G.R. No. 100935 June 30, 1997
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. VICENTE ZABALLERO alias “ATOY,” accused-appellant.

FACTS

Private complainant Hermie “Mimil” Galo, a 14-year-old girl described as weak and of low intelligence who suffered from epilepsy, accused Vicente Zaballero of rape. The incident allegedly occurred on December 12, 1987, around 10:00 a.m., in Sitio Lanao, Cuña, Sagay, Camiguin. While gathering guavas on the accused’s land, Zaballero pulled her down, removed her panty, covered her mouth, and inserted his penis into her vagina. After the act, she reported the incident to her Aunt Elvira Galo, who informed her mother, Herminigilda Galo. Herminigilda confronted the accused, who did not deny the act and brazenly told her to file a case, even claiming his wife consented to it. This confrontation was witnessed by Edilberto Salga, Isidra Zaballero (the accused’s sister-in-law), and Victoria Echalico (the accused’s sister). Herminigilda brought Mimil for a medical examination, where Dr. Germanito S. Cain found lacerations in her genitalia consistent with penetration, though he stated they were at least three days old. Policeman Maureno Salva testified that the accused admitted to the station commander that he had sexual intercourse with the complainant. Mimil also testified that the accused had carnally abused her five times prior to the December 12 incident. The defense presented an alibi, with the accused claiming he was at a store in Bugang, about seven kilometers away, obtaining goods on credit at the time of the incident. Defense witness Mory Abecia, a coconut gatherer for the accused, testified that on December 10, 1987, he saw Mimil having sexual intercourse with a man named Dodo Rabongue, not the accused. The accused also suggested that his sister and sister-in-law testified against him out of envy and that he had poor relations with Mimil’s family.

ISSUE

The central issue is whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that Vicente Zaballero committed rape against Hermie Galo, particularly considering the credibility of the complainant’s testimony and the defense of alibi.

RULING

The Supreme Court AFFIRMED the trial court’s decision convicting Vicente Zaballero of rape and sentencing him to reclusion perpetua, with the modification of increasing the civil indemnity to P50,000.00. The Court held that the straightforward, clear, positive, and guileless testimony of the offended party, even if she is mentally weak and suffers from occasional epileptic bouts, is sufficient to convict. The trial court’s assessment of the complainant’s credibility is accorded great respect and finality, absent any showing of arbitrariness or bias. The Court found the defense of alibi inherently weak, as the accused failed to prove it was physically impossible for him to be at the crime scene. The testimonies of the accused’s own relatives (sister and sister-in-law) corroborated the confrontation, and the accused’s brazen admission to the victim’s mother and to the police bolstered the prosecution’s case. The medical findings, while indicating lacerations at least three days old, did not negate the commission of rape, as the complainant testified to prior abuses. The defense witness’s account of seeing Mimil with another man was deemed a diversionary tactic that instead magnified the accused’s perverted character.