THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. BERNABE SANCHA, accused-appellant. ULANDU

Automatic review of the decision1 [Per Judge Sancho Dames II.] of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 38, Daet, Camarines Norte, finding accused-appellant Bernabe Sancha guilty beyond reasonable doubt of two counts of rape of his daughter, aged 15, and sentencing him, in both cases, to suffer the penalty of death and to indemnify the victim in the amount of P100,000.00.

Two informations for rape were filed against accused-appellant.

In Criminal Case No. 8888, the information2 [Rollo, pp. 14-15.] against accused-appellant alleged -

In Criminal Case No. 8889, it was alleged -

The cases were then consolidated. When arraigned, accused-appellant pleaded not guilty to the charges, whereupon, joint trial commenced.

The prosecution evidence shows the following: Complainant Bermalyne Aban Sancha is accused-appellant's daughter by his wife Arsenia Aban Sancha. She is the second child of the couple. At the time she testified in court on February 26, 1997, Bermalyne was 16 years old. Upon the death of their mother on June 17, 1995, Bermalyne and her siblings, Emma, 19, Augusto, 12, Maritess, 10, and Rosalie, 8, had been left in the care of accused-appellant in their house in Sitio Biray, Barangay Banokbok, Vinzons, Camarines Norte. Soon after, however, Emma, the eldest, went to Manila.

In the evening of June 20, 1996, accused-appellant and his children, Bermalyne, Augusto, Maritess and Rosalie were at home about to go to sleep. Their house was small (about one-fourth [1/4] of the courtroom) with no partition inside. The family slept side by side on the floor. Accused-appellant slept between Augusto and Maritess. To the right of Augusto were Rosalie and Bermalyne. At about 7:00 p.m., after the children had fallen asleep, accused-appellant went near Bermalyne and then started to remove her t-shirt, short pants and underwear. Bermalyne was awakened, and she started to cry. Accused-appellant removed his short pants and underwear quickly, went on top of Bermalyne and then inserted his penis into her vagina. Bermalyne felt pain in her private parts as accused-appellant forced himself upon her. When accused-appellant removed himself from her, Bermalyne noticed her vagina bleeding. Accused-appellant raped her two more times that night, at about 10:00 p.m. and 12:00 midnight. Throughout the rape, Bermalyne was crying but accused-appellant threatened to kill her if she resisted or woke up her siblings.3 [TSN of Bermalyne A. Sancha, Feb. 26, 1997, pp. 10-18; Feb. 27, 1997, pp. 2-11 (morning session); See sworn statement of Bermalyne Aban Sancha dated September 26, 1996 (Exh. C), Crim. Case No. 8888, pp. 4-5.]

The following day, June 21, 1996, at about 8:00 a.m., accused-appellant again sexually assaulted his daughter. At about 11:00 a.m. of that day, while the other children were out, playing in the house of Arsenio Aban, Bermalyne's maternal uncle, accused-appellant again raped Bermalyne inside their house. Bermalyne tried to shout but accused-appellant covered her mouth with his hand. When Bermalyne's siblings returned home at about 3:00 p.m. of that same day, she did not tell them what had happened to her as she was afraid of accused-appellant and ashamed of her disgrace.4 [TSN of Bermalyne A. Sancha, Feb. 27, 1997, pp. 11-17 (morning session)] In fact, she did not even say anything of her ordeal to her uncles Artemio, Alejandro and Arsenio Aban, brothers of her late mother Arsenia, who were also residents of Sitio Biray. Later, Bermalyne and her siblings were brought by accused-appellant to their paternal grandfather's house in Mangcawayan, Vinzons, Camarines Norte. Slx

Somehow, however, Artemio Aban learned from Flory Vasquez and one Julieta that Bermalyne had been raped by accused-appellant. When confronted, Bermalyne broke down and admitted to her uncle that she had been molested by her own father. So, on September 24, 1996, while accused-appellant was out fishing (naglaot), Artemio took Bermalyne to Sitio Biray where Bermalyne confided the matter to her aunt Flocerfida Aban, Artemio's wife. Artemio and Flocerfida did not bring Bermalyne back to Mangcawayan and instead took custody of her.5 [Id., pp. 18-28; TSN of Flocerfida Aban, Feb. 27, 1997, pp. 11-21 (afternoon session); TSN of Artemio Aban, March 3, 1997, pp. 2-9.]

