People v. Ospig

G.R. No. 141766 · 2003-11-18 · J. AZCUNA, J.: · Criminal Law

REITERATION

Facts

The Antecedents: Elizabeth Salazar, common-law wife of Alejandro Salazar (working abroad), lived with her four children—including 13-year-old AAA and 9-year-old Gladys—in a small boarding house at Tam-awan, Quezon Hill, Baguio City, divided into a living room/kitchen and a curtained bedroom with two beds for the children. Appellant Roger Ospig, Elizabeth's boyfriend, resided there from early 1998, sleeping in the living room on a chair or foam, assisting with household chores, childcare, and the girls' studies, while keeping the relationship secret from the children; Elizabeth slept with the children until they were asleep, then joined appellant in the living room for intercourse. On October 18, 1998, Elizabeth worked the night shift (7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. next day) at Bay-Sport Manufacturing Inc., confirmed by her time record and employment certificate. In the early morning of October 19, 1998, AAA woke to find appellant beside her in the bedroom; he had removed her underwear, kissed her and her nipples, and inserted his finger into her vagina; she resisted by turning prone, prompting him to leave temporarily. Appellant returned, removed her shorts and underwear, pinned her hands above her shoulders, threatened to kill her and siblings if she shouted, mounted her, parted her legs, inserted his penis into her vagina causing pain, and made up-and-down movements until she kicked him hard, after which he left; AAA confided only in Gladys, fearing appellant's menacing presence when approaching Elizabeth. Appellant left on December 24, 1998, ahead of Alejandro's arrival. On February 10, 1999, Gladys informed Elizabeth, leading to AAA's sworn statement and medical exam on February 15, 1999, by Dr. Vladimir Villasenor revealing deep healed lacerations at 5:00 and 8:00 o'clock positions, gaping labia majora, non-virgin state, compatible with October 19 incident caused by erect penis insertion. During trial, appellant handed Elizabeth a letter dated August 20, 1999, claiming drunken mistake of AAA for Elizabeth, admitting embrace/kiss/finger insertion but denying rape, seeking forgiveness. Procedural History: Charged under Information for rape of 13-year-old AAA on October 19, 1998, via force/intimidation; appellant arraigned April 19, 1999, pleaded not guilty; trial before RTC Branch 6, Baguio City (Crim. Case No. 16420-R) with prosecution evidence from AAA, Elizabeth, Gladys, Dr. Villasenor, and exhibits (diary, medical report, time record, letter); defense testimony from appellant denying consummation, alleging drunken mistaken identity and kick; RTC convicted January 12, 2000, sentencing reclusion perpetua, P50,000 indemnity, costs, crediting 4/5 preventive imprisonment; appellant appealed to Supreme Court raising errors in fact appreciation, diary interpretation, credibility, mitigating circumstances. The Petition: Appellant argued trial court erred in finding consummated rape, misinterpreting AAA's diary entry (Exhibit F-1, October 18, 1998) with coded symbols indicating only 'nearly abused' without subsequent act, suggesting acts of lasciviousness or attempted rape; claimed mistaken identity in dark (no electricity), embracing/kissing AAA thinking her Elizabeth, stopping at kick without penetration; alleged inconsistencies in AAA's testimony (penis insertion only second time on direct, both times on rebuttal); sought credit for voluntary surrender (went voluntarily with arresting officers at home) and voluntary confession via letter (admitting incident pre-prosecution evidence, marked exhibit); asserted no force/threat sufficient for rape.

Issue(s)

Whether appellant's acts constituted consummated rape or merely attempted rape/acts of lasciviousness, considering AAA's diary, testimony inconsistencies, and mistaken identity claim. Whether mitigating circumstances of voluntary surrender and voluntary confession of guilt apply. Whether the penalty and damages were properly imposed.

Ruling

The decision of the RTC is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION: appellant guilty of simple rape, sentenced to reclusion perpetua, ordered to pay P50,000 civil indemnity and ADDITIONAL P50,000 moral damages, costs de oficio.

Ratio Decidendi

On consummated rape vs. attempted/acts of lasciviousness, diary, inconsistencies, and mistaken identity: The Court held AAA's straightforward, detailed testimony credible, describing two intrusions—first finger insertion after removing underwear, resisted by turning; second penile insertion after pinning and threatening death to family, causing pain until kicked—corroborated by her diary explanation (Exhibit F-1: 'nearly [abused]' referred to finger/penis acts causing pain) and Dr. Villasenor's medico-legal report (Exhibit E: deep healed lacerations at 5:00/8:00 o'clock, gaping labia majora from erect penis, compatible with October 19, 1998, non-virgin state). Even assuming initial drunken mistake in dark (no electricity), appellant left after first resistance, realizing it was AAA (no pubic hair, kick), but returned deliberately to ravage her, negating mistake via force/threat under RA 8353 Art. 266-A(1)(a); trial court correctly ruled no excuse for second act. Alleged inconsistencies (penis insertion timing in direct vs. rebuttal) trivial, not affecting core penetration fact, supported by medical evidence; appellate courts defer to trial court's credibility calibration absent overlooked facts (People v. Viajedor, G.R. No. 148138, April 11, 2003; People v. Banela, 301 SCRA 84, 1999). Diary symbols clarified by AAA as penile/finger insertion causing pain, outweighing defense. Thus, consummated simple rape proven beyond reasonable doubt. On mitigating circumstances: Voluntary surrender inapplicable as requisites unmet: appellant actually arrested at home April 9, 1999, by PNP-CIDG via warrant (Records p. 15), merely submitted, not spontaneous pre-arrest surrender to authority acknowledging guilt (People v. Javier, 377 SCRA 300, 2002; People v. Caber, 346 SCRA 166, 2000; People v. Baybado, 335 SCRA 712, 2000—warrant shows arrest). Letter (Exhibit 3, August 20, 1999) not voluntary confession: denies rape, post-arraignment/not guilty plea, presented by prosecution after two witnesses, not pre-prosecution evidence by defense. On penalty and damages: Simple rape via force/threat (RA 8353 Arts. 266-A(1)(a), 266-B) correctly penalized reclusion perpetua; P50,000 civil indemnity mandatory (People v. Viajedor); additional P50,000 moral damages awarded under Civil Code Art. 2219(2) for rape's inherent trauma, no further proof needed (People v. Viajedor).

Main Doctrine

The testimony of a rape victim, particularly a minor, given in a straightforward and candid manner, carries great weight and deserves full credence, especially when corroborated by medical evidence showing deep healed hymenal lacerations and gaping labia majora consistent with penile penetration. Even assuming an initial mistaken identity, subsequent acts of returning to the victim, pinning her down, and consummating sexual intercourse through force and threats negate any excuse and establish consummated rape under Article 266-A(1)(a) of RA 8353. Alleged inconsistencies in the victim's testimony, such as details in direct examination versus rebuttal, do not impair credibility if the core fact of penetration is consistent and supported by physical evidence. Voluntary surrender as a mitigating circumstance requires that the offender not be actually arrested, surrender spontaneously to authorities without a warrant, and manifest intent to acknowledge guilt; mere submission upon service of an arrest warrant at one's residence constitutes actual arrest and does not qualify. In rape convictions, the offender is automatically liable for civil indemnity of P50,000 as mandatory compensatory damages and moral damages of P50,000 without further proof, recognizing the inherent psychological trauma inflicted on the victim.