G.R. No. L-37935 August 31, 1982
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. CLEMENTE GANADO, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

The prosecution’s evidence established that on the evening of December 10, 1969, Concordia Estabillo was at home in Barrio Wacal with her three young children and her 12-year-old sister-in-law, Lolita. Her husband was away. Accused Clemente Ganado, a neighbor, entered the house. Concordia recognized him by the light of a kerosene lamp before he extinguished it. He then held a scythe to her breast, embraced her neck, and overcame her resistance, tearing her clothes and injuring her finger during the struggle. He succeeded in having carnal knowledge of her. Lolita witnessed the attack and also recognized the accused. Concordia reported the incident the next day, and a medical examination confirmed injuries consistent with the use of a scythe, though a vaginal smear was negative for spermatozoa.
The defense interposed alibi. Ganado claimed he was in Barrio Aggub, seven kilometers away, attending the wake of his mother-in-law from December 8 to 12, 1969. Witnesses corroborated his presence there. He argued the prosecution evidence was insufficient, highlighting the absence of spermatozoa and alleged inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies regarding the identification and the details of the assault.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed the crime of rape through force and intimidation, thereby overcoming his defense of alibi.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court found the testimonies of the victim and her young eyewitness credible and consistent. Positive identification by both witnesses, who knew the accused as a neighbor, prevailed over the defense of alibi. The Court ruled that for alibi to succeed, the accused must prove it was physically impossible for him to be at the crime scene. The distance of seven kilometers did not constitute such impossibility. The medical findings of incised and punctured wounds corroborated the victim’s account of a violent struggle with a scythe. The absence of spermatozoa does not negate rape, as complete penetration, not emission, is the essential act. The force employed, which subdued the victim’s resistance, was sufficient to constitute violence under the law. The trial court’s assessment of witness credibility is entitled to great respect, and no improper motive was shown for the victim, a married woman with children, to falsely accuse a neighbor of a grave crime. The penalty of reclusion perpetua was affirmed.