GR 100913; (March, 1993) (Digest)
G.R. No. 100913 . March 23, 1993.
People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellant, vs. Martin Casao, accused-appellant.
FACTS
Complainant Maribel Ilagan, a 17-year-old, was in sixth grade and described as unkempt with a fondness for children’s games. Sometime in October 1987, while walking home from school, she was met by accused-appellant Martin Casao, a barriomate. He pulled her into a banana plantation, removed her skirt and panty, and forced her to have sexual intercourse with her despite her lack of consent. During the act, he pointed a “balisong” (knife) at her neck and threatened to kill her if she reported the incident. Maribel did not tell anyone until her mother discovered her pregnancy in January 1988. She then revealed that Martin Casao had sexually abused her. She gave birth to a baby boy in June 1988. An Information for rape was filed against Martin Casao. The accused pleaded not guilty, claiming he and Maribel were sweethearts and that their sexual relations were consensual, and that he had offered marriage, which her parents rejected. The trial court convicted him of rape.
ISSUE
Whether the accused-appellant is guilty of the crime of rape.
RULING
Yes, the accused-appellant is guilty of rape. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty.
The Court found that force and intimidation were employed, as the accused pointed a “balisong” at the victim’s neck, creating a genuine fear of death or bodily harm that vitiated her will. The victim’s failure to immediately report the crime did not negate rape, as it was due to the threat against her life and her mental condition; a clinical psychologist testified she had the social maturity of a 10-year-old and an I.Q. below 60, making her mentally defective. The accused’s “sweetheart” defense was unsubstantiated and a mere concoction, and his offer of marriage was considered an admission of guilt.
The proper penalty for rape is reclusion perpetua. The trial court erred in imposing “life imprisonment.” Although the use of a deadly weapon would ordinarily increase the penalty to death, the death penalty was not restored at the time, making reclusion perpetua the imposable penalty. The Court also increased the damages awarded from P25,000 to P30,000.