G.R. No. 194236 ; January 30, 2013
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, vs. PATRICIO RAYON, SR., Appellant.

FACTS

Appellant Patricio Rayon, Sr. was charged with violation of Section 10(a) of R.A. No. 7610 (Special Protection of Children Against Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act) for acts of lasciviousness against his autistic daughter, AAA, and with qualified rape of his eight-year-old daughter, BBB. The prosecution presented testimonies from the victims’ mother, XYZ, and sister, XXX, who witnessed the appellant embracing AAA, spreading her legs, and touching her breast and vagina. BBB testified that in December 2005, the appellant removed her clothing, covered her mouth, and inserted his penis into her vagina and anus. Medical findings for AAA showed a healed hymenal laceration, while BBB’s hymen was intact, though the medico-legal officer explained that penetration of the labia minora could still constitute rape and that the hymen often remains intact in child abuse cases.
The defense consisted of denial, alleging the charges were fabricated because the appellant disapproved of his wife having an American pen pal. The Regional Trial Court convicted the appellant for both crimes, a decision affirmed by the Court of Appeals. The appellant elevated the case to the Supreme Court via an appeal.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the prosecution evidence suffices to prove the appellant’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt for the crimes charged.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the convictions but modified the penalties and awards. For Criminal Case No. 2006-174 (involving AAA), the Court correctly reclassified the crime from Section 10(a) to Section 5(b) of R.A. No. 7610 . Section 10(a) penalizes child prostitution, while Section 5(b) specifically punishes acts of lasciviousness under circumstances of sexual abuse. The appellant’s acts of touching AAA’s intimate parts, given her autism and mental deficiency, constituted sexual abuse under Section 5(b), warranting the higher penalty of reclusion perpetua.
For Criminal Case No. 2006-175 (involving BBB), the Court upheld the qualified rape conviction. BBB’s candid and consistent testimony, corroborated by her prompt disclosure and the medico-legal finding of labial penetration, established the crime. The appellant’s relationship as father constituted the qualifying circumstance of minority and relationship. The defense of bare denial cannot prevail over positive identification and credible testimonies. The Court increased the civil indemnity and moral damages to P75,000.00 each and awarded exemplary damages of P30,000.00 to BBB, and also awarded civil indemnity, moral, and exemplary damages, plus a fine, to AAA. The totality of evidence met the required quantum of proof for conviction.