• W/N TC GRAVELY ERRED IN FINDING THAT CLEOPATRA CHANGLAPON HAD POSITIVELY IDENTIFIED JEFFREY GARCIA Y CARAGAY AS ONE OF THOSE WHO ABDUCTED AND RAPED HER? (NO)
HELD: RTC AFFIRMED with MODIFICATIONS. As modified, accused-appellant is sentenced to suffer the penalty of Death for the complex crime of Forcible Abduction with Rape and Reclusion Perpetua for
each of the three counts of rape; P146,125.75 as actual damages, P75,000.00 as civil indemnity and P50,000.00 as moral damages.
RATIO:
● Based on our own review of the records of this case, we find that complainant was neither influenced nor induced by the police to point to accused-appellant as one of her
molesters. On the contrary, the transcripts convincingly show that complainant was left to freely study the faces of the thirty or more inmates on the basketball court below to see whether she recognized any of them. There was no suggestion from the police to point to the new detainee, who had just been arrested on another rape charge.
● Owing to the gravity of the crime and penalty involved, we have meticulously studied the testimony of complainant Cleopatra Changlapon and find it to be clear, straightforward and categorical. The details of her narration are consistent on all material points. Her actions throughout her ordeal correspond to normal human behavior. We take particular note of her natural and spontaneous reaction of crying and attacking her molester when brought before her face to face. The records also eloquently exhibit that she repeatedly cried throughout her
testimony. All of these actuations bear the ring of truth and deserve full faith and credit. ● More importantly, complainant's narration of the events is well substantiated by the
physical evidence. The second degree burns found on her face, chest and thighs prove that she was indeed burned with lighted cigarettes whenever she attempted to fight her assailants. The medico-legal officer confirmed that they were consistent with cigarette burns. Furthermore, the contusions found on her body were said to be caused by a blunt instrument like a closed fist. This confirms her testimony that she was repeatedly hit to stop her from struggling. The medico-legal officer placed the time of infliction of the external physical injuries on complainant within the last twenty-four hours. The findings on her genitals — namely the gaping labia majora, the congested and abraded labia minora, and the lacerations — all suggest the entry of a foreign object, such as a fully erect male organ. Finally, the presence of spermatozoa further confirms that complainant recently had sexual intercourse.
● In the face of complainant's positive and categorical declarations that accused-appellant was one of her rapists, accused-appellant's alibi must fail.
● It is a well-settled rule that positive identification of the accused, where categorical and consistent and without any showing of ill motive on the part of the eyewitness testifying on the matter, prevails over alibi and denial which if not substantiated by clear and convincing evidence are negative and self-serving evidence undeserving of weight in law.
● Furthermore, in order that the defense of alibi may prosper, accused-appellant must establish not only that he was somewhere else when the crime was committed but also that it was physically impossible for him to have been at the scene of the crime at the time it was committed. In the case at bar, the place of commission of the rapes — somewhere between Tam-awan and Longlong — and the boarding house where accused-appellant alleged he was in the evening of July 14, 1998, are both situated within Baguio City. The distance between Tam-awan and Aurora Hills, especially at dawn, can be traversed in just a matter of minutes.
● Indeed, as pointed out by the trial court, accused-appellant's witnesses failed to account for his whereabouts after 12:00 midnight. At the time of the rape, complainant distinctly heard one of her molesters state the time as 1:30. Since it was still dark when complainant was dropped off on the side of the road, it can safely be assumed that the crimes were committed at dawn.
● The trial court, therefore, did not err in convicting accused-appellant of the complex crime of forcible abduction with rape. The two elements of forcible abduction, as defined in Article 342 of the Revised Penal Code, are: (1) the taking of a woman against her will and (2) with lewd designs. The crime of forcible abduction with rape is a complex crime that occurs when there is carnal knowledge with the abducted woman under the following circumstances: (1) by using force or intimidation; (2) when the woman is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; and (3) when the woman is under twelve years of age or is demented.
