G.R. No. 110554 February 19, 1999.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ROMY SAGUN @ POKPOK, accused-appellant.

FACTS

On September 25, 1991, an Information was filed charging accused-appellant Romy Sagun with the crime of rape, allegedly committed on or about midnight of November 5, 1990, in Barangay Bonifacio, Diffun, Quirino. It was alleged that he, armed with a bolo and by means of force and intimidation, had sexual intercourse with Maritess A. Marzo against her will. During arraignment on June 25, 1992, accused-appellant pleaded not guilty.
The prosecution evidence established that on the night of November 5, 1990, Maritess Marzo, a third-year high school student, was asleep in her boarding house. She was awakened by footsteps and recognized her neighbor, Romy Sagun, who poked a bolo at her head and threatened to kill her if she shouted. He shifted the bolo to her neck, removed her skirt and panty, took off his pants, laid on top of her, opened her legs, and inserted his organ into hers, gyrating for about five minutes. Maritess struggled but could not push him away. She felt a partial penetration. After Sagun left, she woke her boardmates but did not immediately reveal the rape due to the death threat. The next morning, she informed her landlord, Rudy Agsalud, who reported the incident to the police. On November 6, 1990, a medical examination by Dr. Moises Lazaro revealed a partial penetration of about 1-1.5 cm, with the hymen remaining intact.
The defense presented a different version. Accused-appellant testified that on the evening of November 5, 1990, after a drinking spree, he noticed the door of Maritess’s boarding house was open and she was reviewing. He entered to talk to her as a neighbor. Because he was drunk, Maritess told him to leave or she would report him to the landlord, so he left. He denied threatening her with a bolo, undressing her, or having sexual intercourse with her. He claimed he left Quirino on November 9, 1990, for a job in Manila and only learned of the charge when his wife visited him before Christmas in 1990.
The Regional Trial Court found accused-appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of rape and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua, ordering him to pay P50,000.00 as damages. Hence, this appeal.

ISSUE

The sole assignment of error is whether the trial court committed grave abuse of discretion and erred in giving credence to the testimony of the private complainant and, on that basis, convicting the accused-appellant and awarding damages against him.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the trial court. The Court held that the trial court’s assessment of the credibility of witnesses is entitled to great weight and respect, as it had the direct opportunity to observe their demeanor, conduct, and attitude. The alleged inconsistencies in the complainant’s testimony were minor and did not affect her credibility. The medical finding of an intact hymen does not negate rape, as full penetration is not required; even the slightest penetration of the female organ by the male organ constitutes carnal knowledge. The Court found the complainant’s testimony to be clear, credible, and consistent with human experience. The defense of denial could not prevail over her positive identification. The award of P50,000.00 as civil indemnity was sustained. The penalty of reclusion perpetua was affirmed.