G.R. No. 175238 . February 24, 2009.
People of the Philippines, Appellee, vs. Elmer Baldo y Santain, Appellant.

FACTS

Three Informations for rape were filed against appellant Elmer Baldo. The prosecution established that AAA, the 29-year-old complainant, was a housemate of the appellant (her nephew) and Norman Echani (her cousin) in a one-room house. On February 10, 2000, appellant professed his love to AAA and, after she admonished him due to their kinship, threatened to rape her if she ignored him. He then held her left hand, poked a fan knife (balisong) at her, removed her pants and panty, dragged her to the floor, and had sexual intercourse with her despite her resistance. He repeated the act on February 11 and 12, 2000. AAA reported the incidents to her cousin Echani on February 12. A medico-legal examination revealed a “deep healing laceration” on her hymen compatible with recent loss of virginity and contusions on her left arm and thighs, though it was negative for spermatozoa. The appellant, in his defense, claimed he and AAA were lovers since November 1999 and that the sexual acts were consensual. He presented two witnesses who testified they were always together and held hands. The Regional Trial Court convicted appellant for the rape on February 10 (Criminal Case No. 00-18080) but acquitted him for the charges on February 11 and 12 due to insufficiency of evidence, sentencing him to reclusion perpetua and ordering him to pay ₱50,000 as indemnity. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction with modification, adding awards of ₱50,000 moral damages and ₱25,000 exemplary damages.

ISSUE

Whether the guilt of the accused-appellant for the crime of rape, particularly the element of force or intimidation, has been proven beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals. The prosecution proved all elements of simple rape: (1) carnal knowledge, which appellant admitted, and (2) the use of force or intimidation. The Court rejected the appellant’s “sweetheart defense” for lack of compelling evidence, noting that even if true, a love affair does not justify rape. The Court also held that AAA’s failure to shout or offer tenacious resistance did not negate the presence of force or intimidation, as resistance is not an element of rape and victims react differently. The presence of a fan knife constituted intimidation. The awards of ₱50,000 civil indemnity, ₱50,000 moral damages, and ₱25,000 exemplary damages (due to the aggravating circumstance of using a deadly weapon) were proper.