G.R. No. L-47911 July 27, 1988
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. RICARDO SATO alias JUNIOR and ALFREDO SASUTA, accused. ALFREDO SASUTA, appellant.

FACTS

The prosecution alleged that on February 11, 1975, complainant Felomina C. Sato, her husband Catalino, and their 8-year-old son Jose were returning home to Carcar, Cebu, when they were accosted by accused Ricardo Sato and Alfredo Sasuta. Ricardo struck Catalino, rendering him unconscious. The two accused then took turns raping Felomina. The following day, the incident was reported to the police. Felomina was medically examined, but the NBI technician found no spermatozoa in the cervical smear taken from her.
Appellant Alfredo Sasuta, the sole appellant after his co-accused withdrew his appeal, raised the defense of alibi, claiming he was elsewhere at the time of the incident. He assailed his conviction, arguing that the prosecution evidence was insufficient, improbable, and failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Specifically, he pointed to the absence of spermatozoa, the lack of physical injuries on the complainant, and alleged inconsistencies in the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in convicting appellant Alfredo Sasuta of the crime of rape despite the cited evidentiary challenges.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court methodically dismantled the appellant’s arguments. First, the absence of spermatozoa is immaterial to proving rape; what is essential is evidence of penetration, not emission. The Court noted that spermatozoa could have died by the time of the examination hours later. Second, the lack of physical injuries or signs of a violent struggle on the complainant does not negate rape. Force in rape need not be irresistible; it is sufficient if it accomplishes its purpose. The Court upheld the trial court’s finding that the attack on her husband and the striking of her thighs induced sufficient fear to overcome her resistance.
Third, minor inconsistencies in the testimonies of uneducated barrio folk do not destroy their credibility, especially when the core narrative remains consistent. Most crucially, the testimony of the 8-year-old son, Jose Sato, who witnessed the entire event, provided strong and credible corroboration. He clearly testified that both accused took turns mounting his mother. Finally, the defense of alibi failed. For alibi to prosper, it must be physically impossible for the accused to have been at the crime scene. Appellant’s claim of being in an adjoining town did not meet this stringent requirement, especially when weighed against the positive identification by the victim and an eyewitness. The conviction was upheld, with the modification of ordering the appellant to pay P20,000.00 as civil indemnity to the victim.