People v. Alamo
REITERATIONFacts
1. The Antecedents: On November 20, 1972, Eunice Aragon, a 12-year-old girl, and her 7-year-old sister Nancy were approached by Rosadinio Bañares, an ice cream vendor, who offered them ice cream. Bañares insisted and threatened them, causing them to accept. He then told them to go to a nipa swamp, promising P1.00. Despite their refusal, Bañares threatened to hurt them if they did not comply, and the girls fearfully obeyed. Upon reaching the swamp, Bañares pushed the girls inside a thicket. He then forced Eunice to remove her panties, and when she refused, he held her waist, removed them himself, and proceeded to have sexual intercourse with her, gagging her mouth to prevent her from screaming. After Bañares left, Teodulo Rocelo entered and had sexual intercourse with Eunice, warning her not to talk about it. Leonardo Alamo then entered and had sexual intercourse with Eunice, warning her she would be "boxed" if she reported it. Rogelio Logronio followed and had sexual intercourse with Eunice, also warning her not to tell anyone. Finally, Leopoldo Arnaldo arrived, pushed Eunice down, and had sexual intercourse with her, also warning her not to tell anyone. Eunice did not report the incident to her parents due to fear. 2. Procedural History: The Court of First Instance of Albay convicted Leonardo Alamo, Leopoldo Arnaldo, Teodulo Rocelo, Rosadinio Bañares, and Rogelio Logronio of multiple rape. Each was sentenced to reclusion perpetua, to pay moral damages, and costs. Four of the accused (Alamo, Arnaldo, Rocelo, and Logronio) withdrew their appeal, rendering their conviction final. Only 3. The Petition: of Rosadinio Bañares remained. Accused-appellant Rosadinio Bañares appealed his conviction, assigning errors concerning the credibility of the offended party's testimony, the conclusion of threats and intimidation, and the failure to acquit him.
Issue(s)
Whether the testimony of the offended party is saturated with inconsistencies and improbabilities, and whether threats and intimidation were employed by the accused in succeeding to have sexual intercourse with the offended party. Whether the accused should be acquitted from the charge of rape.
Ruling
The judgment of conviction rendered by the lower court finding the accused-appellant Rosadinio Bañares guilty of rape and sentencing him to imprisonment of reclusion perpetua and to pay Eunice Fortuna Aragon the amount of Three Thousand Pesos as moral damages is hereby AFFIRMED.
Ratio Decidendi
On the credibility of the offended party's testimony and the presence of threats and intimidation: The Court found no merit in the appellant's contention that there was no force or intimidation employed and that the victim consented. The victim's testimony clearly showed that she was intimidated and forced by the accused. She testified that Bañares threatened to hurt them if they did not go to the nipa swamp, causing them to become afraid and comply. When they reached the swamp, Bañares pushed them inside a thicket. He then forced her to remove her panties, and when she refused, he held her waist, removed them himself, and proceeded with the sexual intercourse despite her struggle. The Court reiterated the established jurisprudence that the force or violence necessary in rape is a relative term, depending on the age, size, and strength of the parties and their relation to each other. Considering the tender age of the complainant (12 years old), the force employed by the accused-appellant was sufficient to instill fear and compel her submission. It was not necessary that the force be so great as to cause complete resistance; it is sufficient that it was enough to consummate the sexual act against the victim's will. The claim that the victim asked for P1.00 and voluntarily submitted was deemed flimsy, preposterous, and outrageous, especially given the victim's age. On the acquittal of the accused: The Court found that the weight of evidence clearly showed the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The prosecution's evidence, as summarized and corroborated by the victim's testimony, established the commission of rape through force and intimidation. The fact that four other co-accused withdrew their appeals was seen as an indication of their realization that the prosecution's evidence was overwhelming. Therefore, the accused-appellant's appeal lacked merit, and the lower court's judgment of conviction was affirmed.
Main Doctrine
The force or violence necessary in rape is a relative term, depending on the age, size and strength of the parties and their relation to each other. It is sufficient that the force used is sufficient to consummate the culprit's purpose of copulating with the offended woman, especially when the victim is of tender age and the acts are done against her will.