G.R. No. 186496 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. DANTE GRAGASIN Y PAR, ACCUSED-.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE , finding the accused Dante Gragasin y Par guilty beyond reasonable doubt as principal of the crime of Rape as defined and penalized under Article 266-A and Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code as amended by RA 8353, the court hereby sentences the said accused to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua and to pay the offended party P50,000.00 as indemnity and P50,000.00 as moral damages, and the costs of this suit. [8] In giving full weight and credit to AAA's testimony, the trial court applied the doctrine that testimonies of rape victims who are young and immature deserve full credence, considering that no young woman, especially of tender age, would concoct a story of defloration, allow an examination of her private parts, and thereafter pervert herself by being subjected to a public trial, if she was not motivated solely by the desire to obtain justice for the wrong committed against her. Neither was there any showing of a sinister motive on the part of AAA or her family to testify as they did. Although there was no testimony that AAA cried at any time after the alleged incident, it does not mean that nothing happened to her. It bears stressing that, on direct testimony, AAA testified that she, in fact, fell ill for a day after the incident. The workings of the human mind when placed under emotional stress are unpredictable, and people react differently. On intermediate appellate review, the Court of Appeals affirmed the findings of the RTC, but modified the penalty and award of damages in this wise: IN LIGHT OF ALL THE FOREGOING, the appeal is hereby DENIED. The decision of the Regional Trial Court is hereby AFFIRMED WITH MODIFICATION. Accused-appellant Dante Gragasin y Par is sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua and to pay the victim AAA (to be identified through the Information in this case), the amount of P75,000.00 as civil indemnity, P75,000.00 as moral damages and P25,000.00 as exemplary damages. [9] Hence, this appeal where accused-appellant prays for his acquittal. On 13 April 2009, the Court required the parties to submit their respective supplemental briefs, if they so desired. [10] For expediency, the defense and prosecution opted to adopt their briefs submitted to the Court of Appeals. [11] The case was thereafter deemed submitted for decision. I. THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN CONVICTING THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT FOR THE CRIME OF RAPE DESPITE THE FACT THAT HIS GUILT WAS NOT PROVEN BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT. II. ASSUMING ARGUENDO THAT THE ACCUSED COMMITTED A CRIME, THE TRIAL COURT SERIOUSLY ERRED IN CONVICTING HIM OF CONSUMMATED RAPE DESPITE THE FACT THAT THE ELEMENT OF SEXUAL INTERCOURSE WAS NOT PROVEN BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT. III. THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN GIVING SCANT CONSIDERATION TO THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED BY THE DEFENSE WHICH IS MORE CREDIBLE THAN THAT OF THE PROSECUTION'S. The assignment of errors may be narrowed down to the sole issue of whether or not accused-appellant's guilt was proven