SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

Search for www.chanrobles.com

PLEASE CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST ➔ SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

FIRST DIVISION

G.R. No. L-65676 June 24,1985

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. EUFEMIO EGAS alyas Dodong, Accused-Appellant.

GUTIERREZ, JR., J.:

This is an appeal from the decision of the Regional trial Court of Oroquieta City, 10th Judicial Region, Branch XII convicting defendant-appellant Eufemio Egas of the crime of rape. The dispositive portion of the decision reads:

WHEREFORE, and in view of all the foregoing, this Court finds the accused Eufemio Egas alyas Dodong guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Rape as defined in Article 335 (2) of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, and is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of RECLUSION PERPETUA, to indemnify the offended party Nazarita Baluyos Suan in the sum of P 12,000.00, to acknowledge and support Joel Suan, the child born to Nazarita Suan as a result of the crime, with the accessories of the law and to pay the costs.

The information dated January 2, 1979 filed against the accused-appellant alleged that:

That on or about the 3rd day of June. 1978, at barangay Bolangog, in the municipality of Lopez Jaena, province of Misamis Occidental, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, said accused, by means of violence and intimidation and by first making offended party Nazarita Baluyos Suan unconscious, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously have carnal knowledge of said offended party Nazarita Baluyos Suan, against her will, and in her house, chanrobles virtual law library

ALL CONTRARY TO LAW and with aggravating circumstance that the said offense was committed in the dwelling of the offended party, the latter not having given provocation for the offense.

The evidence for the prosecution is summarized in the People's brief as follows:

Complainant Nazarita Suan and appellant are third cousins living in separate houses in Bolangog, Lopez Jaena, Misamis Occidental. At about 1:30 p.m. of June 3, 1978, complainant was alone in the kitchen of her house, listening to the radio. Her parents and elder brother Jaime were then in Senote, Oroquieta City attending to some business. Appellant stealthily entered the house through the kitchen door, immediately hugged complainant and pulled her towards the sala. Complainant vigorously resisted appellant's advances. When she shouted for help, appellant boxed her on the chest, rendering her unconscious. In that state, complainant was ravished by appellant.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

When complainant woke up, she found herself naked and her vagina bleeding. She saw appellant seated in the kitchen. Appellant warned her not to tell her parents about the incident. Otherwise, he will kill her and her parents. Thereafter, appellant left and complainant cried. Because of appellant's threat of harm, complainant, who was then only 14 years old, did not immediately inform her parents about the incident.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

However, in the evening of August 5, 1978, Nazarita complained of stomach ache. It did not subside until the following morning. So her mother, Laureta, massaged her abdominal region and discovered that she was pregnant. When her mother inquired on what happened, only then did complainant reveal for the first time appellant's assault on her. Laureta immediately informed her husband, Sulpicio, about the incident. Sulpicio ordered Laureta to invite appellant's parents to their house for a confrontation regarding the incident. In that confrontation, appellant's parents suggested that appellant and complainant be married. Sulpicio replied that he still has to find out from complainant if she will agree to marry appellant. Appellant's parents promised to return on August 8, 1978 to know complainant's decision. Complainant refused to marry appellant. At any rate, appellant's parents failed to return, On August 14, 1978, Dr. Jose P. Libunao examined complainant and found her to be three to four month pregnant (Exh. A).chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Hence, complainant filed rape charges against appellant. After due investigation, appellant was charged with rape in an information dated January 12, 1979. As a result of the rape, a baby boy was born on February 27, 1979 (Exh. D). [tsn., pp. 8-9, 14, July 2, 1979; pp. 213, Oct. 10, 1979; pp. 14-18, Dec. 6, 1979; pp. 14-32, Dec. 7, 1979; pp. 2-14, Feb. 4,19801.

