This is an appeal by Alfredo Ablaneda y Peconia, alias "Kalahupag" from the decision1 [Penned by Judge Emmanuel S. Flores dated April 15, 1996.] of Branch 41, of the Regional Trial Court of Daet, Camarines Norte finding him guilty of rape. The dispositive portion of the decision reads:

The evidence for the prosecution shows that the complainant-victim is Wilma Canada, a 35-year old housewife, living in Barangay Tuaca, Basud, Camarines Norte. She claimed that at 2:30 in the afternoon of May 21, 1993, she was waiting by the roadside for a ride home when the accused Alfredo Ablaneda, alias Kalahupag appeared. The accused, a reputed member of the New People’s Army (NPA), told her that she was being summoned by members of the NPA to answer some questions. "About what?" she asked him, but the accused just muttered, "basta ngaya." Fearful of the NPAs, she agreed to go but asked the accused whether she could first inform her husband. The accused acceded and they boarded a jeepney for Bgy. Tuaca, to go to her house. They alighted at the crossing of Bgy. Tuaca, where Rolando, the husband of Wilma was waiting. Upon learning of the order of the NPAs, Rolando asked whether he could accompany Wilma but the accused refused saying, "nothing will happen to her". The accused and Wilma proceeded to the supposed rendezvous until they reached the backyard of Marta Aban. Wilma noticed that nobody was around and she asked, "Where are the NPAs?" When the accused did not reply, Wilma sensed something bad was about to happen and she started to run. The accused went after her, tugged at her skirt and grabbed her right hand. He took out a fan knife from his waist and pointed it at her neck. He warned her not to shout or she would be killed. He then pushed her on the ground, raised her skirt and pulled her panty down her thighs. In an instant, he was able to remove his pants and underwear and forcibly lied on top of her. She struggled to free herself but in vain. The accused was much stronger and he succeeded in having sexual intercourse with her. She cried and was ordered to go home. Once again, he threatened to kill her should she tell anyone about the incident.

Rolando proceeded to the house of Junior Aban2 [Records do not disclose whether this is the same house as Marta Aban’s.] to wait for his wife. When he saw Wilma emerge from the backyard of Marta Aban’s house, he asked her what happened. She bid him to wait until they were home. When they got home she told him that the accused raped her. He did not confront the accused because he was known as to be a member of the New People’s Army (NPA). Sdjad

The next morning, Wilma went to the house of her aunt, Cecilia Bendecio and confided to her the incident, including the threat of the accused. Cecilia did not report to the police. Three (3) months passed by before Wilma decided to break her silence. She went to barangay captain Pablo Cardil, Sr. to complain. The barangay captain put into writing Wilma’s complaint and asked her to sign it. He also summoned the accused who denied raping Wilma. The matter was then referred to the Police Headquarters of Basud.3 [TSN, Wilma Canada, August 16, 1994, pp. 3-29.]

On August 20, 1993, Wilma filed a sworn complaint4 [Original Record, p. 2.] against the accused. The Municipal Trial Court of Basud conducted a preliminary investigation and found probable cause for filing an information. Consequently, the provincial prosecutor of Daet, Camarines Norte filed an information5 [Original Record, p. 1.] dated October 20, 1993 against the accused for rape.

In defense, the accused painted a different picture of what transpired between him and Wilma on that afternoon of May 21, 1993. According to him, at 3:00 p.m. on that day, three (3) men, whom he suspected to be NPA members because "they were armed and looked different from military personnel" came to his house and ordered him to bring Wilma Canada to the land of Rufino Aban because they wanted to ask her a few questions. Afraid of incurring their ire, he went to Wilma’s house but was informed she was in Tuaca.6 [Records do not disclose the exact place in Tuaca.] He looked for her and spotted her together with her husband at the crossing of Tuaca, while alighting from a bus. He told Wilma about the summon of the NPAs. She asked the accused to accompany her. He told Wilma to first inform her husband but she refused. The accused then accompanied her to the land of Rufino Aban, a kilometer and a half from his house and situated along the national highway. When they got there, the three (3) armed men were nowhere in sight. He told Wilma to go home. Three months later, on August 16, 1993, barangay captain Pablo Cardil, Sr. informed him that a complaint7 [Exhibit 1; Original Record, p. 75.] for rape was filed against him by Wilma. On May 28, 1994, the police arrested him.8 [TSN, Alfredo Ablaneda, January 19, 1996, pp. 2-18.] Newmiso

As earlier adverted to, the trial court convicted the accused of rape and sentenced him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua. Hence, this appeal where he raises the following errors:

In convicting accused-appellant, the trial court relied on the oft repeated ruling that "(w)hen an alleged victim of rape says that she was violated, she says in effect all that is necessary to convict the accused so long as her testimony meets the test of credibility."9 [Citing People v. Marciano Sapurco, G.R. No. 107748, July 3, 1995, Decision p. 3; Rollo, p. 57.] In its own words, the trial court held that "x x x it is inclined to lend credence to the testimony of the complainant, who claims to have been sexually assaulted since it is inconceivable that she would invent such a sordid tale of defilement unless it be the plain truth."10 [Decision, p. 3; Rollo, p. 57.]

