G.R. Nos. 93437-45; July 12, 1991
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. CIPRIANO CABALLES, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Cipriano Caballes was charged with nine counts of rape committed against his 14-year-old daughter, Arlene, from January to April 1986, shortly after her mother’s death. The complaints alleged that the accused, armed with a knife, used force and intimidation to have sexual intercourse with the complainant against her will. The incidents occurred in their one-room dwelling where the entire family slept on the floor. Arlene testified in detail about each assault, describing how her father would wake her at night, threaten her with a knife, and forcibly have carnal knowledge. She did not immediately report the rapes due to threats on her life.
The Regional Trial Court of Cebu convicted Caballes of all nine counts and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua for each crime, plus indemnity. On appeal, the accused argued that the charges were fabricated due to family resentment, citing the delay in reporting and the lack of physical resistance. The defense also questioned the medical findings, as the examination conducted four days after the last alleged incident showed no fresh lacerations and the presence of spermatozoa, which typically have a 24-hour lifespan.

ISSUE

Whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused for the crime of rape beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court emphasized that the credibility of the complainant, a young victim of incestuous rape, is paramount. Her detailed, candid, and consistent testimony, which withstood rigorous cross-examination, was found to be credible and sufficient to establish guilt. The Court ruled that delay in reporting is not indicative of fabrication, especially when the victim is intimidated and living under the same roof as her aggressor. The failure to shout or offer vigorous physical resistance is understandable when fear and threats paralyze the victim.
Regarding medical evidence, the Court held that the absence of fresh lacerations does not negate rape, as healed lacerations can still be consistent with prior sexual assault. The presence of spermatozoa days after the last incident, while unusual, was not entirely impossible and did not discredit the clear testimony. The accused’s defense consisted merely of denial, which cannot prevail over the positive and categorical testimony of the victim. Between affirmative testimony and bare denial, the former prevails. The decision was affirmed with modification, increasing the civil indemnity to P30,000.00 for each count of rape.