"That on or about the 15th day of February, 1996, in the [M]unicipality of Meycauayan, [P]rovince of Bulacan, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, conspiring, confederating together and mutually helping each other, armed with a firearm and bladed instrument, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously, by means of force, violence and intimidation, with lewd designs, have carnal knowledge of the offended party Elizabeth S. Lawson, against her will and without her consent."

"WHEREFORE, premises considered, judgment is hereby rendered finding the accused YAMASITO VERGEL GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT of the crime of rape defined and penalized under Art. 335 of the Revised Penal Code and hereby sentences him to suffer the penalty of RECLUSION PERPETUA and to indemnify the victim [in] the amount of P100,000.00 in moral damages and to pay the costs of suit."6 [Assailed Decision, p. 5; rollo, p. 17.]

"Sometime before 11:00 o’clock in the morning of February 15, 1996, appellant Yamasito Vergel and Danny Duran, both apparently drunk and armed with a gun and fan knife (balisong), respectively, fetched and forcibly brought victim Elizabeth Lawson on board a tricycle to the apartment of a certain Aling Aurora located at Zuniga, Bayugo, Meycauayan on the pretext that her mother wanted her to join her there. ScÓ lex

"When they arrived at the apartment, Elizabeth was told by appellant to wait for her mother who had gone out to buy something. Appellant then poked the gun at her side and pulled her into a bedroom. Appellant put the gun down on the bed and then removed the victim’s clothes before undressing himself. When they were both naked, appellant parted the victim’s thighs and inserted his penis into her vagina. He made up and down and push and pull movements only pausing whenever he heard Danny Duran, who had stayed guard near the door of the sala, alert him to the presence of someone passing. Appellant held the victim’s outstretched arms above her head and mashed her body while performing sexual intercourse with her. The victim, who felt pain in her private parts, pleaded with the appellant to let her go home. At about 1:00 o’clock in the morning of the following day appellant, after satisfying his lust, finally agreed to let the victim go home but only if she would tell no one about the incident. Appellant and Duran dropped the victim off in her home and then sped off on board a tricycle.

"Exhausted from her ordeal, the victim did not tell her mother about the rape upon reaching home. It was only on the morning of February 27, 1996 that she narrated the incident to her mother after the latter noticed ‘kiss marks’ on her neck. Her mother lost no time in reporting the matter to the authorities and filing a complaint against appellant and Duran.

"The victim was brought by her mother to the hospital at Camp Olivas, Pampanga for medical examination. She was later confined at the Nazareno Clinic from March 1-3, 1996 for treatment after she was found to be suffering from a vaginal infection. Sclawä

"Dr. Edgardo Gueco, PNP Superintendent and Chief of the Crime Laboratory at Camp Olivas, examined the victim on February 29, 1996 upon the request of the Meycauayan Police. Genital examination of the victim revealed newly-healed hymenal lacerations at 1, 4 and 10 o’clock positions.

"Incidentally, the victim who was 21 years old at the time of the incident, finished schooling only up to Grade VI. She was nicknamed ‘Nano’ because of her short height. She had a low IQ and was sickly."

"On the part of the defense, the accused Vergel denied the charges leveled against him, insisting that it was the victim’s mother who caused the filing of the instant suit as the latter was constantly being reminded by the accused of her monetary obligations to the accused in the amount of P4,000.00. In fact, in the morning of February 28, 1996, as he was again collecting from the victim’s mother the amount the latter owed him, he was told by Mrs. Lawson that something [would] happen to him. True enough, on the evening of that day, he was arrested by the authorities. He likewise insisted that he could not have done the alleged rape at the place being referred to by the private complainant as the said place is teeming with people considering that beside it is an artesian well, on its other side is a store and fronting it is a street where there are many passersby."10 [Assailed Decision, p. 3; rollo, p. 53.] Korteä

"While the victim’s narrations were at times confusing the private complainant having given answers totally unrelated to the questions being propounded, nevertheless, her testimony, taken in its entirety, revealed a clear picture of the consummation of the crime of rape and that the accused Vergel was the author thereof. Kyleä

"It must be stressed that the victim is a mere grade school graduate which made it doubly difficult for her to immediately comprehend the questions thrown at her and to offer an intelligent answer. It would not matter that she was unable to sequentially describe her ordeal. ‘The failure of a rape victim to relate in detail the things done to her does not lessen her credibility[;] instead it indicates her sincerity, candor and lack of outside suggestion’ (PEOPLE vs. PAMOR, supra) for ‘a rape victim is not and cannot be expected to keep an accurate account of her traumatic experience.’ (PEOPLE vs. SABELLINA, 239 SCRA 492). What is relevant is that she was able to describe details which [constitute] the elements of the crime complained of -- the accused had carnal knowledge of the offended party and xxx coitus was done through force or intimidation (PEOPLE vs. FABRO, 239 SCRA 462).

"Besides, as the Court had noticed, the private complainant was trembling, confused and ashamed during all the time that she was on the stand. This is quite understandable for she could not be expected to be at ease relating to the public a painful and humiliating experience."11 [Assailed Decision, pp. 4-5; rollo, pp. 54-55.]

"The Court also cannot fathom the defense being advanced by the accused that the victim’s rape charges [were] mere concoctions planned by her mother. In the first place, no woman would permit herself to be used, even by her own mother, for some flimsy reason. The Filipino culture places a heavy premium on a Filipina’s purity and virginity, thus, making it unthinkable for the herein victim to make-up such a story. ‘An unmarried Filipina would not publicly admit that she had been raped, voluntarily allow herself to be medically probed and endure humiliating and delicate questions in the course of the trial, if her accusations were malicious concoctions.’ (PEOPLE vs. BAUTISTA, 236 SCRA 102).

