People v. Conrado Pajaro
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: On February 7 and February 11, 1981, the victim, then aged thirteen, alleged that she was subjected on two separate occasions to the crime charged by the accused in the locality of Hinigaran, Negros Occidental. Medical examination showed healed laceration of the hymen and findings consistent with prior penetration but no spermatozoa were observed. The accused was arrested on March 25, 1981, detained, transferred to the provincial jail on July 6, 1981, escaped custody on February 21, 1983, and was recaptured on January 29, 1988. Procedural History: Two informations were filed on July 10, 1981. The Regional Trial Court, Branch 42, Bacolod City, after joint trial, convicted the accused on November 14, 1989 of the crime charged in both cases and imposed the penalty of reclusion perpetua and ordered indemnity of P20,000 for each count. The accused appealed. The Supreme Court, Second Division, affirmed the conviction on December 17, 1996, with modification increasing the indemnity for each count to P30,000. The Petition: The accused-appellant contended that the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, arguing lack of torn garments, delay in reporting, inconclusive medical testimony, and the complainant's long delay in seeking his recapture.
Issue(s)
Whether the trial court erred in finding the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime charged on two counts.
Ruling
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction of the accused for the crime charged on both informations, upheld the penalty of reclusion perpetua for each count, and modified the award of indemnity by increasing damages to P30,000.00 for each count.
Ratio Decidendi
On Whether the trial court erred in finding the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime charged on two counts: The Court emphasized that the credibility of the victim's testimony was paramount and that the trial court, which observed the witness' demeanor, found her testimony credible. Applying People vs. Dayag and People vs. Valdez, the Court reiterated that evidence coming from a credible witness must still be credible in itself, and found the victim's account consistent and uncontradicted by any proof of improper motive. Referencing People vs. Natan, the Court explained that the force or violence required for the crime charged is a relative concept dependent on the parties' size, age and strength, and that absence of torn clothing or external injuries does not negate the application of force or intimidation. The Court accepted behavioral and psychological explanations for delayed reporting, citing People vs. Ibay, and concluded that the victim's delay was not inconsistent with her testimony given her age and the threats alleged. The Court further considered the accused's escape from custody as indicative of consciousness of guilt, applying the principle from People vs. Sibayan, and found the accused's defenses inherently unbelievable; consequently, there was no substantial reason to overturn the trial court's findings of fact under the standard set out in People vs. Martinez and Collado vs. IAC. Finally, the Court adjusted the damages upward pursuant to prevailing jurisprudence in People vs. Soberano, while otherwise affirming the conviction and penalty imposed by the trial court.
Main Doctrine
Victim testimony, when credible and uncontradicted by proof of improper motive or compelling circumstances, may suffice to convict for rape even in the absence of external injuries; force or intimidation is to be assessed relative to the parties' size, age and strength.