Accused-appellant challenges the assumption behind this ruling and asserts that his guilt has not been proven beyond reasonable doubt. He pounds on the fact that when Wilma first reported the incident to the barangay captain of Tuaca, she executed the following sworn statement where she declared that he was not able to consummate the rape as she succeeded in playing a trick on him, viz:

Moreover, accused-appellant contends that "after the incident, she went home, x x x exhibiting no sign of apprehension or physical harm."12 [Appellant’s Brief, pp. 8-9; Rollo, pp. 49-50.] Accused-appellant also claims that the prosecution’s failure to present Wilma’s torn panty and skirt further negates her story.13 [Id., at p. 9; Rollo, p. 50.] And, finally, accused-appellant capitalizes on the fact that Wilma reported the alleged rape three (3) months after its commission.14 [Id.] Scjuris

On opposite ends of the scale are the constitutional presumption of innocence of the accused and the principle giving easy credence to the testimony of the victim in rape cases. In People v. Godoy15 [250 SCRA 676 (1995)], we explained the proper approach of courts when confronted by this problem, viz;

On the basis of the foregoing and after a thorough review of the evidence presented by both sides, we acquit the accused-appellant:

First, Wilma’s sworn statement before the barangay captain categorically declaring that she was able to avoid accused-appellant’s sexual advances casts a serious doubt on the veracity of her accusation. The trial court did not give weight to this damaging declaration by holding that sworn statements are often incomplete and inaccurate. Allegedly, court decisions generally consider them to be inferior to testimony given in open court.16 [Citing People v. Alegado, G.R. No. 80532, Nov. 8, 1993, Decision, p. 4; Rollo, p. 58.] We hold, however, that these rulings are not applicable in the case at bar for Wilma’s sworn statement is not merely incomplete, but tells an entirely different story. It says that no rape was committed against her by accused-appellant because she was able to escape from his lascivious clutches. Scsdaad

Second, we find it hard to believe that Wilma was calm and composed after the alleged sexual assault. She even managed to keep her husband’s inquiry at bay, when she met him a few minutes after the incident. She was not crying, she did not look disheveled or harassed. Her husband did not observe anything unusual about her which could have immediately aroused his suspicion that something bad might have happened to her.17 [TSN, Rolando Canada, November 16, 1994, p. 9.] Time and again, we emphasize that a woman’s conduct immediately after the alleged assault is of critical value in gauging the truth of her accusations.18 [People v. Herrick, 187 SCRA 364 (1990)] It must coincide with logic and experience.19 [People v. Cartuano, 255 SCRA 403 (1996)] In this case, we cannot say that Wilma’s deportment is consistent with a victim of rape.20 [People v. Antido, 278 SCRA 425 (1997)]

Third, Wilma’s medical examination itself does not establish that rape was committed against her, viz: Sdaad

Fourth, the prosecution failed to present her torn panty and skirt. The trial court brushed this omission aside, invoking the rule that a rape victim’s torn panty and skirt are not indispensable evidence to prove rape. The rule, however, holds true only if there exist other corroborative evidence sufficiently and convincingly proving the rape charge beyond reasonable doubt. The rule would go the other way, where the testimony of the complainant is weak and no other physical evidence has been presented to bolster the charge of sexual assault.22 [Supra Fn 15.]

Fifth, accused-appellant’s reputation as an NPA member was not proven. On the contrary, barangay captain Cardil’s testimony shows that the accused-appellant is a person given to boasting when drunk and for this reason his barriomates did not take him seriously: Sdaamiso

"x x x.

Last, it took Wilma three (3) months before reporting the alleged sexual assault. In light of the totality of evidence, such tardy reporting cannot but put the story of Wilma in serious doubt.

IN VIEW WHEREOF, the decision appealed from is REVERSED and accused-appellant is ACQUITTED. No costs.

Davide, Jr., CJ., (Chairman), Kapunan, Pardo, and Santiago JJ., concur. 10/6/99 3:49 PM