G.R. No. 76483 - People vs. Avero

The case involves an allegation of rape committed by Julio Cabanlig against the complainant, Isabel Distor.
The incident occurred on October 30, 1975, at Barangay San Felipe, Binalonan, Pangasinan.
At the time of the incident, the complainant was 14 years old, while the appellant was 27 years old.

During an overnight Girl Scouts camping event at the San Felipe School campus, the complainant, a member of the Girl Scouts, was present.
Initially, while preparing for the night’s sleep at the school, Isabel was invited by two of her companions, Myrna Tadena and Paulina Bugaoan, to utilize the campus toilet.
Instead of proceeding to the toilet, Myrna Tadena suggested that the trio go to Julio Cabanlig’s nearby house, and they accordingly went to his camarin where a bamboo bed was available.
Once there, the accused entered the scene by taking hold of the complainant, embracing and kissing her, and then pushing her onto the bamboo bed.
The accused then removed his pants and the complainant’s undergarment before forcefully inserting his penis into her private parts, an act she described as painful.
The assault occurred in two separate instances during that night. After the first act, although she attempted to resist or escape, the complainant was held down and further threatened with the use of a knife—a detail reinforced by the trial court despite minor discrepancies in presentation.
Ultimately, around 4:00 a.m. of October 31, 1975, the accused released her when she returned to the school campus.

Following the assault, the complainant encountered the assembly of the Girl Scouts at the school and hesitated to report the incident for fear of retribution, both personal and familial.
The incident became known in the community when teachers informed Isabel’s father based on observations at the school campus.
A community settlement was initiated, involving the barrio captain and local councilmen, which led to an agreement for the accused and the complainant to marry on December 20, 1975.
However, before the wedding could take place, the accused married another woman, prompting the complainant and her parents to pursue legal action.
A physical examination was subsequently conducted on December 19, 1975, resulting in the issuance of a medico-legal certificate that became part of the documentary evidence.

The trial court’s findings were based substantially on the testimony of Isabel Distor, along with documentary evidence and stenographic entries that provided a detailed chronology of the incident.
The People’s statement included precise page references to the transcript and documentary evidence, reinforcing the factuality of the complainant’s account.
Despite the appellant’s contention regarding alleged inconsistencies and minor discrepancies in the testimony—such as the issue of the knife and the signing of the participant list—the court found the overall narrative credible.
The accused's brief attempt to introduce evidence of prior consensual relations was rejected, particularly on the basis of the complainant’s minor age and the nature of the coercive elements present during the incident.

Whether the testimony of Isabel Distor is sufficiently credible to uphold the charge of rape beyond reasonable doubt.
How much deference should be given to the trial court’s assessment of the complainant’s demeanor and consistency despite identified minor discrepancies.

Whether the alleged inconsistencies in the complainant’s account regarding details of the assault (e.g., the mention of a knife in her courtroom testimony versus her sworn statement) detract materially from her credibility.
The significance of the delay in reporting the incident and filing the complaint, and whether these factors undermine the prosecution’s case.

The issue of whether the claim that the complainant was the accused’s sweetheart and had consensual encounters prior to the incident can be sustained in light of her tender age and evidence of coercion.
The relevance and impact of testimonies regarding the relations allegedly occurring on different dates and in the accused’s house.

The importance of corroborative factors such as the physical examination evidence and testimony concerning the community settlement attempts.
Whether the subsequent actions and statements by community members influenced the determination of the incident’s credibility.