G.R. No. 202060; December 11, 2013
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. FERDINAND BANZUELA, Accused-Appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Ferdinand Banzuela was charged with the rape of AAA, a six-year-old, and the attempted rape of BBB, a seven-year-old, both occurring in February 2003 in Mandaluyong City. The prosecution’s version established that Banzuela lured the two children to a cemetery. For AAA, he laid her on a tomb, removed her underwear and his own clothes, mounted her, and inserted his penis into her vagina while she cried, threatening to kill her family if she told anyone. BBB, who was initially blindfolded, later found AAA with blood on the tomb. In a separate incident, Banzuela also brought BBB to the cemetery, laid her down, and kissed her, but fled when a man passed by. A medical examination of AAA revealed her hymen was intact. Banzuela denied the charges, presenting Daily Time Records to support an alibi that he was at work during the alleged incidents.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the prosecution proved Banzuela’s guilt for rape and attempted rape beyond reasonable doubt, particularly in light of the medical finding of an intact hymen for AAA and the credibility of the child victims’ testimonies versus the defense of alibi.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. On the charge of rape, the Court clarified that full penile penetration and a broken hymen are not required for consummated rape under the Revised Penal Code. The law is satisfied by the introduction of the male organ into the labia of the female organ. AAA’s credible and consistent testimony that Banzuela inserted his penis into her vagina, corroborated by BBB’s account of seeing blood, sufficiently established the crime. The medico-legal report is merely corroborative and does not negate the commission of rape. For attempted rape against BBB, the Court found that Banzuela performed overt acts—bringing her to the cemetery, laying her down, undressing her, and kissing her—manifesting a direct intent to have carnal knowledge, which was frustrated only by the arrival of a third party. The defense of alibi was correctly rejected for being inherently weak and unsubstantiated by clear and convincing proof, especially as it failed to demonstrate the physical impossibility for Banzuela to have been at the crime scene. The testimonies of the child victims, given in a straightforward and consistent manner, prevailed over the untenable defense.