G.R. No. 171270 EN BANC ; September 20, 2006 [Formerly G.R. Nos. 153250-52]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, appellee, vs. ALEXANDER MANGITNGIT, appellant.

FACTS

Appellant Alexander Mangitngit was charged with three counts of rape against his daughters. One case was dismissed. The remaining two cases involved his daughters, BBB (15 years old) and CCC (12 years old). BBB testified that on January 21, 1999, at around 4:00 AM, while their mother was away, appellant touched her, held her neck, removed her clothing, and had carnal knowledge. He threatened to kill her if she reported it. CCC testified that on January 29, 1999, at around 2:00 AM, appellant, after positioning her brother away, embraced her, removed her panty, and raped her despite her resistance and complaint of pain. He also threatened her life. Both victims positively identified their father as the assailant, recognizing him by sight in the moonlight and by his voice.
The Regional Trial Court convicted appellant of two counts of rape and imposed the death penalty. The case was elevated to the Supreme Court for automatic review.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the appellant for the crimes of rape beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty. The Court found the testimonies of the victims, BBB and CCC, to be credible, consistent, and convincing. The defense of denial and alibi proffered by the appellant was inherently weak and could not prevail over the positive identification by the victims. The Court emphasized that in rape cases, the credibility of the victim is paramount. The testimonies of the young victims, who were of tender age, were delivered in a straightforward and categorical manner, detailing the acts of sexual assault and the threats made by their own father. Their willingness to undergo the ordeal of a public trial and their positive identification of the appellant, whom they recognized by his physical presence and voice, lent credence to their accounts.
The legal logic is clear: the elements of rape through force, threat, or intimidation were established. The victims’ minority and their relationship to the appellant as his daughters were proven. The defense of alibi fails because it was not physically impossible for the appellant to be at the crime scene. The Court applied the prevailing jurisprudence that alibi is unavailing against positive identification. However, due to the passage of Republic Act No. 9346 prohibiting the death penalty, the Court modified the penalty to reclusion perpetua for each count of rape. The award of civil indemnity and moral damages was also affirmed in accordance with prevailing case law.