G.R. No. 188855; December 8, 2010
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. RUEL TAMANO y PASIA, Accused-Appellant.

FACTS

The accused-appellant, Ruel Tamano, was charged with two counts of rape under two separate Informations, both alleging that he and a co-accused, Danny Alcanices, conspired to have carnal knowledge of AAA, a 17-year-old girl with Down Syndrome described as having a mental age below twelve. The incidents allegedly occurred between February and March 2002 at a house in Batangas City where both accused were boarders. The prosecution established that AAA, a “special child” requiring assistance in daily tasks, was raped first by Tamano and then by Alcanices in a sequential manner within the same timeframe. AAA did not immediately report the assaults, but her subsequent change in behavior, including irritability and physical signs like red marks on her wrists, prompted her cousin to inquire, leading to her disclosure of the rapes.
The defense interposed denial and alibi. Tamano claimed he was elsewhere, working on a farm and later in Manila, during the alleged period. The Regional Trial Court convicted Tamano of simple rape, a decision affirmed with modification by the Court of Appeals, which increased the damages awarded. Tamano appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing the prosecution failed to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt and questioning AAA’s credibility due to her mental condition.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the prosecution successfully proved the guilt of the accused-appellant for the crime of rape beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court meticulously applied the principles governing the review of rape cases, giving utmost respect to the trial court’s assessment of witness credibility, which is even more compelling when affirmed by the appellate court. The Court found AAA’s testimony credible and consistent. Her mental disability did not impair her credibility; rather, it made her incapable of fabricating a coherent story of sexual abuse, and her straightforward narration of the traumatic events, including specific details like the pain she felt and the sequence of acts, carried the ring of truth. The medical findings, while not conclusive of recent penetration, were consistent with her account.
The Court rejected the defense of alibi as weak and unsubstantiated, noting it cannot prevail over the positive identification by the victim. The defense failed to demonstrate it was physically impossible for Tamano to have been at the crime scene. Furthermore, the element of force or intimidation in rape is subsumed when the victim is proven to be a mental retardate, as the law presumes the victim’s incapacity to give rational consent. The clinical psychologist’s evaluation confirming AAA’s mental age solidified this presumption. Thus, all elements of rape under Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code were present. The penalty of reclusion perpetua and the awarded damages were upheld as proper.