On August 14, 1978, Dr. Jose P. Libunao III, a resident physician at the Misamis Occidental Provincial Hospital, Oroquieta City, examined complainant Nazarita Suan. Dr. Libunao issued the following medical certificate which contained the following findings:

= NORMAL EXTERNAL GENITALIA
= VAGINA ADMITS TWO FINGERS WITH EASE
= OLD HYMENAL LACERATION AT 4:00 O'CLOCK AND 6;00 O'CLOCK
- INTERNAL OS EXUDING WHITISH MILKY FLUID INTO POSTERIOR FORNIX
- CERVIX CLOSED, SOFTISH ON PALPATION
= UTERUS MIDLINE, ENLARGED WITH FUNDI HEIGHT ABOUT 3-4 CM. INFERIOR TO UMBILICUS

IMPRESSION:

= PREGNANCY UTERINE ABOUT 3-4 MONTHS GESTATION
= CERVICITIS, CHRONIC chanrobles virtual law library

xxx xxx xxx

The accused-appellant on the other hand claims that the alleged complainant, Nazarita Suan was his sweetheart and that she consented to the sexual act, basis of the complaint. The defense evidence is summarized in the accused-appellant's brief as follows:

Eufemio Egas testified that he and the offended party were sweethearts. They kept their relationship secret because their parents were against it considering that they were blood relatives. While their relationship as sweethearts was existing, he visited the offended party regularly at their house and even have sexual relations with her especially when her parents were not around. He started having sexual relations with her in December 1977. During the latter part of July 1978, the offended party informed him that she was pregnant. Although he was a little frightened of the thought of her being pregnant, nonetheless he assured her that she need not worry because he was going to marry her anyway. On August 8, 1978, the mother of the offended party went to his house and inquired into the truth of their daughter's pregnancy. The accused admitted having impregnated Nazarita Suan and intimidated to them of his plan to marry her considering that they were sweethearts. Thereafter, his parents went to the Suan's residence for a talk and when they returned home, they told him that they would apply for a marriage license on 8 August 1978. However on the date agreed upon, accused failed to go to the office of the Local Civil Registrar of Lopez Jaena to apply for marriage license because on said date, he played in the basketball tournament in Hasa-an Lopez Jaena, Misamis Occidental where he was the captain ball of their barangay's basketball team and that he had previously asked his mother to inform the Suan's about his inability to go to the Local Civil Registrar's Office on the said date. After the said basketball tournament, he returned home on August 9, 1978 and he learned that his mother had a quarrel with the mother of the offended party on August 6, 1978. Several days later, he was charged with the crime of rape. (TSN, pp. 2-26, November 12, 1980).

The accused-appellant raises the following assignments of errors in his brief: chanrobles virtual law library

I chanrobles virtual law library

THE TRIAL, COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT COMMITTED THE CRIME OF RAPE THROUGH VIOLENCE AND INTIMIDATION.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

IIchanrobles virtual law library

THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN GIVING MORE WEIGHT AND CREDENCE TO THE EVIDENCE ADDUCED BY THE PROSECUTION AND IN TOTALLY DISREGARDING THE EVIDENCE ADDUCED BY THE DEFENSE.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

IIIchanrobles virtual law library

THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN FINDING THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT OF THE CRIME OF RAPE.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

The assigned errors raised by the accused-appellant revolve around the issue of credibility of witnesses. A careful examination of the records shows that this case furnishes another occasion to reiterate the settled doctrine that when the issue is one of credibility of witnesses, we have always accorded the highest degree of respect to the findings of the trial court. The lower court was in a better position to decide the question, having heard the witnesses themselves and having observed their deportment and manner of testifying during the trial. Unless the court has plainly overlooked certain facts of substance and value that if considered, might affect the results of the case we do not disturb its factual findings. We have considered the arguments of the accused-appellant on appeal in the light of the evidence and we see no reason to depart from this established doctrine.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

The defendant-appellant first questions the credibility of the offended party by pointing out that she made no outcry immediately after the defendant-appellant left their house but instead talked with the defendant-appellant who tried to comfort her.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

The accused-.appellant's contention has no merit. The 14-year old Nazarita could not have shouted immediately after the accused- appellant left their house because she and her family were under threat of death by the latter.

