G.R. No. 136393 ; October 18, 2000
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. AMADIO ITDANG, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Amadio Itdang was convicted of rape by the Regional Trial Court and sentenced to reclusion perpetua. The prosecution established that on June 25, 1997, in Davao City, Itdang, the half-brother of the victim Cristina Itdang, entered her room while she was sleeping, poked a bolo at her, and forcibly had sexual intercourse with her. Cristina struggled but was overpowered. The act was witnessed by Itdang’s wife, Dionesia, who corroborated the victim’s account, testifying she saw the rape through a wall and observed Cristina’s resistance.
Further evidence revealed Cristina was unschooled, illiterate, and suffering from mild mental retardation, with a psychological evaluation indicating a mental capacity akin to a 3-year-old child. A social worker’s report indicated she had been sexually abused by Itdang for over seven years, resulting in a child who had died. The defense presented witnesses, including Itdang’s children, who claimed the rape charge was fabricated due to a marital quarrel, alleging Dionesia initially reported a mauling incident. However, the defense testimonies were inconsistent regarding the presence of a defense witness during the critical dates.

ISSUE

Whether the conviction of Amadio Itdang for the crime of rape is proper.

RULING

Yes, the conviction is affirmed. The Supreme Court upheld the trial court’s finding that the prosecution proved Itdang’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Cristina’s credible and consistent testimony, corroborated by the eyewitness account of Dionesia, sufficiently established all elements of rape through force and intimidation. The Court found the defense of fabrication unconvincing, noting major inconsistencies in the defense testimonies which weakened their claim of ill-motive.
The Court modified the penalty and damages. While the information did not allege the use of a deadly weapon, the evidence proved Itdang used a bolo, which under prevailing jurisprudence can be appreciated to qualify the crime, making the imposable penalty reclusion perpetua to death. As no aggravating circumstance was proven, the lesser penalty of reclusion perpetua was correctly imposed. The award of damages was increased: P50,000.00 as civil indemnity (mandatory upon conviction), P50,000.00 as moral damages (affirmed), and an additional P25,000.00 as exemplary damages, justified by the aggravating moral circumstance of raping a mentally retarded half-sister to deter similar reprehensible conduct.