GR 125125; (February, 2000) (Digest)
G.R. No. 125125 -27 February 4, 2000
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. MELANDRO NICOLAS y FAVELLA, accused-appellant.
FACTS
Accused-appellant Melandro Nicolas was convicted by the trial court of two counts of statutory rape and one count of simple rape against his daughter, Shellome Nicolas. The statutory rapes occurred in June and August 1991 when Shellome was eleven years old. The simple rape was committed in October 1992 when she was twelve. Shellome testified that her father sexually assaulted her on these occasions in their home in Pandacan, Manila, while her mother was working abroad. After the third incident, she confided in a classmate, leading to a police report and a medical examination which confirmed she was no longer a virgin.
The accused denied the charges, claiming his actions were mere displays of paternal affection like hugging and kissing. He argued that even if sexual intercourse occurred, it was consensual as Shellome allegedly offered no resistance and he employed no force, threat, or intimidation.
ISSUE
Whether the trial court erred in convicting Melandro Nicolas of two counts of statutory rape and one count of simple rape.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court upheld the trial court’s factual findings, emphasizing its superior position to assess witness credibility. Shellome’s testimony was found to be straightforward, unwavering, and credible. For the two incidents in 1991, where Shellome was under twelve, the crime was statutory rape under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, where carnal knowledge with a woman under twelve is punishable regardless of force or consent.
For the 1992 incident, where Shellome was twelve, the crime was simple rape. The Court found that the element of force or intimidation was present through the moral ascendancy and threats made by her father, a parent in a position of authority. The medical finding of a healed laceration corroborated the fact of carnal knowledge. The defense of bare denial and implausible claim of innocent affection could not overcome the positive and credible testimony of the victim. The penalties of reclusion perpetua for each count and the awarded damages were sustained.