GR 128813; (October, 1999) (Digest)
G.R. No. 128813 . October 4, 1999.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. YAMASITO VERGEL @ “BUBOY” and DANNY DURAN, accused, YAMASITO VERGEL @ “BUBOY,” accused-appellant.
FACTS
Accused-appellant Yamasito Vergel, together with Danny Duran (at large), was charged with the rape of Elizabeth S. Lawson on or about February 15, 1996, in Meycauayan, Bulacan. The Information alleged that they, armed with a firearm and bladed instrument, conspired and used force, violence, and intimidation to have carnal knowledge of the victim against her will. Vergel pleaded not guilty. The prosecution’s version established that on February 15, 1996, Vergel and Duran, both apparently drunk and armed, forcibly fetched Lawson via tricycle under the pretext that her mother wanted her. They brought her to an apartment, where Vergel, after poking a gun at her, pulled her into a bedroom, undressed her, and had sexual intercourse with her while Duran stood guard. The act lasted until about 1:00 a.m. the next day. Lawson, who was 21 years old with a low IQ and only a Grade VI education, reported the incident to her mother on February 27, 1996, after “kiss marks” were noticed on her neck. A medical examination revealed newly-healed hymenal lacerations. The defense version, presented solely by Vergel, denied the rape and claimed the case was fabricated by the victim’s mother because Vergel was constantly demanding payment of a P4,000.00 debt from her.
ISSUE
Whether the trial court erred in convicting accused-appellant Yamasito Vergel of rape based on the evidence presented.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s decision, finding Vergel guilty beyond reasonable doubt of rape and sentencing him to reclusion perpetua. The Court upheld the trial court’s findings on the credibility of the victim-witness, emphasizing that such findings are entitled to great respect and will not be disturbed on appeal absent any showing of palpable mistake or grave abuse of discretion. The Court ruled that the victim’s testimony, though at times confusing due to her educational background and the traumatic experience, was credible and sufficient to establish all the elements of rape through force and intimidation. The medical findings corroborated her account. The Court rejected the defense of denial and the alleged motive of the victim’s mother, noting that no mother would subject her daughter to the ordeal of a rape prosecution over a debt. The award of moral damages was also sustained.