G.R. No. 101631 June 8, 1994
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ROMEO IBAY Y MACEDA, accused-appellant.

FACTS

On September 5, 1989, Donna Villanueva, an 11-year-old girl (born January 7, 1978), executed a sworn statement accusing Romeo Ibay of rape. An Information dated September 13, 1989, charged Ibay with raping Villanueva on or about August 14, 1989, in Rodriguez, Rizal, by means of force and intimidation. The case was docketed as Crim. Case No. 1048 in the RTC of San Mateo, Rizal. After pleading not guilty, trial ensued. The prosecution presented Donna Villanueva, her mother Susan Eusebio, her half-sister Jocelyn Constantino, and Dr. Emmanuel L. Arañas. The defense presented accused-appellant Romeo Ibay, his employer Leonardo Cahatol, and co-worker Lorenzo Aspiras. The trial court convicted Ibay of rape and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua and to indemnify the victim P30,000.00, prompting this appeal.
The prosecution evidence established that on August 14, 1989, around 4:00 p.m., Donna was fetching water from an artesian well near Mang Rufing’s hut, which was occupied by Ibay. Ibay called her, grabbed her arm, pulled her inside the empty hut, removed her shorts, and made her lie down. He threatened to kill her if she shouted. He then mounted her, inserted his penis into her vagina causing her pain, and later ejaculated. Afterward, Donna saw blood from her private part, and Ibay warned her to keep silent. Donna did not report the incident until September 3, 1989, when Ibay again tried to drag her into the hut. Her sister Jocelyn witnessed this and reported it to their mother, prompting Donna to reveal the rape. On September 5, 1989, Donna and her mother reported the crime to the police, and she was medically examined by Dr. Arañas. The medico-legal report concluded she was in a non-virgin state, with healed hymenal lacerations, but found no external signs of recent trauma and negative for spermatozoa.
The defense relied on alibi. Ibay testified he was working as a plumber on a deep-well drilling project in Green Heights Subdivision, Marikina, on August 14, 1989, returning home at 7:00 or 8:00 p.m. His employer, Cahatol, and co-worker, Aspiras, corroborated that they worked on the project from August 12 or 13, 1989, and on August 14 worked until late evening or 7:00 p.m.

ISSUE

Whether the prosecution evidence is sufficient to sustain the conviction of accused-appellant Romeo Ibay for rape beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The trial court’s findings on the credibility of witnesses are accorded great weight. The Court found no cogent reason to depart from this rule, as the alleged inconsistencies in the victim’s testimony were minor and did not relate to material facts of the crime. The victim’s behavior of not screaming and delaying the report was deemed understandable due to the threat on her life and the natural hesitation of a young victim. The mother’s initial hesitation to report due to shame and fear of social stigma was also considered natural. The medico-legal findings of healed hymenal lacerations confirmed loss of virginity and were consistent with the rape occurring weeks prior. The defense of alibi was weak and could not prevail over the positive identification by the victim. The Court held that the prosecution proved the crime of statutory rape, as the victim was below 12 years old, making her consent immaterial. The penalty of reclusion perpetua and indemnity were affirmed.