Q. What else transpired between you and Eufemio Egas on that occasion? chanrobles virtual law library

A. He told me further that not to tell my parents because I might be mauled, or if I insist in telling my parents he will bring away from the place where I am living and kill me including my parents.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q. Did you comply with the instruction given by Eufemio Egas for you not to tell your parents, otherwise, you will be brought away and killed including your parents?chanrobles virtual law library

A. I did it because I was afraid of his instruction to me.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

(TSN., p. 7, October 10, 1979)

xxx xxx xxx

And under gruelling cross-examination, the following testimony remained unimpeached:

Q . Now, did I get you correctly that when the accused after committing the act charged in the complaint he threatened you or intimidated you in order that you will not tell the act to your parents.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

A. Yes, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. Will you please tell this Honorable Court the exact words uttered which Eufemio Egas, regarding the threatening allegedly committed by him?chanrobles virtual law library

A. He said, don't tell this to your mama because if you are going to tell this to your mama, you will be mauled and that you will be taken out from your house upon a distance then I will bring you outside and I will kill you.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q. Now, when he uttered you that particular statement you were afraid of that?chanrobles virtual law library

A. Yes, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

(TSN., p. 15, December 6,1979)

The accused-appellant also submits that the rape charge was filed by Nazarita only because she felt jilted by the accused-appellant when the latter failed to show up on the date agreed upon by them to go to the Office of the Local Civil Registrar to secure a marriage license.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

The accused-appellant's argument are not supported by the facts. The complainant, consistently denied in her direct and cross-examinations that she was the sweetheart of the accused- appellant. She testified that although she knows Eufemio, she is not engaged nor intimately related with him. She testified that:

Q. Were you sweethearts? chanrobles virtual law library

A. No, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q. The accused is your neighbor? chanrobles virtual law library

A. Yes.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. Where?chanrobles virtual law library

A. In Bulangog.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q. He never courted you? chanrobles virtual law library

A. Never, chanrobles virtual law library

(TSN., P. 3, July 2, 1979).

xxx xxx xxx

Q. You also declared that the accused sometimes sleep in your house, did he ever offered his love to you? chanrobles virtual law library

A. No, he never courted me.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

(TSN., p. 12, October 30, 1979)

xxx xxx xxx

Q. But he visited you three times a month?chanrobles virtual law library

A. But his visiting me three times a month is just to listen to the radio.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. Not to see you? chanrobles virtual law library

A. No, that was not the purpose.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

COURT: chanrobles virtual law library

Q. Not to make love to you? chanrobles virtual law library

A. No.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. Nor to court you?chanrobles virtual law library

A. No.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q. Did he ever tell you that he was attracted to you during the period that He often goes to your house? chanrobles virtual law library

A. No, he did not tell me that,chanrobles virtual law library

Q. For this whole period since you know him in 1972 he never express his love for you chanrobles virtual law library

A. No.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. About you, you have not express your love to him?chanrobles virtual law library

A. I have not shown.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. Do you have any feeling for him? chanrobles virtual law library

A. Nothing.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

(TSN. pp. 12-13, October 30, 1979).

Moreover, the accused-appellant did not present any letters, mementoes and pictures to attest to his pretensions that the complainant was his sweetheart and that he usually goes to the house of the complainant to have sexual intercourse with her. We apply the rule laid down in People vs. Tumaliuan (129 SCRA 682), that:

xxx xxx xxxchanrobles virtual law library

. . . Appellant has not presented a single letter, note or any piece of evidence to support his claim that she was his sweetheart, Not having presented any evidence other than appellant's testimony that the act of sexual intercourse was voluntary, the declaration of the offended party, corroborated by the testimonies . . . assumes more weight and importance and to which We give full credit. . . .

Furthermore, the claim of the accused-appellant that he had several acts of sexual intercourse with Nazarita is belied by the medical findings that the complainant had only two hymenal lacerations.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Thus, the submission of the defendant-appellant that the rape charge was filed only because the complainant felt jilted when he failed to show up on the date they were supposed to get a marriage license, deserves scant consideration. The defendant-appellant was never the sweetheart of the complainant nor could she have agreed to marry him. She testified that:

Q. Do you want to marry him? chanrobles virtual law library

A. No.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q. Why'?chanrobles virtual law library

A. I don't love him.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

(TSN., p. 4, July 2, 1979)

xxx xxx xxx

Q. Did I get you correctly . . . . Is it not a fact that after you supposedly revealed the matter to your parents, the parents of the accused have visited your house? chanrobles virtual law library

A. Yes, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q. And as a matter of fact it was agreed that you and Eufemio Egas will be married soon?chanrobles virtual law library

A. No, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. Is it not a fact that your father expected the accused and is parents to go to your place on August 9, 1978? chanrobles virtual law library

A. No. sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

(TSN., p. 18, December 6, 1979).

