G.R. No. L-45084 - People vs. LOPEZ

The complainant is Eligrace Abalos, a girl who was thirteen years old at the time of the incident.
The accused is Expedito Lopez, who was the live-in paramour of Francisca Tuazon, the maternal aunt of the complainant.
The familial relationship and personal connections are significant, with the accused involved romantically with a relative of the complainant.

On June 11, 1973, at around one o’clock in the afternoon, the complainant was at the residence of her maternal aunt, Francisca Tuazon, who lived with the accused.
Prior to the incident, the accused borrowed P0.60 from the complainant and asked her to purchase cigarettes for him.

After the cigarette errand, the accused called the complainant into a room and closed the door.
He held the complainant’s hand and laid her on the floor.
The accused utilized a pillow and a blanket, with the latter being described as a flimsy, transparent flour sack, which he used to cover the complainant’s face.
Following this, he removed both her panties and his own trousers to perform the sexual act.
The complainant, though nervous and in tears, did not demonstrably resist, and her actions indicated obedience rather than active resistance.

A medical examination conducted at around 6:13 P.M. revealed that the complainant’s hymen showed old healed lacerations, and a vaginal smear tested positive for spermatozoa.
No external physical injuries were noted, and the examination described normal findings apart from the lacerations and evidence of spermatozoa.

The complainant’s testimony provided a detailed narrative of the events but also contained inconsistencies—such as uncertainty regarding the duration of the incident and the exact moment of penetration.
She noted that she was “a little bit suspicious” of the accused’s motive, yet she proceeded as instructed, indicating a level of acquiescence.
The accused, in his testimony, outright denied having carnal knowledge of the complainant and maintained that he neither used force nor intimidation.
Additional circumstances include the presence of the complainant’s grandmother, Corea Rovillos, who was asleep downstairs and did not respond to any cries for help during the incident.

The records and testimonies were examined carefully, with the court noting the absence of demonstrable force or active resistance from the complainant.
The case was evaluated in light of constitutional safeguards, particularly the presumption of innocence, which mandates that guilt must be proven beyond reasonable doubt.
The prosecution’s evidence was determined insufficient in establishing that the essential element of force or intimidation was present during the alleged rape.

Whether the evidence presented met the requisite element of force or intimidation as mandated by law for a conviction of rape.
Whether the complainant’s narrative—characterized by indications of mere obedience and a lack of active resistance—was sufficient to prove the offense beyond reasonable doubt.
Whether the constitutional presumption of innocence was properly upheld in light of the ambiguities and inconsistencies in the testimonies.
The appropriateness of equating mental or passive compliance with the absence of force, especially in the context of alleged intimidation.