G.R. Nos. 111956 and 111958-61 March 23, 1995
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ARMANDO PADILLA Y VITONIO, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Accused Armando Padilla y Vitonio was charged with rape in five separate complaints filed by Catherine Ramos y Moral, assisted by her mother. The cases were consolidated. The accused pleaded not guilty. The prosecution’s version, as summarized by the trial court, established that the accused, a family driver, raped the complainant on five occasions between December 1991 and August 1, 1992. The first rape occurred in the family home at dawn, where the accused entered through a window, poked a knife at the complainant, and threatened her. Subsequent rapes occurred in June 1992 (before her 13th birthday) at the Prince Hotel, on her birthday (June 24, 1992) at the Town and Country Motel, on July 25, 1992, and on August 1, 1992, also at the Town and Country Motel. In each instance, the accused used a knife to threaten and intimidate the complainant. The complainant reported the rapes to her mother on August 2, 1992. A medico-legal examination confirmed an old-healed complete hymenal laceration. The accused’s defense was that all sexual acts were consensual, claiming the complainant seduced and threatened him to continue the relationship. The trial court found the complainant’s testimony credible and convicted the accused of five counts of rape, sentencing him to reclusion perpetua for each count and ordering him to pay moral damages.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in convicting the accused-appellant of five counts of rape based on the credibility of the complainant’s testimony and in rejecting his defense of consensual sexual acts.

RULING

The Supreme Court DISMISSED the appeal and AFFIRMED the conviction with modifications to the damages. The Court held that the trial court’s assessment of the complainant’s credibility is entitled to great respect and found no reason to deviate from it. The complainant’s detailed, straightforward, and consistent testimony, coupled with her young age (12 to 13 years old during the rapes), carried credibility. The defense of consensual sex was implausible and contrary to human nature and experience. The Court noted that the accused, a 31-year-old married man, would not have been intimidated by a 12-year-old girl’s alleged threats. The presence of force and intimidation was established through the use of a knife and threats to kill. The medico-legal findings corroborated loss of virginity. The penalty of reclusion perpetua for each count was affirmed as the crimes were committed before the effectivity of Republic Act No. 7659 . The award of moral damages was increased to P50,000.00 for each count in favor of the complainant, and exemplary damages of P25,000.00 for each count were additionally awarded.