● In the case at bar, the information sufficiently alleged the elements of forcible
abduction, i.e., the taking of complainant against her will and with lewd design. It was likewise alleged that accused-appellant and his three co-accused conspired,
confederated and mutually aided one another in having carnal knowledge of complainant by means of force and intimidation and against her will.
● Aside from alleging the necessary elements of the crimes, the prosecution convincingly established that the carnal knowledge was committed through force and intimidation. Moreover, the prosecution sufficiently proved beyond reasonable doubt that accused- appellant succeeded in forcibly abducting the complainant with lewd designs,
established by the actual rape.
● Hence, accused-appellant is guilty of the complex crime of forcible abduction with rape. He should also be held liable for the other three counts of rape committed by his three co- accused, considering the clear conspiracy among them shown by their obvious concerted efforts to perpetrate, one after the other, the crime. As borne by the records, all the four accused helped one another in consummating the rape of complainant. While one of them mounted her, the other three held her arms and legs. They also burned her face and extremities with lighted cigarettes to stop her from warding off her aggressor. Each of them, therefore, is responsible not only for the rape committed personally by him but for the rape committed by the others as well.
● However, as correctly held by the trial court, there can only be one complex crime of forcible abduction with rape. The crime of forcible abduction was only necessary for the first rape. Thus, the subsequent acts of rape can no longer be considered as separate complex crimes of forcible abduction with rape. They should be detached from and considered independently of the forcible abduction. Therefore, accused-
appellant should be convicted of one complex crime of forcible abduction with rape and three separate acts of rape .
● The penalty for complex crimes is the penalty for the most serious crime which shall be imposed in its maximum period. Rape is the more serious of the two crimes and, when committed by more than two persons, is punishable with reclusion perpetua to death under Article 266-B of the
Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 8353. Thus, accused-appellant should be sentenced to the maximum penalty of death for forcible abduction with rape.
● As regards the other three acts of rape, accused-appellant can only be sentenced to reclusion perpetua. The trial court appreciated the aggravating circumstances of nighttime, superior strength and motor vehicle. However, these were not alleged in the information. Under the amended provisions of Rule 110, Sections 8 and 9 of the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure, which took effect on December 1, 2000, aggravating as well as qualifying circumstances must be alleged in the information, otherwise, they cannot be considered against the accused even if proven at the trial. Being favorable to accused-appellant, this rule should be applied retroactively in this case. Hence, there being no aggravating circumstance that may be appreciated, and with no mitigating circumstance, the lesser of the two indivisible penalties shall be applied, pursuant to Article 63, paragraph (2) of the RPC
● Anent the matter of damages, the trial correctly awarded the amount of P50,000.00 as moral damages. This was justified by complainant's emotional and physical suffering, as narrated in her testimony. Notably, the prosecution successfully proved that complainant lost her virginity during the rape. As she narrated, virginity is a highly regarded virtue among the people of Kalinga.
● However, the trial court failed to award civil indemnity to the complainant. We have ruled that if rape is committed or qualified by any of the circumstances which authorize the imposition of the death penalty, the civil indemnity shall be not less than P75,000.00. For the other three counts of simple rape, where the proper penalty is reclusion perpetua, accused-appellant is liable for civil indemnity in the amount of P50,000.00 for each count.
● We also find that the actual damages awarded by the trial court was well substantiated. Complainant presented the required receipts for her medications, transportation and other
expenses. 50 Complainant testified that as a member of the Kalinga tribe, she had to undergo the korong and songa rituals, wherein they had to butcher several chickens, pigs, and carabaos, thereby incurring total expenses of P90,000.00. These rituals were intended for complainant's safety and to call on the tribe's spirits so that no more violence or misfortune may befall her. The grand total of all these actual expenses, including those for medicines and transportation, as duly proved by the receipts and computations presented in evidence, is P146,125.75, the amount awarded by the trial court.
10. People v Toledo (1949)
Accused: Santos Toledo, Benito Guevara, Anacleto Vecido, Pedro Cahinhin, Martin Montoya, Augusto Garcia and Pedro Garcia.
