GR 120656; (March, 2000) (Digest)
G.R. No. 120656 ; March 3, 2000
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ARNEL FERDINAND OMAR Y ABAD, accused-appellant.
FACTS
On December 5, 1991, fourteen-year-old Marilou Moraleda was walking home when accused-appellant Arnel Ferdinand Omar and Hamsa Pangandaman accosted her. They dragged her to a volleyball court, forced her to drink beer, and threatened to kill her family. She was then brought to a room in Taguig Elementary School where Pangandaman raped her. After Pangandaman left, accused-appellant also raped her. Later that same night, two other men, Zacaria Barauco and Michael Omar Alawi, also raped her. Marilou reported the incident the next day. A medico-legal examination confirmed recent sexual intercourse, and psychological tests revealed Marilou had a mild mental retardation and was suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder.
Accused-appellant denied the charge and interposed alibi, claiming he was sick at home on the night in question. He was supported by the testimonies of his neighbor and sister, who stated that Marilou, appearing drunk and accompanied by the three other men, had come looking for him that evening. The defense portrayed Marilou as a woman of loose morals. The trial court convicted accused-appellant of rape and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua with an award of P30,000 as civil indemnity.
ISSUE
Whether the trial court erred in convicting accused-appellant of rape based on the credibility of the victim’s testimony and in rejecting his defense of alibi.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction with modification. The Court upheld the trial court’s assessment of the victim’s credibility, which is accorded great weight on appeal. The detailed and consistent testimony of Marilou, a minor with mild mental retardation, was found credible and sufficient to prove the elements of rape through force and intimidation. Her mental condition did not impair her ability to give a coherent account of her traumatic experience. The defense of alibi was properly rejected as it was not physically impossible for accused-appellant to have been at the crime scene. Furthermore, the defense’s attempt to impeach the victim’s character was irrelevant to the commission of the crime. The Court modified the civil liability, increasing the civil indemnity to P50,000 and awarding an additional P50,000 in moral damages, which are automatically granted in rape cases without need of further proof, given the psychological trauma suffered by the victim.