G.R. No. L-41085 August 8, 1988
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. JESUS VIRAY Y BONIFACIO alias JESSIE, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

The appellant, Jesus Viray, was convicted of rape by the Court of First Instance of Rizal and sentenced to reclusion perpetua. The complainant, Josefina Betco, was a 28-year-old partially mute woman. On August 21, 1974, she arrived home crying and communicated to her mother through words and gestures that while she was bathing at her sister’s adjacent house, Viray forced open the bathroom door, pulled her out, and despite her resistance, succeeded in having sexual intercourse with her on a bed. Her resistance caused his organ to become detumescent, preventing ejaculation. She immediately reported the incident to her mother, who brought her to the police to file a complaint. An NBI medico-legal report confirmed she could have had sexual intercourse around the alleged date.
Viray presented a different version. He claimed that on the same date and time, he merely went to the sister’s house to ask Josefina’s permission to use the toilet, as his own house lacked one, and after defecating, he returned home. He denied the rape allegation and was arrested that evening based on Josefina’s complaint.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in finding the accused guilty of rape beyond reasonable doubt based on the credibility of the partially mute complainant’s testimony.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, upholding the trial court’s assessment of the complainant’s credibility. The Court emphasized the doctrine that appellate courts generally will not disturb the trial court’s findings on witness credibility unless certain facts of substance and value were overlooked. A meticulous review of the record revealed no such oversight. Despite her speech impairment, Josefina gave a clear, consistent, and positive identification of Viray as her assailant. She demonstrated the act through gestures and uttered the vernacular term for sexual intercourse. The trial court took painstaking measures to ensure the veracity of her testimony by using her mother as a special interpreter, given their unique ability to communicate.
The Court found the defense of bare denial unconvincing. Viray’s claim that his sole purpose was to use the toilet was deemed unbelievable, as he failed to prove it was his customary practice. Moreover, there was an absence of any ill motive for Josefina and her mother to fabricate such a grave charge, especially since the families were on good terms. The immediate reporting of the incident to the mother and the police lent credibility to the complaint. The medico-legal findings, while not conclusive of force, were consistent with the allegation of recent sexual intercourse. The Court thus found the appellant’s guilt proven beyond reasonable doubt. The decision was affirmed, but the civil indemnity was increased to P30,000.00.