EN BANC
PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
G.R.
No.
147606
January 14, 2003
-versus-
ROGELIO MIRANTE
SR.,
Accused-Appellant.
D E C I S I O N
BELLOSILLO,
J.:
The court a quo
found ROGELIO MIRANTE SR. guilty of raping his fourteen (14)-year old
daughter
Analyn Mirante and sentenced him to death. It also ordered him to
indemnify
his victim the amount of P75,000.00 and P50,000.00 as moral damages,
and
to pay the costs.[1]chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
"He molested me everyday,
except on Sundays when my mother was around."[2]
This was the heartrending account of private complainant Analyn Mirante
when she narrated to the court the sexual molestations she suffered in
the hands of her lecherous father Rogelio Mirante Sr. chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
As narrated by Analyn,
she first experienced her father's depravity when at around noon of 28
November 1998 he ordered her to enter the room and to take off her
clothes.
Earlier, she noticed that he ordered her siblings Jovelyn (8), Renalyn
(6) and brother Jason (2) to go to sleep. Sensing her father's lewd
intentions,
she started crying.cralaw:red
Now entrapped inside
the room, Analyn first thought of fleeing but changed her mind when she
saw the ominous figure of her father with a bolo on hand. Rogelio
forcibly
stripped her of her clothing, caressed her body with his lips and
inserted
his penis into her organ. She tried to free herself but her father was
simply too strong for her. After satiating his lust, he wiped her
private
part and pressed her stomach which according to her was intended to
thwart
pregnancy.[3]chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Analyn recounted that
in the early morning of 25 February 1999 her mother Avelina, as usual,
left for work leaving her behind in the house with her father and her
two
(2) sisters and a brother who were all much younger than she. At around
noon, her father suddenly straddled her, repeatedly kissed her body
including
her most delicate parts, and penetrated her sexually. She pleaded to
him
to stop as she was hurting, but her entreaties proved futile as her
father
continued his pumping motion. Not content with his physical
superiority,
the accused threatened her with a knife if she would not stop
resisting.
She could only cry in pain and anguish. She recalled that some moments
into the frenzy he withdrew his penis from her organ and ejaculated.
She
surmised that that was intended to prevent her from getting pregnant.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
As early as 28 November
1998, Analyn already confided to her mother Avelina and older brother
Rogelio
Jr. the rape incidents but her mother remained unmoved, and worse, even
sided with the accused and gave credence to his denials.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
On a date she could
no longer recall, Analyn was accompanied by her older brother to the
police
station where she was interviewed by Police Officer Morada so that the
following day she was brought to a medical clinic for physical
examination.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Analyn revealed on cross-examination
that on various occasions her father would maltreat her younger
brothers
and sisters and break household furniture pieces and appliances
whenever
she would refuse to give in to his sexual advances. That was exactly
what
happened on 28 November 1998 when he again let loose his fury by
throwing
a number of household appliances and other items including two (2)
television
sets and a radio when Analyn refused to give in to his sexual
importuning.
On about five (5) different occasions, she reported the sexual
molestations
of her father to her mother but the latter not only would not believe
her
but also refused to take any step to help her.cralaw:red
Dr. Emmanuel Perez,
medico-legal officer of the PNP Crime Laboratory, found the victim’s
genitalia
to be "an elastic, fleshy type hymen with shallow healed lacerations at
five and nine o’clock and deep healed lacerations at seven o’clock
positions"[4]
but found no injury on the extra-genital portion of her body.[5]chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Seeking his exoneration,
the accused interposed the defense of alibi and denial. His version was
that at about seven o’clock in the morning of 27 February 1999 he left
for his plantation about two hundred (200) meters from their house.
When
he returned at around seven o'clock in the evening, he caught Analyn
kissing
with her boyfriend Lando on the sofa. Seeing that one of his children
was
already crying, he ordered Analyn to pacify him but she took offense
and
irately muttered, "dahil sa inyo wala akong kalayaan." Enraged by his
daughter's
discourteous remarks, he furiously broke the appliances that he could
get
his hands on. Thereafter, he gave Analyn P10.00 and dared her to call
the
police and put him in jail if she did not like his advice.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
When the commotion subsided,
according to him, he returned to his plantation and stayed there in his
hut for the night. When he returned to the house the following morning,
he was surprised to find police officers inside their house. He was
even
more stunned when they arrested him for allegedly raping his daughter.
When asked for the possible reason why his daughter would impute such a
grave accusation against him, he could only guess that Analyn regarded
him as "malupit" or a cruel father who would scold and punish his
children
for the slightest infraction. He insisted that his daughter was
recalcitrant
and hardheaded, and had the habit of cursing him whenever he would give
her some advice.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
After trial, the court
a quo found the accused guilty of raping his daughter Analyn on 27
February
1999, and imposed upon him the maximum penalty of death. The trial
court
gave credence to the testimony of Analyn; on the other hand, it did not
believe that the alleged resentment of the victim towards her father
for
being a strict disciplinarian was sufficient enough to cause her to
fabricate
the very serious charge of incestuous rape against him. If Analyn was
only
concerned with her freedom, she could easily have run away from home.
