G.R. Nos. 140034-35 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES AND, VS. RODOLFO ZABALA Y BACORRO, ACCUSED-.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, in Criminal Case No. 99-377 and Crim. Case No. 99-378, Accused Rodolfo Zabala y Bacorro, is found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Rape as defined and penalized in Article 266-A and penalized under Article 266-B respectively, of the Revised Penal Code, he is hereby sentenced in each of the cases to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua and to pay Complainant AAA, the sum of P50,000.00 as moral damages. Aggrieved with the decision, appellant interposed the instant appeal where he raises the lone assignment of error that: THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN CONVICTING THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT OF THE CRIME OF RAPE WHEN HIS GUILT HAS NOT BEEN PROVEN BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT. [14] Appellant argues that the testimony of the victim, AAA, is undeserving of belief for being inconsistent with human nature and the normal course of things. He stresses that according to the victim's testimony, appellant pulled down the victim's panty to just above her knees and then inserted his penis into her. Since her panty would restrain her and not allow her legs to open, appellant argues that it is thus improbable that the victim's knees were spread enough to allow the appellant to insert his penis. [15] Appellant further contends that it was impossible for him to have carried the victim to his house without being noticed when, according to the victim herself, she was always with a member of her family and was never left alone. [16] This is aside from the fact that the victim reported the rape a year after it supposedly happened. Finally, appellant submits that the medical findings show no visible signs of injury despite the fact that she was of a very tender age at the time of the alleged rape. [17] We find the appeal to be without merit. Testimony of child-victims of rape is given full weight and credence. [18] Our courts usually give great weight to the testimony of the victim of sexual assault, especially where the victim, is a minor. Here, the victim vividly recalled details that a child her age, only 9 at the time of the trial, could not have possibly concocted. The victim positively identified appellant in court as the one who raped her. [19] It is highly improbable that a girl of tender years, one not yet exposed to the ways of the world, would impute to any man a crime so serious as rape, if what she claims is untrue. Where the testimony of the victim meets the test of credibility, we have consistently held that a woman who says she has been raped in effect says all that is necessary to show that rape has been inflicted on her. [20] This is especially true for minors because no woman, especially one of tender age, would concoct a story of defloration, allow an examination of her private parts and be subjected to public trial and humiliation if her claim is not true. [21] In this case, no motive has been shown on the part of the victim why she would falsely charge her neighbor of the crimes of repeated rape. The delay in reporting the crime which wa