G.R. No. L-11991; October 31, 1960
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. PORFIRIO TAÑO, ET AL., defendants. PORFIRIO TAÑO and DIONISIO CANTONG, defendants-appellants.

FACTS

On July 25, 1955, at 8:00 p.m., several persons called at the house of spouses Leodegario and Herminigilda Domingo in Barrio Talacuan, Iloilo, claiming there was a letter for Leodegario. When Leodegario went down carrying a lamp, he was knocked down and the light was extinguished. Appellant Porfirio Tañó pointed a rifle at Leodegario, while Guillermo Camina tied his hands. After striking Leodegario, Tañó ordered him taken to a river bank. Tañó, Camina, and Roman Caldito then entered the house armed, forced open a trunk, and stole men’s and women’s apparel and an envelope containing P210.00. Subsequently, Tañó dragged Herminigilda, pushed her down, placed himself on top of her while his companions held her legs apart, struck her left thigh, tore her panty, and had intercourse with her. Camina and Caldito then similarly raped her in turn while she was held down. The accused then fled. The physician who later examined Herminigilda found a contusion on her left thigh but did not examine her private parts. Herminigilda testified that Tañó had carnal knowledge of her, that she scratched his face, and that her panty bore a coloration from semen. The trial court convicted Porfirio Tañó, Guillermo Camina, and Roman Caldito of Robbery in Band with Rape, and Dionisio Cantong and Maximo Calico of simple robbery in band. Only Porfirio Tañó pursued the appeal.

ISSUE

Whether the evidence is sufficient to prove beyond reasonable doubt that appellant Porfirio Tañó committed rape.

RULING

Yes, the evidence is sufficient. The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s judgment. The Court carefully examined the evidence and found Herminigilda’s testimony credible. She testified explicitly that Tañó had carnal knowledge of her, which was corroborated by the contusion on her thigh and the presented panty with coloration. The Court noted that it is well-known Filipino women would not admit to rape unless it actually occurred due to their instinct to protect their honor. Furthermore, Herminigilda’s affidavit executed shortly after the incident consistently implicated Tañó in the rape, indicating it was not a fabrication. The trial judge who heard her testimony believed her, and the Supreme Court found no reason to overturn this finding. The Court also agreed with the trial court that the aggravating circumstances of commission by a band, nighttime, dwelling, and superior strength attended the crime, with no mitigating circumstances, warranting the imposition of the penalty in its maximum degree. The judgment of conviction was affirmed.