GR 215202; (March, 2018) (Digest)
G.R. No. 215202. March 14, 2018
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, V. VILLARIN CLEMENO, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.
FACTS
Accused-appellant Villarin Clemeno was charged with two counts of rape committed against his daughter, AAA, in June 2003 and June 2004 in Batangas City. The prosecution’s evidence established that AAA was sleeping when her father laid on top of her, removed her clothing, and had carnal knowledge with her despite her resistance. He threatened to kill the family if she reported the incidents. AAA became pregnant from the second rape and gave birth in April 2005. DNA testing confirmed with 99.999999% probability that accused-appellant was the biological father of AAA’s child. AAA only disclosed the rapes to her mother after giving birth.
The defense presented accused-appellant as its sole witness, who denied the charges. He claimed the complaint was fabricated due to a property feud with his brother-in-law, who allegedly influenced AAA. He also assailed AAA’s credibility, arguing her resistance was insufficient as she did not shout, and that her delay in reporting was unnatural. The Regional Trial Court found him guilty of two counts of rape and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua without parole for each count, which the Court of Appeals affirmed.
ISSUE
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming accused-appellant’s conviction for two counts of rape.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. On the issue of credibility, the Court upheld the consistent findings of the trial and appellate courts, emphasizing that the trial judge’s direct observation of witness demeanor is accorded great respect. AAA’s detailed and candid testimony, corroborated by the DNA evidence proving paternity, constituted proof beyond reasonable doubt. The Court rejected the defense’s arguments regarding AAA’s conduct. The failure to shout or escape immediately is not proof of consent, especially when the rapist is a parent who instills fear through threats and violence. Delay in reporting is not an indication of fabrication when the accused exercises moral ascendancy and authority over the victim, as in this case where the father threatened to kill the family. The alleged motive of being influenced by a relative was deemed too flimsy to compel a daughter to endure the ordeal of a public trial for rape. The Court modified the damages, increasing the awards for civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary damages to Seventy-Five Thousand Pesos (Php75,000.00) for each count, all with legal interest from finality until fully paid.