The following day, September 25, 1996, at about 6:00 p.m., Bermalyne, together with spouses Artemio and Flocerfida, and Flory Vasquez, went to radio station Bombo Radyo (DZVX) in Daet.6 [TSN of Bermalyne A. Sancha, Feb. 27, 1997, pp. 6-10 (afternoon session); TSN of Flocerfida Aban, Feb, 27, 1997, pp. 21-25; TSN of Artemio Aban, March 3, 1997, pp. 9-11.] They sought the help of station manager Rhonnel R. Peñaflor who accompanied them to the 501st Criminal Investigation Group (CIG) Office in Daet, Gamarines Norte where the officer-in-charge, SPO2 Clemente Gonzales, conducted an investigation and placed Bermalyne's statements in writing (Exh. C).7 [TSN of SPO2 Clemente Gonzales, Feb. 28,1997, pp. 2-11.]

On September 26, 1996, Bermalyne filed a criminal complaint (Exh. B) for two counts of rape against accused-appellant before the Municipal Trial Court, Vinzons, Camarines Norte.

On the same day, September 26, 1996, Artemio and Flocerfida accompanied Bermalyne to the Camarines Norte Provincial Hospital in Daet, Camarines Norte for her medical examination. Dr. Marcelito B. Abas, medico-legal officer of Regional Health Office No. 5, examined Bermalyne and his report (Exh. A)8 [Crim. Case No. 8888, RTC Records, p. 4.] yielded the following results:

The findings showed that the hymenal lacerations of Bermalyne could have been caused by the penetration of a turgid penis during sexual intercourse. There is no finding of other physical injuries inflicted upon Bermalyne.9 [TSN of Dr. Marcelito B. Abas, Feb. 26, 1997, pp. 2-8.]

The defense then presented its evidence. Accused-appellant Bernabe Sancha interposed denials. According to him, at about 6:00 p.m. of June 20, 1996, Arturo and Edmundo Flavia went to his house and they drank two bottles of gin. As they got tired and became tipsy, the two left. At about 7:00 p.m., he was already asleep in his house in Sitio Biray, Barangay Banokbok, Vinzons, Camarines Norte together with his children, Bermalyne, Augusto, Maritess and Rosalie. He slept soundly and woke up at 7:00 a.m. of the following day, June 21, 1996. By 7:30 a.m., he left and did some usual farm work (kaingin) for more than two hours. At about 10:00 a.m., he went back to his house and slept again. He woke up at 3:00 p.m. He claimed that the charge of double rape was merely a scheme (pakana) of his brothers-in-law, Alejandro and Artemio, to get back at him for Arsenia's death. He alleged that they harbored ill-feelings against him for being negligent in attending to Arsenia while she was giving birth to her youngest child which resulted in her untimely demise. After Arsenia's death, Bermalyne would visit the house of her maternal uncles once in a while. He averred that the reason he transferred his family to Mangcawayan was that he wanted to take care of his father (Bermalyne's paternal grandfather) who was already very old. He said that when the case was filed, he did not ask Bermalyne why his brothers-in-law prevented him from seeing her. Nor did he bring up the matter to any member of his own family nor to any of his immediate relatives.10 [TSN of Bernabe Sancha, March 10, 1997, pp. 2-29.]

On August 21, 1997, the trial court rendered a decision finding accused-appellant guilty of two counts of rape. The dispositive portion of its decision reads:11 [Rollo, p. 24.]

Accused-appellant seeks reversal of his conviction alleging errors in the trial court's decision. Slxsc

First. Accused-appellant points out inconsistencies in Bermalyne's statements as to the number of times he allegedly raped her. He says that at one time, she said she was abused three times, while at another time she said four times. On the other hand, a witness for the prosecution, Flocerfida Aban, testified that Bermalyne related to her that she had been raped by accused-appellant twice. Accused-appellant contends that because of these discrepancies, Bermalyne was lying.