"What is more appalling is the accused’s insinuation that the rape story was the victim’s mother’s brainchild simply because of a P4,000.00 debt which the accused had been continuously and annoyingly demand from her. ‘No mother would stoop that low as to subject her daughter to the physical hardship and shame concomitant to a rape prosecution just to assuage her own hurt feelings’ (PEOPLE vs. REJANO, 237 SCRA 627) or ‘to satisfy her desire for revenge’ (PEOPLE vs. SABALLE, 236 SCRA 365or simply because of a ‘supposed feud’ (PEOPLE vs. SABELLINA, supra)."12 [Ibid.] ) EsmmÓ is

"I.......The trial court gravely erred in convicting the accused even when the prosecution’s evidence failed to meet the parameters of proof beyond reasonable doubt and/or moral certainty because:

"(1)......The presence of the essential elements [that] constitute rape was not proved[;] on the contrary, granting that the testimony of the complainant [was] true, it is clear that the act if done, was with the consent of the offended party;

"(2)......The circumstances as narrated by the offended party [were] contrary to the natural human experience and on this basis alone, the trial court should have taken the testimony of the offended party with extreme caution, as it [was] clearly fabricated; Mseä sm

"(3)......The trial court totally ignored the clear and direct testimony of both the offended party and her mother that the latter discovered the commission of the offense because of the presence of kiss marks on the neck of her daughter.

"II.......The trial court erred in totally disregarding the defense of the accused that the victim’s tale of rape [was] incredulous and was merely a concoction of the victim’s mother who had an axe to grind against him.

"III.......The trial court erred in not giving weight and importance [to] major inconsistencies in the testimony of the victim xxx:

(1) she stated at first when she was called at her house that if she will not go with them, she will be killed, later she testified that if she will not go with him, he will kill her mother;

(2) the impossibility of waiting for her mother inside the room when there [were] several persons in the house;

(3) at the time accused [was] undressing himself, she ha[d] all the time to shout or run away or call the attention of the persons in the house and outside of the house;

(4) the on and off acts of abusing the victim [were an] impossible scenario in a crime of rape;

(5) [the victim's statement]: ‘stop that, I do not like it anymore’ connotes[d] that she like[d] it initially; Esâ msc

(6) xxx when accused inserted his penis, her thighs were opened, which for all intents [was a] glaring indication of her willingness to do the act, if such act was really done on the date of the alleged commission; and

(7) xxx it is highly unbelievable that the push and pull movement of the accused would last from 12:00 o’clock in the afternoon of February 15, 1996 up to one o’clock in the morning of the following day."13 [Appellant’s Brief, pp. 6-8; rollo, pp. 43-45.]

"PROS. SANTIAGO: ScmisÓ

Q......After poking a gun, what happened, if anything still happened?

A......He undressed me, Sir. I [was] wearing "ternong pula".

x x x ......x x x ......x x x

COURT:

Q......What happened after Yamasito undressed himself?

A......He separated my thighs, Your Honor.

Q......And after that what happened?

A......He inserted his penis into my vagina.

Q......And what happened?

A......I was hospitalized.

Q......Was Yamasito Vergel able to insert his penis into your vagina?

A......Yes, Your Honor.

PROS. SANTIAGO:

Q......How did Yamasito Vergel move his body while his penis was inserted into your vagina? MisÓ sc

A......He made an up and down, push and pull movement.

Q......For how long did Yamasito Vergel move his body while he was in that movement?

A......Five (5) times, Sir.

Q......For how long?

A......He stopped for a while, Sir.

COURT:

When you said stop, what do you mean? He stopped the push and pull movement?

A......Whenever somebody [was] passing, he would stop for a while.

PROS. SANTIAGO:

Q......While somebody [was] passing [by] the room?

A......While raping me, when somebody would pass, he would leave me and after a while, he [would] return.

Q......How [did] you know that somebody [was] passing along that house? MisÓ spped

A......Because Danny Duran was guarding[;] when somebody [was] passing, he would say: "Stop that, somebody is passing".

x x x......x x x......x x x

Q......What were your and Yamasito’s position whenever he would stop that push and pull movement?

A......He [would] return to me when there [was] no more person passing.

Q......Will you describe the appearance of Yamasito Vergel when he was in the act of pushing and pulling xxx?

A......He was frowning. ("nakasimangot")

Q......What about you, please be candid, what did you feel when Yamasito inserted his penis to your private part?

A......"Masakit po".

x x x......x x x......x x x

Q......How about your arms? xä law

A......Like this one, Sir. (Witness demonstrating her both arms stretched above her head)

Q......How about the arms of Yamasito?

A......He [was] holding [both of my] hands, Sir.

Q......Are your referring to both hands of Yamasito?

A......Yes, Sir.

Q......What else happened?

A......Yamasito Vergel told me to return to the room.

COURT:

Q......While Yamasito Vergel was in the act of what you stated as push and pull movement and holding your hands with his hands, how did you react?

A......"Masakit Po." He mashed my whole body, Your Honor.

Q......While Yamasito Vergel was doing that particular act, what was your reaction?

A......I felt aches on my breast, Your Honor. Scä

Q......Did you like the act?

A......No, Your Honor.

Q......And what did you do?

A......I told him, "Yamasito Vergel, let me go home." ("Pauwiin mo na ako".)

PROS. SANTIAGO:

Q......What was the response of Yamasito Vergel?

A......He said, ‘I will let you go home but do not tell it to anybody’."14 [TSN, July 10, 1996, pp. 20-23; records, pp. 139-143.]