G.R. No. L-34334 November 7, 1979
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. MARIANO TIGULO and PACIFICO VELASQUEZ, defendants-appellants.

FACTS

On the evening of May 4, 1969, in Pacac, Guimba, Nueva Ecija, complainant Erlinda Ubaldo was in her isolated house with her four young children while her husband was away. She went downstairs to fetch firewood when appellant Mariano Tigulo suddenly appeared, covered her mouth, pointed a gun at her, and forcibly took her to a location east of her house. Appellant Pacifico Velasquez was present and assisted by holding her legs and removing her panties. Tigulo then had carnal knowledge of her while pinning her down and covering her mouth. Her mother, Francisca Pagaling, was alerted by the crying grandchildren and witnessed the assault with a flashlight. The accused fled thereafter.
The victim and her mother reported the incident to the barrio captain and the police. A medical examination revealed old healed lacerations consistent with sexual intercourse. An information for rape was filed against both accused. The defense of Tigulo was denial, alleging a consensual illicit relationship and that the act was interrupted by the mother’s arrival. Velasquez interposed alibi. The trial court convicted both of rape and sentenced each to reclusion perpetua with an indemnity of P20,000.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the constitutional presumption of innocence was overcome by the prosecution’s evidence to sustain the conviction of both appellants for the crime of rape.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the civil indemnity. The Court meticulously scrutinized the records, upholding the trial court’s findings. The defense of Tigulo was unavailing. The testimony of the complainant, corroborated by her mother’s eyewitness account and the medical certificate, was credible and consistent. The Court emphasized that the trial judge’s factual conclusions, based on direct observation of witness demeanor, are entitled to great respect. The stage of moral certainty required to overcome the presumption of innocence, as established in People v. Dramayo, was satisfactorily reached.
Regarding Velasquez, his participation, though limited to holding the victim’s feet and removing her underwear, was indispensable. The Court found that without his aid, the crime could not have been committed, making him a co-principal by direct participation. His defense of alibi was inherently weak and further discredited by evidence that he threatened the victims to prevent them from revealing his involvement. The judgment was modified by reducing the indemnity to P12,000.00. As modified, the conviction of both appellants for the crime of rape and their sentence to reclusion perpetua were affirmed.