G.R. No. 83812 - People vs. Peralta

On the night of 12 July 1983, Merlyn Robinos was waiting for a ride near the gate of Eastland, a manufacturing enterprise in Rosario, Pasig.
While waiting, she became the victim of a robbery and was sexually assaulted.

While waiting for what she believed to be the tricycle of her friend Antonio Flores, Merlyn noticed that the vehicle was manned by accused Enrico Peralta, with Cosme Tamor as the companion.
Upon boarding, Merlyn was unexpectedly pulled aside; Cosme Tamor used an icepick to threaten her by poking her neck, and a handkerchief was used to silence her.
The accused stole various articles belonging to her, including a Citizen’s wristwatch, a yellow gold necklace, earrings, a wedding ring, cash, and her handbag, amounting to a total of P1,430.00.

After the robbery within the tricycle, Tamor began his sexual advances by placing his hand between Merlyn’s legs, an act which she tried to resist.
The duo discussed taking her to a different location and eventually stopped at a vacant lot behind Sinalab Restaurant, where Peralta dragged her against a wall.
Despite her struggles and pleas, Peralta forcibly penetrated her, and during the process, the victim managed to briefly remove the handkerchief to cry for help.
The intervention of an onlooker, later accompanied by a security guard and several others, led to a scuffle in which a shot was fired, ultimately leading to the arrest of the accused.

The prosecution’s evidence included the complainant’s detailed testimony describing how, due to her mistaken assumption regarding the tricycle, she inadvertently became involved with the accused.
Medical evidence was obtained from Dr. Dario L. Gajardo, whose report, although noting minimal external signs of injury, indicated congestion and other signs in the genital area consistent with assault.
During trial, the complainant’s testimony was elaborated upon through extensive direct and cross examinations, where inconsistencies pointed out by the defense were addressed and clarified.
The defense offered a contradictory version stating that the complainant voluntarily entered the tricycle and even partially provoked the incident by her actions, which was strongly rebutted by the complainant’s consistent narrative.

An Information was filed on 18 July 1983, charging Peralta and Tamor with robbery with rape based on the incident.
Both accused, after being arraigned and assisted by counsel, pleaded “not guilty.”
The trial court, finding the complainant’s testimony credible and supported by physical and circumstantial evidence, convicted both accused and sentenced them to reclusion perpetua, awarding moral damages initially at P20,000.00.
On appeal, the accused questioned the trial court’s acceptance and credit given to the prosecution’s evidence, citing inconsistencies between the sworn affidavit and in-court testimony.

Whether the differences between the complainant’s pre-trial affidavit and her in-court testimony raise reasonable doubts regarding her credibility.
Whether these inconsistencies could amount to reversible error affecting the conviction.

Whether the trial court erred in giving full probative value to the prosecution’s evidence, including witness testimony and the medico-legal report.
The relevance of the absence of external injuries and spermatozoa findings in supporting or negating the rape charge.

Whether the actions of both Peralta and Tamor during the incident demonstrate a unified criminal design indicative of conspiracy in committing robbery with rape.
The significance of their coordinated conduct from the moment the complainant was pulled from the tricycle until the assault took place.

How much deference should be given on appeal to the trial court’s assessment of the credibility of the complainant’s testimony and overall evidence.