PHILIPPINES, VS. JONEL MANIO ALIAS “BOBONG,” ACCUSED-.

Ruling

WHEREFORE, the Court finds the accused Jonel Manio alias Bobong Manio guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Rape of a six-year old minor, and as a consequence of which and pursuant to the provisions of Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, the mandatory penalty of death is hereby imposed on him. He is likewise ordered to pay and indemnify the offended party in the amount of P50,000.00. [3] In this automatic review of his conviction, appellant assails the decision, basically questioning the factual findings, of the trial court. There is not much that the Court can do to help the cause of appellant. Testifying on what had happened to her on 03 September 1998, the six-year old victim, Catherine Navarro, narrated thusly - FISCAL DATU You said that you know Bobong Manio by having pointed to him a while ago. You also stated that something was done to you by him and when you were asked you do not want to answer. What did Bobong Manio do to you? WITNESS He inserted his penis into my vagina, sir. (Kinarat) x x x x x x x x x FISCAL DATU: You said that Bobong Manio did something to you, kinarat,' what exactly did he do to you? WITNESS: Kinarat, sir. Q. Do you know that you have a reproductive organ or a sexual organ? A. . COURT Let her point to her pekpek. FISCAL DATU Will you please point to us your pekpek? WITNESS: (Witness points to her pekpek) COURT: You stated the word kinarat, and this was what Bobong Manio did to you? WITNESS: Yes, sir. x x x x x x x x x COURT: Did Bobong Manio ever play with you? A. No, sir. Q. If he did not play with you, what was it that he did to you? A. Kinarat,' sir. Q. When he did that to you, what did you feel? A. I did not feel any, sir. Q. Were you not hurt? A. I was hurt, sir. Q. Did you notice if there was blood that came out from you? A. Yes, sir, I noticed that there was blood. Q. Where was the blood that you saw? A. In my panty, sir. Q. What about your pekpek, did you look at it if you saw blood? A. Yes, sir, there was blood. x x x x x x x x x ATTY. HERNANDEZ: Catherine, what the accused allegedly did to you at that time was bad, do you know that? WITNESS: Yes, sir, I know that. Q. And since you know that it was bad, did it not occur to your mind to shout so that people may come to your rescue? A. I shouted and I also cried, sir. [4] Per his medical report, Exhibit C, the examining physician, Dr. Jaime Rodrigo L. Leal, found healing hymenal laceration and concluded that his physical findings of genitalia [was] indicative of penetration. The counsel for the accused agreed to dispense with the doctors testimony; the accused himself was asked to sign the minutes of the proceedings to signify his conformity on the admission made by counsel. [5] Be that as it might; a medical examination of a victim of rape would not be indispensable to establish the fact of rape the proof of which could also come from a credible witness. Hardly, could appellants defense of denia