Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions

G.R. No. 185384 - (People of the Philippines v. Marcos S. Lopez).- We resolve the appeal, filed by accused Marcos S. Lopez (appellant), from the June 29, 2007 decision of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR- H.C. No. 01730.^[1]

In its October 21, 2002 decision,^[2]  the Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 78 of Malolos, Bulacan, found the appellant guilty of two counts of rape^[3] committed against his nieces, AAA,^[4] nine (9) years old, and BBB, thirteen (13) years old,^[5] on August 17, 1996 and September 27, 1997, respectively. It imposed the penalty of reclusion perpetua for each count of rape and ordered him to indemnify each of the victims the amounts of P50,000.00 as civil indemnity, P50,000.00 as moral damages and P25,000.00 as exemplary damages, and to pay the costs of suit.

On intermediate appellate review, the CA found the inconsistencies the appellant pointed out to be insignificant. The CA also rejected the appellant's claims that the victims' delay in reporting the rape incidents and the medical findings on AAA's unbroken hymen placed doubts on or negated the commission of the rapes. The CA increased the amounts of civil indemnity and moral damages, awarded to AAA and BBB, from P50,000.00 to P75,000.00 each.

Our Ruling 

We deny the appeal, but modify the awarded indemnities.

We see no reason to disturb the findings of the RTC, as affirmed by the CA. We entertain no doubt that the appellant had committed rape against AAA and BBB, based on their credible and positive testimonies pointing to the appellant as the perpetrator of the crimes.

As the CA did, we find the inconsistencies of the victims' statements to be immaterial; they do not at all discredit the credibility of the victims and their statements. Minor testimonial discrepancies caused by the natural fickleness of human memory tend to strengthen, rather than weaken, credibility because they erase suspicions of a rehearsed testimony.^[6] We, likewise, reject the appellant's claims; delay in reporting incidents of rape, in the face of threats of physical violence, should not be taken against the victim.^[7] Neither is a broken hymen an element of rape.^[8]

On the civil liabilities, we affirm the award of exemplary damages to serve as deterrent to elders who abuse and corrupt the youth, as well as to protect the latter from sexual abuse.^[9]

However, we reduce the awards of civil indemnity from P75,000.00 to P50,000.00 and moral damages from P75,000.00 to P50,000.00, considering that the appellant was sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua, and not death that warrants the imposition of the higher amount.^[10] 

WHEREFORE, the decision dated June 29, 2007 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 01730, finding the appellant guilty of two counts of rape, is AFFIRMED, with the MODIFICATION that both awards of civil indemnity and moral damages are reduced to P50,000.00 and P50,000.00, respectively. Leonardo-De Castro, J., on official leave; Bersamin, J., designated additional member per S.O. No. 1053.

SO ORDERED.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) MA. LUISA L. LAUREA
Clerk of Court

Endnotes:

---

^[1] Penned by Associate Justice Apolinario D. Bruselas, Jr., and concurred in by Associate Justices Bienvenido L. Reyes and Aurora Santiago-Lagman; rollo, pp. 4-18.

^[2] CA rollo, pp. 19-28. 

^[3] Under the repealed Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, to wit:

Article 335. When and how rape is committed. Rape is committed by having carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances:

1. By using force or intimidation:
2. When the woman is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; and
3. When the woman is under twelve years of age or is demented.

The crime of rape shall be punished by reclusion perpetua. [underscoring ours]

^[4] Pursuant to Republic Act No. (RA) 7610, "An Act Providing for Stronger Deterrence and Special Protection Against Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination, and for Other Purposes"; RA 9262, "An Act Defining Violence Against Women and Their Children, Providing for Protective Measures for Victims, Prescribing Penalties Therefore, and for Other Purposes"; Section 40 of A.M. No. 04-10-11-SC, known as the "Rule on Violence Against Women and Their Children," effective November 15, 2004; and People v. Cabalquinto, G.R. No. 167693, September 19, 2006, 502 SCRA 419, the real name of the rape victim is withheld and, instead, fictitious initials are used to represent her.

^[5] The prosecution properly established the victims' ages by presenting in court their Certificates of Live Birth.

^[6] People v. Antonio, 388 Phil. 869, 876 (2000); and People v. Santito, Jr., G.R. No. 91628, August 22, 1991, 201 SCRA 87.

^[7] People v. Cortes, 380 Phil. 89 (2000); and People v. Melivo. 323 Phil. 412 (1996).

^[8] People v. Tampos, 455 Phil. 844 (2003); and People v. Cabebe, 352 Phil. 1155 (1998).

^[9] People v. Layco, Sr., G.R. No. 182191, May 8, 2009, 587 SCRA 803, 808.

^[10] People v. Arcosiba, G.R. No. 181081, September 4, 2009, 598 SCRA 517; People v. Impas, G.R. No. 176157, June 18, 2009, 589 SCRA 565; and People v. Montesclaros, G.R. No. 181084, June 16, 2009, 589 SCRA 320.