Indeed,
his bare denials could not overturn her positive testimony. chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
In his brief, the accused
bemoans his conviction despite a number of inconsistent statements made
by the private complainant which, in his view, demean her credibility
and
shore up his assertion that the alleged victim cried rape if only to
gain
her freedom to live with her boyfriend. He draws our attention to her
statement
on direct examination that her younger sisters and brother were ordered
by their father to sleep which apparently contradicts her statement on
cross-examination that they were asked instead by the accused to play
outside
the house.[6]chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
We are not persuaded.
This Court has enunciated often enough to the point of triteness and
satiety
that minor discrepancies do not affect the essential integrity of the
witness’
testimony in its material whole; on the contrary, they strengthen its
veracity,
as they are badges of truth rather than indicia of falsehood. Indeed,
the
natural fickleness and frailty of human memory do not always allow
precise
recollection and impeccable narration of events especially coming from
a minor who undergoes a harrowing and appalling experience. chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
The accused was positively
and categorically pointed to by the victim as the man who sexually
molested
her. She could not have made a mistake in identifying her own father as
her coital tormentor. This fact cannot simply be overturned by a mere
blanket
denial. Verily, no child in her right mind would concoct a story of
defloration
against her own father and expose her whole family to the stigma and
disgrace
associated with incestuous rape if only to free herself from an
overweening
and strict parent who only happens to enforce parental guidance and
discipline.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
According to the trial
court, Analyn’s account of the sexual assault was given in a most
straightforward,
candid and convincing manner thus leaving no room for doubt that she
was
in fact ravished by her own father. Consider the following narration -[7]chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Q: Will
you
kindly inform this Hon. Court how did your father abuse you that day of
February 25, 1999, according to you?
A: He placed his
body
on my stomach and then he kissed me sir.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Q: And then?
A: He also kissed
the
lower part of my body, sir. chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Q: And then?
A: He kissed me
repeatedly,
sir. chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Q: And then?
A: Sometimes he
wanted
to kiss my lips but I cover(ed) them with my hand, sir.
Q: And then,
what else
transpired?
A: Sometimes I cry
(sic) because it was painful and I told him I do (sic) not like it,
sir.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Q: What was that
painful
that you felt pain?
A: Whenever he
inserts
his private part into my private part, sir. chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Q: Did he insert
his
private part into your private part that day, February 25, 1999?
A: Yes, sir.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
But for accused
Rogelio to be convicted of qualified rape and sentenced to death, it
must
be established with certainty that Analyn was below eighteen (18) years
of age or that she was a minor at the time of the commission of the
crime.
It must be stressed that the severity of the death penalty, especially
its irreversible and final nature once carried out, makes the
decision-making
process in capital offenses aptly subject to the most exacting rules of
procedure and evidence.[8]
However, no birth certificate or similar authentic document, e.g.,
school
records or baptismal certificate of Analyn was presented to prove her
age.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
The uncertainty in proving
the age of Analyn in view of the failure by the prosecution to present
any corroborative evidence as to her age only warrants the conviction
of
the accused for simple rape, not for qualified rape. Hence, the penalty
of death imposed by the trial court must be reduced to reclusion
perpetua.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
The trial court ordered
the accused to indemnify the victim in the amount of P75,000.00, which,
although undenominated, presumably refers to the civil indemnity, and
another
P50,000.00 as moral damages. chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
In view of the finding
that the accused is liable only for simple rape, the amount of
P75,000.00
as civil indemnity should be lowered to P50,000.00 in conformity with
prevailing
jurisprudence.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
WHEREFORE, the Decision
of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 76, San Mateo, Rizal, is MODIFIED.
Accused Rogelio Mirante Sr. is held guilty of simple rape instead, and
not qualified rape, and is sentenced to the lower penalty of reclusion
perpetua and ordered to pay the victim Analyn Mirante P50,000.00 as
civil
indemnity and P50,000.00 as moral damages. Costs de oficio. chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
SO ORDERED.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Davide, Jr., C.J.,
Puno, Vitug, Mendoza, Panganiban, Quisumbing, Ynares-Santiago,
Sandoval-Gutierrez,
Carpio, Austria-Martinez, Corona, Carpio Morales, Callejo, Sr. and
Azcuna,
JJ.,
concur. chan
robles virtual law library
____________________________
Endnotes:
[1]
Decision penned by Judge Jose C. Reyes, Jr., RTC-Br. 76, San Mateo,
Rizal,
Original Records, p. 125. Note that unlike the amount of P50,000.00
which
is specified for moral damages, the
P75,000.00
is not designated for what it is awarded.
[2]
TSN, 11 August 1999, p. 20. See also Exh. 'A,' Original Records, p. 92.
[3]
TSN, 11 August 1999, p. 5.
[4]
TSN, 18 February 2000, p. 5.
[5]
Id., pp. 5-6.
[6]
Rollo, p. 50.
[7]
TSN, 11 August 1999, pp. 6-7.
[8]
People v. Manuel Pruna, G. R. No. 138471, 10 October 2002 citing People
v. Liban, G.R. Nos. 136247 and 138330, 22 November 2000, 345 SCRA 453.ch |