G.R. Nos. 140934-35; October 23, 2001
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, appellee, vs. CONDE RAPISORA y ESTRADA, appellant.

FACTS

The appellant, Conde Rapisora, was charged with two counts of rape. The prosecution’s evidence established that on June 16, 1997, the 16-year-old private complainant, Grace Samson, was waiting along Avenida, Manila, when Rapisora approached, introduced himself as her uncle, and forcibly dragged her into a taxi. He poked a knife at her side and brought her to a motel in Sta. Mesa. Inside the room, he forced her to undress, slapped her when she resisted, and threatened to kill her. He then succeeded in having carnal knowledge of her. After the first act, he raped her a second time. Grace escaped when Rapisora fell asleep, reported the incident, and underwent a medical examination. She later filed a complaint after seeing Rapisora on television in connection with another rape case.
The defense presented a starkly different version. Rapisora claimed he met the complainant, who introduced herself as “Elaine,” at a restaurant. He alleged they engaged in consensual sexual intercourse in a motel after she solicited money from him. He denied using force, intimidation, or a weapon. The Regional Trial Court of Manila, Branch 41, found the prosecution’s version credible and convicted Rapisora of two counts of rape, sentencing him to reclusion perpetua for each count and ordering him to pay damages.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the appellant for two counts of rape beyond reasonable doubt, hinging on the credibility of the complainant’s testimony versus the appellant’s denial and alibi.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalties and damages. The Court upheld the trial court’s assessment of the complainant’s credibility, which is accorded great weight and respect on appeal. The complainant’s detailed, candid, and consistent narration of the harrowing ordeal—from the abduction, the use of a knife and threats, the force employed inside the motel room, to her escape—was found to be credible and constituted proof beyond reasonable doubt. Her conduct immediately after the incident, including her escape, report, and medical examination, was consistent with that of a genuine victim.
The Court rejected the appellant’s defense of denial and his implausible story of a casual consensual encounter. His claim that the complainant was a sex worker who voluntarily went with him was unsupported by evidence and could not prevail over her positive identification and straightforward testimony. The Court emphasized that in rape cases, the accused may be convicted solely on the basis of the victim’s testimony if it is credible, natural, convincing, and consistent with human nature. The alleged inconsistencies in the complainant’s testimony regarding the exact number of sexual acts were deemed minor and did not affect her core assertion of being raped. However, the Court modified the penalty to a single reclusion perpetua for the complex crime of rape with homicide under the then-prevailing law, as the two informations charged acts constituting a continuous crime. The awards for civil indemnity and moral damages were set at P50,000 each per count.