G.R. No. 125542 - THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. ERLINDO TALO, ACCUSED-.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, this Court renders judgment finding accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of forcible abduction with rape aggravated by dwelling and nocturnity and qualified by use of a deadly weapon, sentencing him to DEATH and ordering him to indemnify the complainant P30,000.00 as moral damages. With cost. [28] Hence this appeal. First . Accused-appellant contends that he and complainant had a "previous understanding" and that their sexual intercourse was consensual. This allegedly explains why (1) there was no commotion when he and complainant went out of the latter's house as shown by the fact that not a member of the household was awakened when he dragged her out of her parent's house; and (2) when he removed her pajamas and underwear, or when he undressed, she did not push him which would then have allegedly allowed her to escape. [29] This contention has no merit. Accused-appellant never claimed that he and complainant had any relationship. In fact, he claimed he had never met her before. Thus accused-appellant testified: Q Do you know the private offended party of this case, Doris Saguindang? A I don't know her, sir, I have never met her, only here in Court. Q Do you still remember that time when did you first see or meet her in Court? A The fourth time I attended the hearing, sir. . . . . . . . Q [D]o you know the residence of the parents of Doris Saguindang? A I don't know, sir. Q You have not gone there ever since? A Never, sir. [30] Indeed, apart from his bare assertion that he and complainant were lovers, accused-appellant has shown no other evidence of such relationship, such as love letters, photographs, or other tokens of endearment. On the contrary, complainant stoutly maintained that she had never known accused-appellant before and that the latter, at knife point, forced her to go with him and molested her in a ricefield. Complainant's testimony must be quoted to appreciate her claim: Q Now, as you were awaken[ed] . . . by the accused, what happened? A He choked me up. Q What did he say? A He ordered me to stand up because he has some questions to ask. Q Now, what was your reaction? A I was nervous and shocked. . . . . Q Now, after the accused woke you up, choked you and commanded you to stand up, what happened? A He covered my mouth. Q Why did he cover your mouth? A So that I could not shout. Q Why, did you try to shout for help? A I was trying to shout but no voice will come out. Q So, what happened afterwards? A He forced me to go outside. Q How did he force you to go outside? A He covered my mouth and the other hand has knife pointing near my chest. . . . . Q: Despite of the fact that you were led by that man outside you did not resist or make any noise in order your parents to be awaken? A I tried my best but he was so strong. Q You mean he has big muscles? A Yes, sir. Strong arms. [31] Accused-appellant makes much of the fact that he was able to take complainant out of her parent's house without rousing the household from the