People v. Jagdon
REITERATIONFacts
1. The Antecedents: Two separate Informations were filed against accused-appellant Diosdado Jagdon, Jr. for Rape (Criminal Case No. B-01591) and Acts of Lasciviousness (Criminal Case No. B-01592) involving two minors, AAA (9 years old) and BBB (6 years old). In Criminal Case No. B-01591, AAA testified that the accused-appellant brought her inside a pigpen, licked her vagina, and inserted his penis into her vagina, causing her pain; she struggled, and the accused-appellant, after satisfying his desires, gave her money and warned her not to tell anyone, with BBB, AAA's younger sister, witnessing AAA inside the pigpen with the accused-appellant licking her genitals. In Criminal Case No. B-01592, BBB testified that the accused-appellant called her inside their house, made her lie on a bed, removed her skirt and underwear, licked her vagina, and inserted his finger into it, causing her pain; he also gave her money and told her not to tell her mother. Sometime in February 2003, due to an argument between AAA and BBB, BBB revealed the incidents to their mother; AAA underwent a medical examination, and a provisional medical certificate indicated indications suggestive of sexual abuse, later confirmed by a doctor, and AAA also disclosed that the incidents were not isolated and had occurred multiple times in various locations. 2. Procedural History: The Regional Trial Court (RTC) found the accused-appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Rape and Acts of Lasciviousness. The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty for Acts of Lasciviousness. The accused-appellant appealed to the Supreme Court. 3. The Petition: The accused-appellant sought his acquittal, adopting his brief filed before the CA. The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) manifested that it would not file a supplemental brief as the issues were sufficiently addressed.
Issue(s)
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the accused-appellant's conviction for the crimes of Rape and Acts of Lasciviousness; specifically, whether the elements of statutory rape were sufficiently proven, particularly the age of the victim and the act of carnal knowledge. Whether the elements of acts of lasciviousness were sufficiently proven. Whether the accused-appellant's defenses of denial, alibi, and alleged ill motive of the victims' family are tenable.
Ruling
The appeal is dismissed. The Decision of the Court of Appeals is affirmed with modifications regarding the nomenclature of the crime and award of damages. The accused-appellant is found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Statutory Rape and Acts of Lasciviousness.
Ratio Decidendi
On the conviction for Statutory Rape: The Court affirmed the conviction for statutory rape. It reiterated that the admission of the accused-appellant in open court that AAA was nine (9) years old at the time of the incident, coupled with AAA's testimony, sufficiently established the element of age, even without a birth certificate. The Court found AAA's testimony regarding the carnal knowledge to be clear, convincing, and straightforward, detailing the insertion of the accused-appellant's penis into her vagina and the pain she experienced. The provisional medical certificate indicating indications of sexual abuse further corroborated her testimony. The Court also noted that the spontaneous emotional outburst of AAA during her testimony strengthened her credibility, consistent with jurisprudence that the crying of a victim can be evidence of the credibility of a rape charge. The Court rejected the accused-appellant's arguments regarding the location of the incident (pigpen) and AAA's subsequent behavior (playing with children), stating that lust is not deterred by the presence of people and that victims of trauma may react unpredictably. The alleged inconsistency between AAA's and BBB's testimonies regarding the exact acts witnessed was deemed not fatal, as BBB did not witness the entire occurrence. On the conviction for Acts of Lasciviousness: The Court affirmed the conviction for acts of lasciviousness. The testimony of BBB was found to be straightforward and candid, detailing how the accused-appellant called her inside their house, instructed her to lie down, removed her skirt and underwear, licked her vagina, and inserted his finger into it, causing her pain. The Court found that these acts constituted lascivious conduct. While BBB's testimony and the Information differed on the number of times the molestation occurred (twice in her sworn statement versus a single count in the Information), the Court held that such variance does not diminish the complainant's credibility and is not fatal to the case, as it does not change the proven fact that the accused-appellant molested BBB. The Court clarified that while the acts described could constitute sexual assault, the accused-appellant could only be convicted of Acts of Lasciviousness as charged in the Information, as he cannot be convicted of an offense not charged or necessarily included therein. On the defenses of denial, alibi, and ill motive: The Court found the accused-appellant's defenses to be weak. His denial and alibi were uncorroborated and lacked proof of physical impossibility of his presence at the scene of the crime. The Court noted that it only takes him a little over an hour to travel between his claimed workplace and the locus delicti, making his alibi unconvincing. His claim of ill motive on the part of the victims' family was unsubstantiated by clear and convincing proof. The Court emphasized that between the positive and credible testimony of the victims and the accused-appellant's bare, self-serving, and uncorroborated defenses, the former prevails. The Court reiterated that the assessment of witness credibility is primarily within the domain of the trial courts and appellate courts will not overturn such findings absent strong reasons.
Main Doctrine
The admission of the accused regarding the age of the victim, coupled with the victim's testimony, sufficiently proves the element of age in statutory rape, even in the absence of a birth certificate. The credibility of young victims in sexual abuse cases is generally given full credence, and their emotional reactions during testimony can bolster their credibility. Alibi, without corroboration and physical impossibility of presence at the locus delicti, is a weak defense against positive and credible testimony.