Sulpicio Suan, corroborated the testimony of Nazarita. He testified that:

Q. What else did the parents of Eufemio Egas tell you if any when they were already there in your house upon summoning them?chanrobles virtual law library

A. Then the mother of the accused told me that because there was already the incident that happened between the two, we better marry the two but I answered it cannot be because it is against the local customs and traditions that closely related cannot be married chanrobles virtual law library

(TSN., p. 19, December 7, 1979)

xxx xxx xxx

Q. Going back to the report made by your daughteeeer on August 5, 1978 was there any agreement between you as parents and the parents of Eufemio Egas the accused in this case?chanrobles virtual law library

A. There was none, because there was an offer of the mother of the accused that since the incident had already happened she wanted that they will be married but I said you do what you can and I will ask my daughter.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. Did you ask your daughteer?chanrobles virtual law library

A. Yes.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. What did you ask your daughter?chanrobles virtual law library

A. Then I asked her why did you consented to what your uncle did to you and my daughter answered me No, he boxed me. (Witness demonstrated by using his right hand purportedly boxes the stomach of her daughter.)chanrobles virtual law library

Q. Did you ask your daughter whether she would agree to marry the accused?chanrobles virtual law library

A. Yes, I asked her.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. What was the answer of your daughter?chanrobles virtual law library

A. My daughter answers me back by telling me she cannnot because he boxed me if he did not boxed me I should not be like this now.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

(TSN., pp. 23-24, December 7, 1979)

Laureta Baluyos, the mother of the complainant likewise testified to the same effect. She testified that:

Q. After that conversation with the parents of Eufemio Egas in your house, what else did they do?chanrobles virtual law library

A. Luciana Baluyos told us that because something happened between our son and daughter so we bettwe marry them.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. And did you agree on the proposal of the parents of Eufemio Egas?chanrobles virtual law library

A. My husband answered them back by telling them, you do what you want, but before that, I will confront my daughter if it is really true that they are sweetheart or if she really love the said accused.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. Did you confront your daughter as to the proposal of the parents of Eufemio Egas?chanrobles virtual law library

A. She did not consent to do it or agree to the proposal.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. Do you know the reason why your daughter did not agree?on the proposals of the parents of Eufemio Egas?chanrobles virtual law library

A. The reason was that, she was forced and raped by Eufemio Egas against her will.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

COURT:chanrobles virtual law library

Q. The question is, you were asked whether your daughter was in love with the accused, did she. answer that? chanrobles virtual law library

A. She told us that she did not love Eufemio Egas.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

(TSN., pp. 6-7, February 4, 1983).

If the complainant yielded to the accused-appellant because they were sweethearts, as claimed by him, Nazarita would have agreed to the proposals of the appellant's parents and married him. Instead, she chose to undergo the rigors of a public trial which subjected her to shame and ignominy (People v. Senon, Jr., 121 SCRA 141). In People v. Alcantara (126 SCRA 425), we held that:

xxx xxx xxxchanrobles virtual law library

... Further, COMPLAINANT's father testified that APPELLANT's mother came to their house proposing that APPELLANT marry his daughter with the promise that they will support her studies but COMPLAINANT refused an indication that in filing the complaint it was her sincere and unadulterated desire to seek justice.

That the defendant-appellant indeed had sexual intercourse with Nazarita through force and intimidation is evidenced from the following testimony of the complainant:

Q. Sometime on June 3, 1978 have you met the accused Eufemio Egas? chanrobles virtual law library

A. He was at home.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q. What time was that? chanrobles virtual law library

A. One o'clock in the afternoon.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. what was he doing in your house?chanrobles virtual law library

A. He embraced me.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

(TSN., p. 2, October 10, 1979)

xxx xxx xxx

Q. What part of the house didEufemioEgas pass? chanrobles virtual law library

A. In the kitchen.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q. Did he ask permission when he entered the kitchen? chanrobles virtual law library

A. No, he did not ask permission.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

(TSN., p. 2, Ibid).