This contention is without merit. The perceived discrepancies in the testimony of Bermalyne as to the number of times she was raped are inconsequential. Inconsistencies of this nature can be expected of a young girl whose harrowing experience she is called upon to recall.12 [People vs. Empante, G.R. Nos. 130665 and 137996-97, April 21, 1999; People vs. Padilla, 301 SCRA 275 (1999)] They tend to buttress, rather than weaken, her credibility, since they indicate that her testimony was not contrived.13 [E.g. People vs. Calayca, 301 SCRA 192 (1999)] Indeed, victims of rape hardly retain in their memories the dates, number of times and manner they were violated. For this reason, it has been held that the exact date of the commission of the rape is not an essential element of the crime.14 [People vs. Lim, G.R. Nos. 131861-63, August 17, 1999; People vs. Alba, G.R. Nos. 131858-59, April 14, 1999; People vs. Villamor, 297 SCRA 262 (1998); People vs. Bugarin, 273 SCRA 384 (1997)] What is material is that the commission of the rape by accused-appellant against complainant is sufficiently proven. Discrepancies should refer to significant facts which are crucial to the guilt or innocence of an accused. Inconsistencies and discrepancies in details which are irrelevant to the elements of the crime, such as the exact time of the commission of the crime, are not grounds for acquittal.15 [People vs. Maglente, G.R. Nos. 124559-66, April 30, 1999.]

On the other hand, that Bermalyne was telling the truth is evident from a reading of her testimony as she recounted, with tears welling in her eyes, how she was molested by her father three times on the night of June 20, 1996 and twice in the morning of June 21, 1996:

The rule is settled that the trial court's appreciation of the evidence will not be disturbed on appeal unless there is good reason for doing otherwise. Accused-appellant has not shown that the trial court misappreciated the evidence.18 [People vs. Lim, supra.] Invariably, on questions of credibility of witnesses, we give due deference to the observations of trial courts since they have a better opportunity for observation than appellate courts. It has thus since become doctrinal that the evaluation of testimonial evidence by the trial court is accorded great respect.19 [E.g. People vs. Lopez, 302 SCRA 669 (1999)]

At several instances during her testimony, Bermalyne broke down and cried as she was overcome by emotion, indicating that she was telling the truth.20 [People vs. Ramos, 296 SCRA 559 (1998)] As the trial court observed, she was unperturbed throughout her lengthy cross-examination.21 [TSN, Feb. 27, 1997, pp. 2-15 (afternoon session)] If Bermalyne had concocted her tale, she would not have remained consistent throughout her entire testimony in the face of intense and lengthy interrogation.22 [People vs. Perez, 296 SCRA 17 (1998)]

We are thus convinced that accused-appellant raped Bermalyne. It is well-settled that in rape cases, the accused may be convicted based solely on the testimony of the rape victim, if such testimony is credible, natural, convincing and consistent with human nature and the normal course of things. For by its very nature, rape is committed with the least possibility of being seen by the public. In fact, the presence of eyewitness could even raise serious doubts of its commission.23 [People vs. Medina, 300 SCRA 98 (1998)]

In this case, Bermalyne's testimony is corroborated by medical findings of hymenal lacerations. Nor may the absence of physical injuries on Bermalyne preclude rape. In cases of incestuous rape, accused-appellant's moral ascendancy over the victim takes the place of violence and intimidation.24 [People vs. Bernaldez, G.R. Nos. 132779-82, January 19, 2000; People vs. Panique, G.R. Nos. 125763, October 13, 1999; People vs. Bartolome, 296 SCRA 615 (1998); People vs. Balmoria, 287 SCRA 687 (1998)] Moreover, for rape to exist, it is not necessary that the force or intimidation employed be so great or of such character as could not be resisted. It is enough that the intimidation produces such fear in the victim that if she does not yield to the demands of the accused, something grave would happen to her. Intimidation would also explain why there are no traces of struggle which would indicate that the victim fought off her attacker.25 [People vs. Manggasin, G.R. Nos. 130599-600, April 21, 1999; citing People vs. Cañada, 253 SCRA 277 (1996)] In fact, the law does not even impose a burden of proving resistance on the part of the rape victim.26 [People vs. Cantos, G.R. No. 129298, April 14, 1999.]