FACTS:
● September 22, 1945
○ Magdalena Ronzairo, 21 years old, and Gloria Jimenez, took a passenger bus in Manila in the direction of Cavite to sell canned food
○ Magdalena and Gloria alighted, Toledo Santos following them. ○ Gloria walked away to wash her feet.
○ Magdalena, while waiting, was dragged by Benito Guevarra who suddenly grabbed her right wrist and pushed towards Santos Toledo (who had a) revolver in hand.
○ Santos (?) took her to a house but the owner opposed their evil designs ○ He dragged her to an unpopulated place where there were seven men.
○ Benito Guevara took her inside and got to lie with her, with the help of his fellow who held her by the feet and forearms
○ After Benito, Anacleto Vecido, Pedro Cahinhin, Santos Toledo, Pedro Garcia and Augusto Garcia had intercourse with her. (not Montoya)
○ Toledo Santos carried Magdalena, already weakened, to a house and gave her dinner. After recovering, Magdalena and Santos and Toledo walked down the street to find the bus and met Gloria and two policemen who went in search of Magdalena
○ police arrested Santos Toledo. ● External Examination:
"(a) Contusions mark of the upper external part of the left arm. "(b) Bruises mark on upper external part of the left leg.
"(c) Bruises mark on frontal and middle part of the right leg. ● "Internal Examination:
"(a) Fresh blood oozes out when vaginal opening was being examined. "(b) Presence of pain during exploratory tactation of the vagina.
"(c) Hymen not intact.
"(d) Rupture of the pudendum. "(e) There was sexual penetration."
● Evidence: a jacket, a skirt, underpants, and a nightgown, torn and stained with blood ● ACCUSED:
● Benito Guevara died in prison
● Anacleto Cahinhin Vecido and Pedro have not been apprehended yet ● Martin Montoya was acquitted on reasonable doubt
● Santos Toledo was convicted on charges of rape with violence and rape to 30 years in prison perpetual, and Augusto Garcia and Pedro Garcia, per violation, to an
indeterminate term of 12 years imprisonment as a minimum sentence, and 20 years of reclusion temporal, as maximum punishment, with the accessories and costs.
Toledo and Garcia brothers appeal
ISSUE: WON accused are guilty of rape (yes) ● DEFENSE:
○ Toledo: was at home and at night went to wait for a bus to go to Tagaytay City. military police arrested him because he carried a revolver, then a member of the Second Battalion of guerrillas Moreno. it is not true that he had raped Magdalena
○ Pedro Garcia: afternoon, in the mill grinding rice. He went to the den. Guevara asked if he wanted to have relationship with the woman and he said no because he had to pay five dollars, and returned to the mill. Magdalena Ronzairo Probably “believed that I was one of those who had sexual intercourse with her. because she saw me down. "
○ Garcia Augusto: after reaping rice in the afternoon of that day he retired to his home, went to the den to ask for water, and saw Four men and a woman lying; saw a man and woman in sexual intercourse, Guevara Benito came and informed him that if he wanted to have sexual intercourse with women. could do so by paying five dollars,
● However, It's hard to believe that Magdalena, a stranger in the place, dared to testify falsely against the accused.
● the rape of a woman by an organized group of men is a rare case. For its rarity, raises public outrage.
● With the combined force of 6 men and one with a revolver against a weak woman, resistance is not possible.
● There is no penalty prescribed specifically for multiple violations, but the sense of justice requires that a sentence be imposed for each violation.
● It is clear that Benedict (benito?) is author of rape pro direct?, assisted by the other defendants, and each of these, of those who helped, of course, is as coauthor of rape
● Each of them except Anacleto Cahinhin Vecido and Pedro, who have not yet been arrested, should receive, for the six pro violations each, six convictions for rape.
● We therefore condemn each of the appellants to suffer six convictions of rape, and a sentence is 10 years and one day of prision mayor, as minimum, to 17 years, four months and one day of reclusion temporal, as maximum, with accessory; ero in meeting these six sentences, according to Article 71 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Law No. 217 Commonwealth ccada one must not suffer more than 40 years. It confirms the judgment, in terms of compensation. Appellants pay their fair share in the costs.
