PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JOSELITO BARTOLOME y GARCIA, Accused-Appellant. G.R. No. 191726, February 6, 2012.

DOCTRINE: The crime of rape is consummated by the slightest penetration of the female organ. Full penetration is not required. The presence of spermatozoa, while corroborative, is not indispensable for conviction if the commission of the crime is otherwise sufficiently established by credible testimony.

FACTS

On December 25, 2004, AAA (a minor) was at home with her siblings. Her parents were not present. The accused-appellant, Joselito Bartolome, who was a neighbor and a friend of AAA’s father, arrived and asked AAA to buy cigarettes. When she returned, Bartolome was inside their house. He then pulled AAA inside a room, covered her mouth, threatened her with a knife, and forcibly had sexual intercourse with her against her will. AAA reported the incident to her aunt and subsequently underwent a medical examination. The medical findings showed hymenal laceration but no spermatozoa were found. Bartolome was charged with rape. The Regional Trial Court convicted him and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction. Bartolome appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the absence of spermatozoa negated the commission of rape and that AAA’s testimony was inconsistent.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the conviction for rape despite the absence of spermatozoa in the medical findings and alleged inconsistencies in the victim’s testimony.

RULING

No, the Court of Appeals did not err. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction.

The Court held that the absence of spermatozoa does not disprove rape. Rape is consummated by even the slightest penetration of the male organ into the female labia. Proof of emission is not necessary. The medical finding of a hymenal laceration is consistent with penetration. The Court also found that the alleged inconsistencies in AAA’s testimony referred to minor and trivial matters that did not affect the core of her narrativethat she was sexually assaulted by the accused. The testimony of a young rape victim is accorded great weight and credibility. The positive and categorical identification by AAA, coupled with the medical evidence, established Bartolome’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The defense of denial and alibi, unsupported by clear and convincing evidence, could not prevail over the positive testimony of the victim. The penalty of reclusion perpetua was affirmed, and damages were awarded to the victim.