Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions > Year 2008 > March 2008 Resolutions > [G.R. No, 178195 : March 26, 2008] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES V. PRECELLANO TABAGAN :

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated 26 March 2008:

G.R. No. 178195 (People of the Philippines v. Precellano Tabagan)

This is an appeal from the Decision^[1] dated January 31, 2007 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-GR. CR-H.C. No. 00219 entitled People of the Philippines v. Tabagan which affirmed the Joint Decision of the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Brach 35 in Mga City in Criminal Case Nos. Ir-4262, 4263, 4287, 4288, 4289, 4290, 4291, 4292, 4293, 4294, 4295, 4296, 4297 and 4298, finding accused-appellant Precellano Tabagan guilty of eight (8) counts of rape.

The antecedent facts follows.

Some time in February 1992, at around 4:00 a.m., private complainant AAA, then 10 years old, was sleeping next to her half-sisters and accused-appellant, her stepfather. She was later awakened by accused-appellant, who held her hands and undressed her. She tried to get away but he overpowered her and succeeded in having sexual intercourse with her, He threatened to kill her afterwards.

The rape of the complainant occurred another thirteen (13) times, between January 1993 to October 1996. Fourteen (14) Informations for rape were then filed against accused-appellant from January 17 to February 24, 1997.

Accused-appellant interposed the defenses of denial and alibi. He testified that he was never left alone with the complainant and that she was always with her mother. He also argued that the victim's brother falsely claimed that he witnessed accused-appellant rape the victim.

On April 26, 2002, the RTC rendered a decision, the dispositive portion of which reads:

WHEREFORE, finding accused PRECELLANO TABAGAN not guilty beyond reasonable doubt in criminal cases no. Ir-4263, 4297, 4298, 4290 and 4289, under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, he is ACQUITTED for the crime charged and these cases are DISMISSED.

However, finding the same accused GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt in criminal case nos. Ir-4262, 4287, 4288, 4291, 4292, 4293, 4294, 4295 and 4296, under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, he is sentenced for each criminal case to reclusion perpetua, pay an indemnity of P50,000.00, moral damages of P10,000.00 and to pay the cost.

SO ORDERED.^[2]

On May 31, 2002, accused-appellant filed his Notice of Appeal of the RTC Decision as to the judgment of conviction.

On September 24, 2003, accused-appellant filed his Brief^[3] before this Court. In conformity with People v. Mateo,^[4] the case was transferred to the CA on October 4, 2004.

On January 31, 2007, the CA affirmed the RTC Decision, ratiocinating thus:

In this case at bench, after scrutiny of the testimonies of private complainant and accused-appellant, We find only minor inconsistencies exist that do not affect the finding of the Regional Trial Court that found, beyond reasonable doubt, that accused-appellant was guilty of rape. Even the uniformity of the narration of the rape is not unusual especially because the victim usually does not know the difference from one rape committed against her at one time from the rape done to her on another day because all she wants to do is forget the horror that she encountered.^[5]

The CA further observed that:

Private complainant's story of her traumatic experience in the hands of accused-appellant, exhibits the marks of a credible testimony coming from a truthful witness and, therefore, must be given full faith and credit. Private complainant described in a positive, natural, sincere and spontaneous manner how she was forcibly ravished by accused-appellant. She could not have narrated her ordeal convincingly if it were not true. The testimonies of victims who are of tender age are credible.^[6]

It disposed of the case as follows:

WHEREFORE, appeal is hereby DISMISSED and the assailed April 25, 2002 Decision of the Regional Trial Court of Iriga City, Branch 35, in Criminal Case Nos. Ir-4262, 4263, 4287, 4288, 4289, 4290, 4291, 4292,4293,4294,4295,4296, [4297] and 4298, is hereby AFFIRMED.

xxxx

SO ORDERED.^[7]

On November 19, 2007, this Court required the parties to submit supplemental briefs if they so desired. The parties manifested their willingness to submit .the case on tie basis of the records already submitted.

The issues presented by accused-appellant before this Court are:

I

WHETHER THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN FINDING ACCUSED-APPELLANT PRECELLANO TABAGAN GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT OF THE CRIME OF RAPE IN CRIMINAL CASES NOS. IR-4262; IR-4287; IR-4288; IR-4291; IR-4292; IR-4293; IR-4294; IR-4295; AND IR-4296
II

WHETHER THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN NOT DISREGARDING THE TESTIMONY OF [AAA] WHICH IS TAINTED WITH MALICE AND FALSEHOODS

The appeal should be dismissed.

Accused-appellant claims that the testimony of AAA lacks the element of truthfulness. Her Narration of all fourteen (14) of the rape incidents, he argues, was uniform and without any variation. He further asserts that any doubt that AAA was a rehearsed or coached witness bolstered by her mother's testimony that AAA never told her that accused-appellant had raped her.

However, both the RTC and the CA found that the victim's testimony Was straightforward and contained only minor inconsistencies. On this point, we have held that minor lapses are to be expected when a person is recounting details of a traumatic experience too painful to recall.^[8] Even the so-called uniformity in the narration of the rape incidents by the complainant is not material and can be excused by the inability of the complainant to provide a more detailed account of a traumatic experience. Furthermore, the truthfulness of the victim's testimony is presumed, absent any ill motive on her part to falsely accuse her stepfather of rape.^[9]

As to the testimony of AAA'S mother that she did not complain of the rape to her, this Court has held that there is no standard form of behavior that can be expected of rape victims after they have been sexually abused because people react differently to emotional stress.^[10] Moreover, the trial court found that the victim's mother "appeared determined to say anything regardless of the truth to save [her] common-law husband/accused thereby giving doubt to her statement,.�^[11] This finding by the RTC should be respected as the trial court judge is in the best position to determine a witness' credibility.^[12] Jurisprudence ice has likewise explained mat some wives are beset by emotional attachment to their husbands that they "knowingly or otherwise suppress the truth" to the prejudice of the victim's rights.^[13]

We thus agree with the CA that the complainant's testimony was credible and should be given full faith and credit.

WHEREFORE, the CA Decision dated January 31,2007 in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 00219, finding accused-appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape, is AFFIRMED.

SO ORDERED.

Endnotes:

---

^[1] Penned by Associate Justice Vicente Q. Roxas and concurred in by Associate Justices Josefina Guevara-Salonga and Ramon R. Garcia.

^[2] CA rollo, p. 78.

^[3] Id. at 95.

^[4] G.R. Nos. 147678-87, July 7, 2004,433 SCRA 640.

^[5] RoIIo, p. 10.

^[6] Id. at 12.

^[7] Id. at 14.

^[8] People v. Bon, G.R. No.166401 (Fromerly G.R. Nos. 158660-67), October 30, 2006, 506 SCRA 168, 184.

^[9] People v. Canuto, G.R. No. 169083, August 7, 2006, 498 SCRA 198, 216.

^[10] People v. Santos, G.R. No. 172322, September 8, 2006, 501 SCRA 325, 341.

^[11] CA rollo, p. 77.

^[12] People v. Cadampong, G.R. No. 148144, April 30, 2004, 428 SCRA 336, 352.

^[13] Santos, supra note 10, at 338.