G.R. Nos. 131867-68; July 31, 2002
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. LAUREANO SISTOSO y DEFRANCO alias “YAYAN,” accused-appellant.
FACTS
The accused-appellant, Laureano Sistoso, was convicted by the trial court of two counts of qualified rape against his twelve-year-old stepdaughter, Rosita Gomonit, and sentenced to death for each count. The first incident allegedly occurred in November 1995 when Rosita was left at home with her stepfather and younger siblings. Sistoso, armed with a scythe, forced her to submit to sexual intercourse and threatened her to prevent disclosure. A second rape occurred in February 1996 under similar circumstances. Rosita initially confided in her mother, Aniceta, who disbelieved her. After a violent episode in September 1996, Aniceta accompanied Rosita for a medical examination, which revealed an old hymenal laceration, leading to the filing of two rape complaints.
During trial, Aniceta recanted her support for her daughter, filing an affidavit of desistance and claiming the accusations were fabricated to stop Sistoso from working as a singer. She even alleged Rosita’s hymenal injury was self-inflicted or caused by her grandmother. Despite intense pressure, including threats from her mother and a threatening letter from Sistoso, Rosita remained steadfast in her testimony. The defense presented Sistoso’s denial and Aniceta’s retraction as their core evidence.
ISSUE
The primary issue is whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused-appellant for two counts of rape beyond reasonable doubt, and if the qualifying circumstances for the imposition of the death penalty were sufficiently established.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty. The Court found Rosita’s testimony to be credible, consistent, and unwavering, even in the face of her mother’s hostile retraction. The medical finding of an old hymenal laceration corroborated her account of prior sexual abuse. The defense’s alternative explanations for the injury were deemed incredible and contrived. The Court emphasized that a recantation, especially one made by a witness who initially facilitated the complaint, is inherently unreliable and viewed with suspicion, as it can easily be obtained through coercion or monetary consideration. The testimony of a young rape victim, when candid and consistent, is accorded full weight and credit.
However, the Court reduced the penalty from death to reclusion perpetua for each count. For rape to be qualified and warrant the death penalty under the law, the concurrence of the victim’s minority (below 18) and her relationship to the offender as a stepdaughter must be alleged in the information and proved during trial. In this case, while Rosita’s minority was established, the Informations failed to allege her specific age. This omission was fatal to the imposition of the death penalty. Consequently, the crimes were considered simple rape, punishable by reclusion perpetua. The Court also modified the awards of damages, granting Rosita P50,000.00 as civil indemnity and P50,000.00 as moral damages for each count of rape, the latter being presumed from the commission of the crime itself.