G.R. Nos. 102409-10 December 21, 1992
People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Felipe de Guzman, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Felipe de Guzman appeals from a Joint Decision convicting him of two counts of Rape. Two Informations were filed: one alleging that on or about December 13, 1989, in Calasiao, Pangasinan, the accused, armed with a dagger and by means of force and intimidation, had carnal knowledge of Marissa Suniega, 12 years old; the other alleging that on or about December 1, 1989, in the same location, the accused, by means of force and intimidation, raped the same victim. The accused pleaded not guilty. The trial court found that on December 1, 1989, the accused entered the victim’s room, clamped his hand on her mouth, removed her clothing, laid his weight on her, spread her legs, and inserted his penis into her vagina while threatening to kill her if she moved. On December 13, 1989, the accused again entered the room, pointed a knife at her, threatened to kill her if she spoke, and inserted his penis into her vagina. A medico-legal certificate indicated a healed lacerated wound on the hymen. The defense was alibi, claiming the accused was in Tarlac on December 1, 1989, and a claim that the complaint was filed in retaliation because the accused sold family belongings. The trial court rejected the defense, giving credence to the victim’s detailed testimony.

ISSUE

The principal issue is the credibility of the complainant’s testimony and her witnesses. Specifically, whether the trial court erred in: 1) giving credence to the story of rape on December 1, 1989; 2) giving credence to the story of rape on December 13, 1989; and 3) convicting the accused-appellant without proof beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

The Supreme Court found no merit in the appeal and affirmed the joint decision of the trial court. The Court held that there was nothing strange or unnatural in the complainant’s behavior of not shouting for help, as the accused clamped her mouth and threatened to kill her. Her apparent normal behavior afterward was explained by her fear that the accused would kill her if she reported the incidents. The Court found her testimony, given at age thirteen, to be simple, clear, and credible, not unusually articulate. A witness who testifies in a categorical, straightforward, spontaneous, and consistent manner is credible. The defense’s claim of a retaliatory motive was rejected as bizarre and unacceptable, noting that no young, decent Filipina would publicly admit rape unless it were the truth to protect her honor. The findings of the trial court on credibility are entitled to great respect. The accused-appellant was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of two counts of rape.