● Rape absorbs forcible abduction if the main objective was to rape the victim. PERFECTO, J. (bengzon, montemayor), dissenting:
It appears, however, that the alleged six rapes were committed on the same occasion, against the same victim, Magdalena Ronzairo, in the same place, although perpetrated by the six appellants by having, one after another, one successive sexual intercourse each with the victim. We vote to sentence appellants for only one crime of rape, and the penalties should not be more than an
indeterminate one of ten (10) years and one (1) day of reclusion mayor to seventeen (17) years, four (4) months and one (1) day of reclusion temporal
11. THE UNITED STATES, plaintiff-appellee
vs. FRANCISCO REYES, defendant-appellant. (1911) FACTS:
● At dusk on the evening of June 26, 1910:
○ Lorenza Cornejo, a girl of about 15 years of age, unmarried, left her house to return some flags which she had borrowed
○ while returning home she was approached by Francisco Reyes, who for some time past had been courting her, making her promises of marriage, and who had arranged with her to accompany him to this city for the purpose of getting married.
○ Reyes insisted on Lorenza's going away with him, and accordingly advised her to go alone to the street-car station, saying that he would follow her, so that no one might see them traveling together;
○ They took a car for this city and went to the house of Jose Torno, situated on Calle Cervantes, and there they remained and lived together conjugally. They had carnal
intercourse about ten times. whenever the abducted girl demanded of her abductor that he fulfill his promise of marriage, he would reply that his mother was looking for some
influential person who might speak to Lorenza's mother; and that the girl afterwards learned from her own mother that the defendant was married
○ After more than fifteen days, they were found by the girl's mother, Cirila Escobar, and a policeman. Reyes was wearing a Chinese camisa, and the girl a chemisette tucked under her skirt.
● charged Francisco Reyes with the crime of consented abduction
● CFI: guilty- two years eleven months and ten days of prision correccional, to pay an indemnity of P3,000 to the offended party, Lorenza Cornejo, and, in case of insolvency, to the corresponding subsidiary imprisonment, in conformity with article 50, rule 1, of the Penal Code, to pay the costs, and to suffer the other penalties specified in the said judgment.
ISSUE: WON guilty of consented abduction- yes
RATIO:
● Art 446 (old) penal code: abduction was committed against the person of a maiden of over 12 and under 23 years of age, with her consent and with unchaste designs.
● SC of Spain: purpose of the law is to prescribe punishment for the disgrace to her family and the alarm caused therein by the disappearance of one who is by her age and sex, susceptible to cajolery and deceit.
● Witnesses: Telesforo Pestañas and Miguela de Guzman saw them going along the street together toward the street-car station
● Other witnesses: The policeman, Eugenio Wenceslao,and the owners of the house, Jose Torno and Aurelia Ligdao
● it is unquestionable that the defendant, with unchaste designs, through cajolery and false promises of marriage made deceitfully and in bad faith, succeeded in seducing the young girl who left her mother's house, by prearrangement with the defendant and at his bidding, inasmuch as he awaited her on the road and they came together to this city and hid themselves and lodged at the house of Jose Torno
● The crime of abduction, with unchaste designs and the consent of the abducted, was
consummated, because the girl left her mother's house, gave herself up to her abductor, had carnal intercourse no less than 10 times, and lived with him conjugally
● Although she was not forcibly taken, it is sufficient that the girl should have left, as she did, removing herself from her mother's custody and yielding to the cajolery, inducement, and promises of her abductor, who took her away with unchaste designs.
● DEFENSE: The defendant denied the charge and pleaded not guilty,
● The averment by Marcelino de la Virgen can not be held to have been proven, which was to the effect that the mother of the abducted girl charged him to tell the defendant that he should give her P2,000, else he would be prosecuted. This statement is unsupported by proof and was denied by the mother
Dispositive:
judgment is hereby affirmed; provided, however, that the defendant, Francisco Reyes. shall be
sentenced to the penalty of one year eight months and twenty-one days of prision correccional, to the accessories of article 61, to pay an indemnity of P1,000 to the offended party, Lorenza Cornejo,