G.R. No. 241249 , July 28, 2020
People of the Philippines, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. Ryan Fetalco y Sablay, Accused-Appellant.

FACTS

The accused-appellant, Ryan Fetalco y Sablay, was charged with Statutory Rape in an Information dated February 24, 2006. It was alleged that on or about July 17, 2005, he had carnal knowledge of AAA, a minor who was four years old at the time. During arraignment, appellant pleaded not guilty. The prosecution presented three witnesses: the private complainant AAA, her mother BBB, and Medico-Legal Officer Dr. Ruby Grace Sabino-Dingson. AAA, in a Sinumpaang Salaysay executed six days after the incident, stated that appellant inserted his hairy male organ, which she referred to as a “daga” (rat), into her vagina. During her court testimony in 2008, she stated she was awakened while sleeping at appellant’s house and saw her private part bleeding, and that appellant inserted a “daga” and then a “pantusok ng fishball.” However, during cross-examination in 2010, she testified that appellant inserted a fishball stick, not a finger nor a “daga,” that there was no bleeding, and that the incident occurred in her own house, not appellant’s. She also admitted her family rented from appellant’s family and their relationship was not good. BBB testified that AAA disclosed appellant inserted something resembling a rat into her vagina, describing it as “titi ni kuya na maitim parang daga may balahibo,” and that it happened in appellant’s house. Dr. Sabino-Dingson presented the medico-legal report (No. M-2760-05) prepared by Dr. Pierre Paul F. Carpio, which indicated AAA had shallow healed hymenal lacerations and “clear evidence of penetrating trauma.” The appellant denied the charges, testifying he was cleaning his brother’s house during the incident and that the accusation arose because AAA’s family failed to pay rent. The Regional Trial Court convicted appellant of Statutory Rape, a decision affirmed with modification by the Court of Appeals. Appellant appealed to the Supreme Court.

ISSUE

Whether the accused-appellant’s guilt for the crime of Statutory Rape has been proven beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

Yes, the accused-appellant’s guilt for Statutory Rape was proven beyond reasonable doubt. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the modified decision of the Court of Appeals. The Court held that all elements of Statutory Rape under Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code were present: (1) AAA was under twelve years old (four years old per her birth certificate), and (2) the accused had carnal knowledge of her. The inconsistencies in AAA’s testimony were not fatal; the Court gave considerable latitude to the child witness, noting her young age and that her initial statement in the Sinumpaang Salaysay, given six days post-incident, was credible. The medico-legal report corroborated her account by showing evidence of penetrating trauma. The defense of denial and alibi, unsupported by clear evidence, could not prevail over the positive identification and credible testimony of the victim. The Court modified the damages, awarding AAA Php100,000.00 as civil indemnity, Php100,000.00 as moral damages, and Php100,000.00 as exemplary damages, with interest at 6% per annum from the finality of the decision until fully paid.