G.R. No. 119835 January 28, 1998.
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. JOSEPH BARRIENTOS, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Joseph Barrientos was charged with the complex crime of Double Robbery with Rape in an Information filed by the Assistant Provincial Prosecutor. The charge alleged that on February 11, 1992, at the Molave Regional Pilot School compound in Zamboanga del Sur, the accused, armed with a batangas knife, through force and intimidation, had sexual intercourse with Exaltacion Lopez twice and thereafter took P100.00 from her. The complaint was initially filed by the Chief of Police based on the sworn statement of the complainant. During the hearing on the accused’s petition for bail, the prosecution presented the complainant, the Chief of Police, and a fellow teacher. The petition was denied. At arraignment, the accused pleaded not guilty.
The prosecution evidence established that the complainant, a 50-year-old teacher, was in her classroom at around 5:30 PM on February 11, 1992, when a man naked from the waist up, with his face wrapped ninja-style, held her from behind, pointed a knife at her neck, and after a struggle, forcibly had sexual intercourse with her on the classroom floor. After the first act, he demanded and received P100.00 from her. He then forced her to have sexual intercourse a second time before leaving. The complainant reported the incident the next day. The police, based on her description of the assailant (medium built, fair complexion, protruding eyes, scar on right arm), investigated and later invited the accused for questioning. When presented to the complainant at the police station, she immediately identified him as her assailant. The accused then asked for her forgiveness, saying, “Ma’m, pasaylo-a ko sa akong nahimo nimo, dili nato ni kasohan, tabangan ta lagi ka Ma’m nga mawala ang estorya nimo.” She refused. A table cloth used by the assailant to wipe himself was recovered and found positive for seminal stains.
The defense presented an alibi, claiming the accused was in Dumingag, Zamboanga del Sur, from the morning of February 11 until the morning of February 13 to borrow a uniform and attend a death anniversary. He claimed he was invited for questioning on February 13 and 17, and was only identified by the complainant on February 20 after which he was jailed and maltreated by the police to extract a confession. The defense presented six witnesses to corroborate the alibi and claim of maltreatment.
The Regional Trial Court found the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the complex crime of rape with robbery and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua and to pay moral damages.

ISSUE

1. Whether the complaint signed by the Chief of Police and the Information filed by the prosecutor were sufficient to confer jurisdiction on the court, considering that the prosecution for rape requires a complaint by the offended party.
2. Whether the trial court erred in admitting the testimony regarding the accused’s plea for forgiveness as an admission of guilt.
3. Whether the trial court erred in relying on the sole testimony of the private offended party for identification.
4. Whether the trial court erred in not believing the accused’s alibi and the testimony of his witnesses.

RULING

1. On the Sufficiency of the Complaint: The Supreme Court ruled that the term “complaint filed by the offended party” in the Rules of Court should be given a liberal interpretation. The sworn statement (sinumpaang salaysay) of the offended party, Exaltacion Lopez, which detailed the rape and robbery, constituted a valid complaint sufficient to initiate the prosecution. This sworn statement, together with the formal complaint filed by the Chief of Police, satisfied the legal requirement. The Court emphasized that the purpose of the complaint is to commence the prosecution, and technicalities should not suppress the victim’s cry for redress.
2. On the Admission of the Plea for Forgiveness: The Court held that the accused’s spontaneous plea for forgiveness, uttered when he was presented to the complainant at the police station, constituted an admission of guilt. His words, asking for forgiveness for what he had done and offering to help “eradicate the story,” were clear and unequivocal. Such an admission is admissible as evidence against him.
3. On the Credibility of the Victim’s Identification: The Court affirmed the trial court’s reliance on the complainant’s positive identification. The accused was not a stranger to her, as she was able to observe his features during the prolonged assault. Her immediate identification of him at the police station, without hesitation, carried great weight. The defense of alibi cannot prevail over the positive identification by the victim, especially when the alibi was not physically impossible. The accused’s claim of being in another municipality was not sufficiently established to preclude his presence at the crime scene.
4. On the Defense of Alibi and Credibility of Witnesses: The Court found the defense of alibi weak and unsubstantiated. For alibi to prosper, the accused must demonstrate that it was physically impossible for him to be at the crime scene. The distance between Molave and Dumingag did not render his presence in Molave impossible. Furthermore, the accused’s claim of police maltreatment to extract a confession was belied by the fact that he never confessed. The trial court’s assessment of witness credibility is entitled to great respect, and the Court found no reason to overturn its findings.
Final Disposition: The Supreme Court AFFIRMED the decision of the Regional Trial Court convicting Joseph Barrientos of the complex crime of rape with robbery and sentencing him to reclusion perpetua. The award of moral damages was also affirmed.