G.R. Nos. 134527-28; September 25, 2001
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. SERAPIO REY alias APIONG, accused-appellant.

FACTS

The accused-appellant, Serapio Rey, was convicted by the trial court for two counts of rape against his niece, Karen Fuentes. The first incident occurred in October 1993, when Karen was thirteen years old. She was sleeping in the living room of their house when she was awakened by Rey on top of her. He covered her mouth, threatened her with a pointed instrument, lowered her clothing, and penetrated her. He threatened to kill her and her sisters if she reported it. The second rape occurred under similar circumstances on 14 May 1995, where Rey again sexually assaulted Karen while she slept and issued the same death threats.
Karen disclosed the rapes to a friend in June 1995, leading to a medical examination that revealed healed hymenal lacerations. Rey denied both accusations, presenting an alibi that he was in different locations during both incidents. He claimed the charges were fabricated by Karen’s relatives to separate her father from Rey’s sister, Ofelia, who was the father’s live-in partner. The defense presented Karen’s father, Montano Fuentes, who testified that upon his return from abroad, Karen was evasive and tearful when he questioned her about the allegations, implying possible fabrication.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in convicting Serapio Rey of two counts of rape based on the credibility of the victim’s testimony and in rejecting the defenses of alibi and frame-up.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court upheld the trial court’s assessment of Karen Fuentes’s credibility, which is generally accorded great weight and respect in rape cases. Her testimony was detailed, consistent, and delivered in a straightforward manner, despite emotional difficulty, which lent it credibility. The Court found no improper motive for Karen to falsely accuse her uncle and endure the ordeal of a public trial.
The defense of alibi was properly rejected as inherently weak and insufficient to overcome the positive identification by the victim. Rey’s claim of being elsewhere was not corroborated by credible evidence. The Court also found the frame-up theory unconvincing. The testimony of Karen’s father, Montano, was deemed unreliable due to his conflicted position between his daughter and his live-in partner’s family. His account of Karen’s equivocation did not negate her consistent accusations elsewhere and was likely influenced by his relationship with Ofelia, who had asked him to testify for the defense.
The medical findings corroborated Karen’s account of sexual violation. The Court thus sustained the findings of guilt beyond reasonable doubt for two counts of rape, affirming the penalties of reclusion perpetua for each count and the award of civil indemnity. Pursuant to prevailing jurisprudence, the Court additionally awarded moral and exemplary damages for each count.