GR 186129; (August, 2009) (Digest)
G.R. No. 186129 ; August 4, 2009
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. JESUS PARAGAS CRUZ, Accused-Appellant.
FACTS
The accused-appellant, Jesus Paragas Cruz, was charged with the rape of AAA, a nine-year-old minor, on June 6, 1998, in Parañaque City. The prosecution presented AAA’s testimony that Cruz entered her house, forced her to remove her shorts, and proceeded to have carnal knowledge with her, threatening to kill her if she reported the incident. Her revelation to her mother months later led to a medical examination, which confirmed two hymenal lacerations. The defense, however, presented a different narrative. Cruz interposed an alibi, claiming he was conducting a land survey in another part of the city at the time of the alleged crime. He further asserted that he had been sexually impotent since 1995, a condition corroborated by his wife and supported by a 2001 medical diagnosis of erectile dysfunction, and suggested the charge was fabricated due to a land dispute with the victim’s family.
ISSUE
Whether the Court of Appeals gravely erred in affirming the trial court’s finding that the accused-appellant is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape.
RULING
The Supreme Court denied the appeal and affirmed the conviction. The Court found the defense of impotency unconvincing. The medical finding of erectile dysfunction was rendered more than three years after the alleged rape; thus, it could not conclusively prove Cruz’s condition at the time of the crime in 1998. The Court emphasized that such a defense requires clear and convincing proof of physical impossibility, which was not established. Regarding the alibi, the Court ruled it was insufficient as Cruz failed to demonstrate the physical impossibility of his presence at the crime scene. His claimed location did not preclude his ability to be at AAA’s house when the rape occurred. The Court also gave full credence to AAA’s candid and consistent testimony, which was corroborated by medical findings. The motive of a land dispute was deemed insufficient to make a family subject a child to the trauma and stigma of a rape trial. Consequently, the prosecution successfully proved Cruz’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The Court affirmed the penalties and awards for civil indemnity and moral damages, and increased the exemplary damages to PhP 30,000 in line with prevailing jurisprudence.