G.R. No. 133186 July 28, 1999
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. NOEL YABUT y GAPOS, accused-appellant.

FACTS

On the night of September 8, 1997, ten-year-old Krystal Kay Salcedo was sleeping beside her sisters in their ground-floor room in Pozorrubio, Pangasinan. Their parents were not home. Around midnight, Krystal awoke to find accused-appellant Noel Yabut, a neighbor, on top of her, moving up and down. She recognized him by light from a nearby street lamp. Fearing he would kill her, she did not shout. Yabut undressed them both, attempted to insert his penis, causing her pain, and she saw a whitish fluid. He then left. Krystal initially did not report the incident to her father but later confided in her aunt, leading to a police complaint and a medical examination.
Dr. Francisco Llamas, who examined Krystal, found hyperemia (redness) and a fresh laceration at her vaginal introitus, which he attributed to contact with a blunt instrument like an erect penis, though her hymen was intact and tests were negative for spermatozoa. The defense, presenting only Krystal’s father as a hostile witness, pointed to alleged inconsistencies in her statements regarding how she was awakened and the lock on the door, arguing the room’s occupancy by her sisters made the act improbable.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in convicting accused-appellant of rape based on the testimony of the child victim and the medical findings, despite the alleged inconsistencies and the physical circumstances.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The alleged inconsistencies in the victim’s testimony were minor and did not affect her core narrative of the rape, which was straightforward and credible. The Court emphasized that testimonies of child victims are given full weight and credit, as a young girl is unlikely to fabricate a story exposing herself to the ordeal of a trial unless motivated by truth. The medical findings of hyperemia and a fresh laceration, though not conclusive alone, corroborated her account of forcible contact. The presence of her sisters in the room does not negate rape, as the crime can be committed anywhere. The defense failed to present clear and convincing evidence to rebut the prosecution’s case. The elements of statutory rape—carnal knowledge with a girl below twelve—were sufficiently proven. The penalty of reclusion perpetua was upheld, with the modification that accused-appellant must pay P50,000 as civil indemnity and an additional P50,000 as moral damages.