G.R. No. L-104954, December 13, 1994
People of the Philippines vs. Mario Fabro y Arquiza

FACTS

The accused-appellant, Mario Fabro, was convicted of rape by the trial court, a decision affirmed by the Court of Appeals. The prosecution alleged that on May 14, 1989, in Tayug, Pangasinan, Fabro, by means of force and intimidation, had carnal knowledge of the private complainant, Rebecca Sequancia, against her will. The complainant testified that while on an errand, Fabro followed her, grabbed her, dragged her to a dark area, and choked her until she lost consciousness. She regained consciousness to find Fabro zipping his pants, with pain in her private parts and a sticky substance present. She immediately reported the incident, and a medical examination revealed contusions on her labia minora, though a vaginal smear was negative for spermatozoa.
Fabro presented a contrary version, claiming the encounter was consensual. He testified that the complainant asked for his company, they engaged in kissing, but did not have sexual intercourse. He admitted sending a letter to the complainant’s employer, Reyval Lopez, asking for forgiveness for his “unforgivable” mistake, which he claimed was written out of fear and upon advice.

ISSUE

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

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court found the complainant’s testimony to be credible, straightforward, and consistent. Her immediate report of the rape, the corroborative medical findings of contusions on her labia minora, and her distressed condition lent credibility to her account. The Court emphasized that the absence of spermatozoa does not negate rape, as emission is not an essential element of the crime. The defense of consensual intimacy was rejected as inherently weak and improbable.
Crucially, the Court gave significant weight to Fabro’s unsolicited letter of apology to Lopez, which contained an admission of a grave offense. The Court ruled this letter was a voluntary acknowledgment of guilt, not a product of fear or advice as he later claimed. His attempt to recant this judicial admission was unconvincing. The totality of the evidence established all elements of rape through force and intimidation. The penalty of reclusion perpetua was properly imposed, as rape under the Revised Penal Code prescribes a single indivisible penalty. The appeal was dismissed.