G.R. No. 142860; January 16, 2003
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. VICTOR TAPERLA y TAMOSA, RONNIE AVILA y CULPA (Acquitted) and JONATHAN LASTIMADO y ALPECHE (Acquitted), accused. VICTOR TAPERLA y TAMOSA, accused-appellant.

FACTS

On the evening of July 4, 1999, seventeen-year-old Maricel Bascones was walking to her aunt’s house in Davao City. Taking a shortcut through the Davao Fish Port Complex, she noticed accused-appellant Victor Taperla following her. She was blocked by his co-accused, Ronnie Avila and Jonathan Lastimado, who held her arms and brought her to Taperla. Taperla dragged her to the back of the Polar Bear Storage, pinned her neck with his arm, laid her on a makeshift table, and forcibly spread her legs. When she resisted, he punched her stomach. He succeeded in having carnal knowledge of her and ejaculated. He then threatened to kill her brother if she reported the incident. The victim immediately reported the rape to her aunt, the barangay captain, and the police. A medical examination revealed abrasions and contusions on her neck, lips, and arms, lacerations in her vaginal canal at 3 and 9 o’clock positions, and the presence of spermatocytes. At trial, Taperla claimed he and the victim were lovers and the act was consensual. The Regional Trial Court convicted Taperla of rape and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua, while acquitting Avila and Lastimado for lack of proof beyond reasonable doubt.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in finding accused-appellant Victor Taperla guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. It held that the prosecution proved Taperla’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The “sweetheart theory” was rejected as uncorroborated, self-serving, and contrary to ordinary human behavior. The Court emphasized that even if they were lovers, force and intimidation could not be justified. The victim’s credible testimony, coupled with the physical injuries documented in the medical findings, proved that carnal knowledge was achieved through force and intimidation. The Court also ruled that the discrepancy in the date of the offense (the Information stated “on or about July 4, 1998,” while the evidence pointed to July 4, 1999) was immaterial, as time is not an essential element of rape. The penalty of reclusion perpetua was affirmed. The civil indemnity was reduced from P75,000.00 to P50,000.00, in line with prevailing jurisprudence when the death penalty is not imposed, while the award of P50,000.00 as moral damages was upheld.