G.R. Nos. 143755-58 - THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. EDUARDO PAJARILLO, ACCUSED-.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, the prosecution having proven the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, EDUARDO PAJARILLO is hereby sentenced as follows: Criminal Case No. 37-590 Reclusion perpetua and to indemnify Rachel Pajarillo Forty thousand (Ph40,000.00) Pesos. Criminal Case No. 37-591 Death and to indemnify Rachel Pajarillo Forty thousand (Ph40,000.00) Pesos. Criminal Case No. 37-592 Death and to indemnify Rachel Pajarillo Forty thousand (Ph40,000.00) Pesos. Criminal Case No. 37-593 Death and to indemnify Rachel Pajarillo Forty thousand (Ph40,000.00) Pesos." [2] Hence, this automatic review of the judgment of the trial court. The usual secrecy that envelops an act of rape, where only the malefactor and the victim are present, places the Court in a delicate task of sifting for truth from the statements and accounts of witnesses proffered by the prosecution and the defense. The Court has rightly been guided by three principles in going through the mass of the evidence, i.e., (1) that an accusation for rape can be made with facility; it is difficult to prove but more difficult for the person accused, although innocent, to disprove; (2) that, by the intrinsic nature of the crime where two persons, the complainant and the accused, are usually the ones involved, the testimony of the complainant is scrutinized with extreme caution; and (3) that the case for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the evidence for the defense. [3] Using these yardsticks, the Court has examined the testimony of Anne Rachel Pajarillo. She has charged appellant with raping her on four separate occasions - the first time in 1993 and subsequently on the 5 th , 10 th and 26 th of November 1995. Testifying on the alleged initial rape committed against her, the complainant narrated that one evening when she was still in the third grade, the date and exact time of which she could not remember, appellant removed her panty, held her two hands, spread her two legs and inserted the tip of his penis inside her vagina. She wanted to shout but she did not because of fear. "Q. Could you describe how your father raped you when you were in grade three? "A. He held my hands. "Q. And then what did you do? "A. He removed my panty. "Q. What were you doing, did you not resist? "A. I wanted to shout but I was afraid. "Q. Then after he had undressed you, what did he do next? "A. He inserted his penis inside my vagina. "Q. What did you feel? "A. I felt pain. "Q. Was that the last time your father raped you? "A. No, sir. "Q. When was the next time? "A. When I was in Grade 4 and Grade 5. "Q. You were also raped? "A. Yes, sir." [4] On cross-examination, however, Anne Rachel admitted that, in view of darkness, she was not able to clearly see her rapist and she could only be certain that it was Eduardo Pajarillo, Sr., because she "could recognize his smell." "COURT: Somebody stood up and went near her and touched her. "ATTY. ALO