complainant
Ma. Liza Jorique before, during and after the commission of said
sexual abuse.

We find no merit in this pretense.  We hold the same opinion as that of the lower
court, that it is not uncommon to see women coming out of the bathroom in their
respective homes clad only with a towel, especially so when the bathroom is
just a few steps away from bedroom or adjacent to the bedroom.

With regard to the claim that the complainant did not lock her
bedroom, said actuations can be considered as lacking in precaution but this
cannot in any way impair her credibility. 
What is important to note is that appellant Paulino
Aquino succeeded in having carnal knowledge of Liza by the use of force and violence and against her
will.  Undoubtedly, all the essential
elements of rape existed.

Appellant further claimed that complainant did not offer any resistance against Paulino Aquino’s lustful
advances.

This contention is likewise untenable.  It is very clear from the records that the
victim Liza Jorique in her
direct and cross-examination categorically declared before the court that she really offered resistance all
throughout the sexual attack of Paulino Aquino, but her resistance proved to be futile.  As aptly explained by the court a quo:

“x x x she
is a petite but pretty girl and not more than five feet tall as against Paulino who as seen by the court is robust and about five
feet and nine (9) inches tall.” (Rollo, p. 110,
RTC Decision)

It is therefore
important to point at this instance, that the failure of the complainant to
successfully resist Paulino Aquino’s
carnal advances is not a manifestation of consent, but rather an indication of
an involuntary submission in the face of the consummation of the outrage.  It is also an indication that the complainant
yielded because of authentic apprehension and real fear of immediate death or
great bodily harm (People vs. Dolores, CA-G.R. No. 18065-R, August 23, 1957).

Furthermore, herein appellants aver that there are several
inconsistencies and contradictions in the testimony of complainant Liza Jorique.  However, after a careful review of the entire
record, We find that such inconsistencies and contradictions are minor and trivial which
will not necessarily affect complainant’s disposition of being candid,
straightforward, spontaneous and sincere in her declarations.

Moreover, such inconsistencies are well-expected to come from an
unexposed barrio lass not used to the rigors of public trial (People vs. Valdez,
150 SCRA 405).

Finally, herein appellants claim that delay in the filing of the complaint (only on June 17, 1986) casts a serious doubt on the veracity of the accusations
made (Appellant’s Brief, pp. 10-11;
Rollo, p. 116).

Again, We find the said argument to be lacking in merit.  Clearly, the records of the case show that
the complaints were filed on June 17,
1986, which is two days after Alejandro Aquino committed his dastardly act on June 15, 1986.  The fact that the complainant Liza Jorique did not immediately
report the previous sexual congresses committed against her was due to her fear
for her life and the lives of her relatives. 
(Rollo, p. 116)

It is not odd for young girls to conceal for sometime the
assaults on their virtue because of the rapist’s threat on their lives (People
vs. San Buenaventura, 164 SCRA 150). 
This court has already recognized that concealment by young girls of
rape against them are not uncommon because of their
fear not only for their own life but also the lives of their relatives and
their friends.  We also repeatedly held
that delay in reporting a rape incident due to death threats is justified.  (People vs. Valdez, supra).

PREMISES CONSIDERED, the guilt of appellants Paulino
Aquino and Alejandro Aquino
for the crime of rape, as separately charged, has been proved beyond reasonable
doubt.

The decision appealed from, being in accordance with law and the
evidence, is hereby AFFIRMED in toto.  With costs against
appellants Paulino Aquino
and Alejandro Aquino.

SO ORDERED.

Melencio-Herrera, (Chairman),
Padilla, Sarmiento, and
Regalado, JJ., concur.