Second. Accused-appellant claims that on June 20, 1996, he went to sleep at 7:00 p.m., which was earlier than his children, and that he did not wake up until 7:00 a.m. of the following day, June 21, 1996. He never got up during the night, not even to urinate. He said that at 7:30 a.m., he went to work in the farm and came back at about 10:00 a.m. He slept and woke up at 3:00 p.m.27 [TSN of Bernabe Sancha, March 10, 1997, pp. 5-8.] On the other hand, Bermalyne categorically testified that accused-appellant raped her thrice - at 7:00 p.m., 10:00 p.m. and 12:00 midnight - on June 20, 1996, and twice - at 8:00 a.m. and 11:00 a.m. - on June 21, 1996.28 [TSN of Bermalyne A. Sancha, Feb. 27,1997, pp. 7-14.] Missc

Our cases show that those who commit rape are no respecter of time and place. The crime of rape has been known to be committed in places ordinarily considered as unlikely. The scene of the rape is not always nor necessarily isolated or secluded.29 [People vs. Sandico, G.R. No. 128104, May 18, 1999; People vs. Perez, supra.] Rape can be committed in places where people congregate, in parks, along the roadside, within school premises, inside an occupied house and even in a room where other members of the family are also sleeping.30 [People vs. Batoon, G.R. No.134194, October 26, 1999.] Among couples with big families who live in cramped quarters, the presence of other members of the family is not necessarily a deterrent to the commission of this crime.31 [People vs. Geromo, G.R. No. 126169, December 21, 1999.] In this case, it is not impossible for the rape to have taken place inside a small house with no partition and with five occupants therein, including accused-appellant and Bermalyne.

Third. Accused-appellant claims that the two criminal cases for rape filed against him had been concocted by his brothers-in-law. They had been harboring a grudge against him believing that he failed to give the best care to his wife, Arsenia, while she was giving birth to their youngest child, as a result of which she died. Accused-appellant denied that he ever was wanting in caring for his wife during her delivery. He said:

A prosecution for rape inevitably exposes the complainant to public scrutiny. That is why some victims of rape would rather suffer in silence than face publicity. No woman would want to go through the humiliation of trial unless she actually has been so brutalized that she desires justice for her suffering.33 [E.g. People vs. Lopez, supra.] In this case, Bermalyne told the court –

We do not think Bermalyne would agree to play along with her uncles just so the latter can punish accused-appellant who is her father. Bermalyne must be so depraved that she would be willing to allow herself to be used as a pawn of her uncles in a plot that can send her father to his death, let alone expose her family to shame.35 [People vs. Acala, G.R. Nos. 127023-25, May 19, 1999; People vs. Melivo, 253 SCRA 347 (1996)] Jospped

Nor do we see any basis to find Bermalyne's uncles so evil as to falsely charge accused-appellant for negligence that was so uncertain.

Fourth. The trial court found accused-appellant guilty of two counts of rape and sentenced him, in both cases, to suffer the penalty of death and to indemnify the victim in the amount P100,000.00 as damages.

Art. 335 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No.7659, provides:

The concurrence of both the minority of the victim and her relationship to the offender constrains the Court to affirm the death penalty imposed by the trial court. Four members of the Court, although maintaining their adherence to the separate opinions expressed in People v. Echegaray 36 267 SCRA 682 (1997)] that R.A. 7659, insofar as it prescribes the penalty of death, is unconstitutional, nevertheless submit to the ruling of the majority that the law is constitutional and that the death penalty should accordingly be imposed.

As to the monetary liability of accused-appellant, the Court finds that the award by the trial court of P100,000.00 as damages, which is P50,000.00 for each count, should be increased to P150,000.00, or P75,000.00 for each count of rape, as civil indemnity. According to jurisprudence,37 [People vs. Victor, 292 SCRA 186 (1998); People vs. Alba, supra; People vs. Empante, supra; People vs. Lim, supra.] since the crime of rape is committed or effectively qualified by circumstances which warrant the imposition of the death penalty by applicable amendatory laws, the complainant should be indemnified P75,000.00 for each count of rape. The additional amount of P50,000.00 for each count of rape by way of moral damages must also be awarded. This award is automatically made in rape cases without need of proof for it is assumed that the complainant has suffered moral injuries entitling her to such an award.38 [People vs. Prades, 293 SCRA 411 (1998)] Sppedjo

WHEREFORE, the appealed decision of the trial court, finding accused-appellant Bernabe Sancha guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime charged and imposing upon him the penalty of death, is AFFIRMED with the MODIFICA TION that accused-appellant is ordered to pay complainant Bermalyne Aban Sancha P75,000.00 for each count of rape or P150,000.00 civil indemnity, and an additional amount of P50,000.00 in each of the two cases or P100,000.00 as moral damages.

In accordance with Section 25 of R.A. 7659, amending Art. 83 of the Revised Penal Code, upon finality of this decision, let the records of these cases be forthwith forwarded to the Office of the President in case he decides to exercise his prerogative of mercy.