G.R. NO. 167180 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. ROLANDO REYES Y NACE.

Ruling

accordingly convicting appellant, the trial court disposed: WHEREFORE, finding the accused Rolando Reyes y Nace GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt in each case of the four counts of Rape, he is hereby sentenced to death by lethal injection in each of the cases filed against him; to pay the victim [AAA] the sums of P75,000.00 as civil indemnity and P50,000.00 as moral damages in each count of rape, and to pay the costs of suit. [21] In finding for the prosecution, the trial court noted the victims narration to be credible, consistent, straight-forward and in accord with human experience, . . . often interrupted by her heart-rending sobs and hysterics on the witness stand. [AAAs] rendition of her testimony was that of a victim of an unacceptable and horrendous fate because it was administered by her own father, the supposed protector of her persona and her honor at moments when she was supposed to be safe from harm and when she was hankering for the love of her mother because she was working in a distant land. Nowhere in her testimony was there any hint that the narration of her harrowing ordeal was tainted by any influence other than the whole truth. Looking at her and closely observing her deportment while she was relating the beastly conduct of her parent removed any lingering doubt as to the veracity of her account. The trial had to be suspended due to [AAAs] hysterics and swooning (sic) . Whenever [AAA] narrated the details of her ravishments, invariably, she would cry . Thus could not be the conduct of a coached actress, as the Defense unfeelingly claimed. [22] (Underscoring supplied) On appellants theory that ABC merely instigated AAA to file the charges against him, the trial court held: . . . No mother in her right senses will use her [teen-age] daughter and expose her and herself to a lifetime of ridicule and obloquy just to remove an unwanted husband. Moreover, no woman, like [AAA], would go through the ordeal of allowing her womanhood to be examined and to be questioned in detail about a very shameful experience unless her intent is to obtain justice for her oppression and to punish the dastardly acts of her own father. No daughter would willingly and cold-bloodedly send her own father to death or to a lifetime of imprisonment unless she was telling the truth. And no daughter would willingly lend her hands to denounce her own father for a heinous offense or have him sentenced to a very heavy penalty in support of the infidelity of her mother. [23] The records of the cases were forwarded to this Court for automatic review. By Resolution [24] of August 24, 2004, however, this Court referred the cases to the Court of Appeals pursuant to People v. Mateo . [25] By Decision [26] of January 19, 2005, the appellate court affirmed with modification that of the trial court by increasing the award of moral damages to P75,000.00 and awarding P25,000.00 as exemplary damages in each case. Thus it disposed: WHEREFORE, premises considered, the appeal