GR 107748; (July, 1995) (Digest)
G.R. No. 107748 . July 3, 1995.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. MARCIANO SAPURCO alias “CIANO,” accused-appellant.
FACTS
On January 16, 1991, eleven-year-old Melinda Malong left her house in Capalonga, Camarines Norte, to relieve herself at a nearby brook. Accused-appellant Marciano Sapurco, a guest in her household, followed her. He grabbed her, threatened to kill her if she shouted, and forcibly brought her to a deserted nipa hut about a kilometer away. There, he undressed her, placed himself on top of her, and had sexual intercourse with her. The following day, he took her to Daet, where he was subsequently arrested by police officers. A medical examination confirmed lacerations in Melinda’s vagina, indicating prior penetration.
The defense presented a contrary version. Sapurco claimed he merely chaperoned Melinda to Daet because she was running away from home after being whipped by her mother. He insisted there was no abduction or rape, asserting that Melinda voluntarily accompanied him and that they merely spent the night at the hut without any sexual contact.
ISSUE
The core issues are: (1) whether the prosecution proved the complex crime of forcible abduction with rape beyond reasonable doubt, and (2) whether the trial court erred in crediting the testimony of the victim over the defense’s version.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. On credibility, the Court upheld the trial court’s assessment, emphasizing that appellate courts generally do not disturb factual findings based on witness demeanor. Melinda’s clear, positive, and convincing testimony detailed the forcible abduction and rape. Her account was consistent on material points, and the alleged inconsistencies with a prior affidavit were minor and did not undermine her core narrative.
On the elements of the crime, the Court found all components present. Forcible abduction was established by the taking of Melinda against her will through intimidation with a weapon. The subsequent rape at the isolated hut consummated the complex crime under Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code. The medical finding of healed lacerations did not negate rape, as full penetration is not required; mere contact with the labia suffices. The defense of mere chaperoning was rejected as inherently improbable and uncorroborated. The penalty of reclusion perpetua and the award of moral damages were thus sustained.