xxx xxx xxx

Q. How did Eufemio Egas hug you, will you kindly demonstrate to the court?chanrobles virtual law library

A. Yes, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

COURT:chanrobles virtual law library

Alright you go down.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

(witness went infront of the bailiff who was seated and grabbed his both sides with both hands and pulled him toward her).chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

COURT chanrobles virtual law library

Q. Was he able to stand up when he pulled you?chanrobles virtual law library

A. Yes, I was able to stand.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q. What did he do when you were standing, was he still holding you? chanrobles virtual law library

A. Yes, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q. What position now? chanrobles virtual law library

A. (witness demonstrate each other holding the bailiff with her two hands around the waist).chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q. What did he do in that position? chanrobles virtual law library

A. He wanted me to drag upstairs.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. Did he drag you?chanrobles virtual law library

A. Yes, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

(TSN., p. 3, October 10, 1979).

xxx xxx xxx

COURT: chanrobles virtual law library

Q. How did he bring you upstairs? chanrobles virtual law library

A. Dragged me.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. He dragged you by the use of his hands? chanrobles virtual law library

A. Yes, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q. Did you shout? chanrobles virtual law library

A. Yes, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q. What did you shout? chanrobles virtual law library

A. Help.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. How many times?chanrobles virtual law library

A. Only once.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q. Did you shout loud?chanrobles virtual law library

A. Yes, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q. what happened when you shouted? chanrobles virtual law library

A. I was boxed by the accused.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. where? chanrobles virtual law library

A. On my abdomen chanrobles virtual law library

(TSN., p. 4, October 10, 1979).

xxx xxx xxx

FISCAL CONOL: chanrobles virtual law library

Q. Why were you boxed by Eufemio Egas, did you not willingly go with him when you were accordingly dragged according to you?chanrobles virtual law library

A. I did not willingly go.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. What did you do when you were dragged beside shouting when you were dragged by Eufemio Egas? chanrobles virtual law library

A. At the time when I was dragged by Eufemio Egas I wanted to extricate myself from his hold.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q. Were you able to extricate yourself from the hold of Eufemio Egas? chanrobles virtual law library

A. I was not.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. Why?chanrobles virtual law library

A. Because he is stronger than me.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q. And to what place were you brought by Eufemio Egas? chanrobles virtual law library

A. Upstairs.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q. Is that a sala or a room? chanrobles virtual law library

A. Room.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q. When you were dragged to the sala by Eufemio Egas, what else did Eufemio Egas do to you?

xxx xxx xxx

A. That I don't know what he did because at that time when he boxed me I lost consciousness.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. When did you lose consciousness, at the kitchen when he boxed you or when you were already at the sala when you were dragged forcibly? chanrobles virtual law library

A. At the time when I was boxed by him.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q. You mean to say that you had no more knowledge when you were dragged to the sala?chanrobles virtual law library

A. Yes, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q. Did you regain consciousness? chanrobles virtual law library

A. Yes, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q. What did you notice after having regained consciousness?chanrobles virtual law library

A. My dress was already removed. I found out that my dress is removed already.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q. Beside your dress what else was removed? chanrobles virtual law library

A. I felt pain on my part of my body and specially so my vagina, " chanrobles virtual law library

(TSN., pp. 5-6, October 10, 1979)

xxx xxx xxx

Q. You said you felt pain on what part of your body did youfeel the pain?chanrobles virtual law library

A. My legs as well as well as my vagina.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

(TSN., p. 6, Ibid).

xxx xxx xxx

FISCAL CONOL: chanrobles virtual law library

Q. What did you notice about your vagina beside having felt the pain? chanrobles virtual law library

A. It was wet and bloody.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q. Did you verify what or why it was wet, is it by blood only or any other else? chanrobles virtual law library

A. It was a blood and sperm cell of a male.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

(TSN., pp. 6-7, October 10, 1979).

The lower court stated that it carefully scrutinized the complainants testimony for improbabilities. It found nothing to doubt the truthfulness and sincerity of the fourteen-year old complainant.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

WHEREFORE, the decision appealed from is AFFIRMED with the modification that the indemnity of TWELVE THOUSAND PESOS (P12,000.00) is INCREASED to TWENTY THOUSAND PESOS (P20,000.00).chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

SO ORDERED.