Facts:

The case involves Salvador Lomerio (hereafter referred to as SALVADOR), who was accused of raping his ten-year-old niece, Leonila Bunagan (hereafter referred to as LEONILA), on March 23, 1993, in Antipolo, Rizal, Philippines. The Regional Trial Court of Antipolo, Rizal, Branch 74, found SALVADOR guilty of statutory rape in a decision dated January 16, 1997. The Information filed against him stated that he had sexual intercourse with LEONILA without her consent and against her will. During the trial, the prosecution presented several witnesses, including Vilma Bunagan, LEONILA's mother, and medical experts who examined the victim. The prosecution's narrative indicated that on the night of the incident, Vilma had left her children unattended at home while she went to her parents' house. Concerned for their safety, she asked her brother, SALVADOR, to fetch the children. Upon arriving at the Bunagan residence, SALVADOR stayed overnight. It was during this time that he...

Facts:

Background and Incident

• On March 23, 1993, Vilma Bunagan left her five children, including 10-year-old Leonila Bunagan (LEONILA), at their Antipolo home while she went to her parents' house in Marikina to care for her sick two-year-old son. She instructed her eldest son, Roberto, to fetch the children, but he failed to do so.
• Vilma then asked her brother, Salvador Lomerio (SALVADOR), to fetch the children. SALVADOR and Roberto arrived at the Antipolo house around 11:00 p.m. Roberto left, and SALVADOR stayed overnight.
• LEONILA was awakened when SALVADOR arrived. She opened the door and went back to sleep. Later, SALVADOR removed his clothes, pinned LEONILA down, removed her shorts and panty, and forcibly inserted his organ into hers. LEONILA cried in pain but was unable to resist. SALVADOR raped her a second time around midnight and threatened to kill her and her siblings if she reported the incident.

Medical Examination

• LEONILA was examined by Dr. Jesusa Nieves Vergara, who found that LEONILA was still in a virgin state physically, with no external signs of recent violence. However, there was congestion or redness in her genital area, which could have been caused by possible penetration of the labia minora.

Defense’s Version

• SALVADOR denied the rape, claiming he only accidentally touched LEONILA’s breast while sleeping. He argued that the medico-legal findings did not support the claim of rape and that the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses were inconsistent and rehearsed.

Issue:

• (Unlock)

Ruling:

• (Unlock)

Ratio:

1. Credibility of the Victim’s Testimony:

   • The Court emphasized that the testimony of a rape victim, especially a minor, is credible if it meets the test of credibility. LEONILA’s testimony was consistent, straightforward, and corroborated by her sister Marvie, who witnessed the rape.
   • Minor inconsistencies in the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses, such as the location of the floor or the number of people in the room, were deemed trivial and did not affect the material aspects of the crime.

2. Medical Findings:

   • The absence of hymenal laceration or external injuries does not negate the occurrence of rape. The Court noted that rape is consummated even with the slightest penetration of the labia minora. The medical findings of congestion in LEONILA’s genital area supported the claim of forcible penetration.

3. Defense of Denial:

   • SALVADOR’s defense of denial was weak and could not overcome the positive and credible testimony of LEONILA. Denial, being a negative defense, must be supported by strong evidence of non-culpability, which SALVADOR failed to provide.

4. Aggravating Circumstances:

   • The Court disagreed with the trial court’s finding of nocturnity and abuse of confidence as aggravating circumstances. However, it recognized the aggravating circumstance of relationship, as SALVADOR was LEONILA’s uncle.

5. Damages:

   • The Court awarded P50,000.00 as civil indemnity and P50,000.00 as moral damages, consistent with prevailing jurisprudence in rape cases.

Conclusion:

The Supreme Court upheld SALVADOR’s conviction for statutory rape, emphasizing the credibility of the victim’s testimony and the sufficiency of the prosecution’s evidence. The Court modified the damages awarded but otherwise affirmed the trial court’s decision.