G.R. No. 132062 - THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. POTENCIANO ARCO, ACCUSED-.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, this Court finds the accused Potenciano Arco GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of STATUTORY RAPE and hereby sentences him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua; to pay the victim the amount of Fifty Thousand (P50,000.00) Pesos moral damages without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency and to pay the costs. [5] Accused-appellant was pronounced guilty of statutory rape under Article 335(3) of the Revised Penal Code since the victim was only 10 years of age at the time of the commission of the crime. In his appeal, accused-appellant would insist that - "THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN FINDING THE ACCUSED GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT OF THE CRIME OF RAPE." [6] Accused-appellant invokes the case of Tuazon vs. Court of Appeals, [7] where the Supreme Court has said: "Judges should not at once look with disfavor at the defense of alibi. Alibi should be considered in the light of all the evidence on record for it can tilt the scales of justice in favor of the accused. In People vs. Omega (76 SCRA 262) we held: "'Although alibi is known to be the weakest of all defenses for it is easy to concoct and difficult to disprove, nevertheless, where the evidence for the prosecution is weak and betrays lack of concreteness on the question of whether or not the accused committed the crime charged, the defense of alibi assumes importance.' "The case at bench reminds us of the warning that judges seem disposed more readily to credit the veracity and reliability of eyewitnesses than any amount of contrary evidence by or on behalf of the accused, whether by way of alibi, insufficient identification, or other testimony. ( supra, Borchard, Convicting the Innocent, p. 1230 ) They are unmindful that in some cases the emotional balance of the eyewitness is disturbed by her experience that her powers of perception becomes distorted and her identification is frequently most untrustworthy. Into the identification, enter other motives, not necessarily stimulated originally by the accused personally-the desire to requite a crime, to find a scapegoat, or to support, consciously or unconsciously, an identification already made by another." [8] Accused-appellant bewails the testimony of 10-year old Rosemarie Magno for lacking in such details as "whether they knew each other, whether they were friends or acquaintances, whether their families knew each other, whether they were related, whether they lived near each other," and the like. Accused-appellant would thus insist that there is no sufficient basis to say that his identity (as being the culprit) has been established. Contrary to accused-appellant's claim, however, the testimony of Rosemarie Magno, particularly as regards his identity, was direct, clear and positive. She testified: "Q : Who was this person, who held your hands and told you that you will be killed, if you will tell somebody? "A : Potenciano Arco, sir. "Q : This person, whom you said Potenciano Arco, if he is here in Court, c