Case Digest (G.R. No. 223681)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Benjamin Salaver y Luzon, G.R. No. 223681, August 20, 2018, the Supreme Court First Division, Del Castillo, J., writing for the Court.
The appellant, Benjamin Salaver y Luzon, was charged in three separate Informations with rape for alleged sexual assaults upon his daughter, referred to as "AAA", occurring on July 19, 2006 (CR-06-8596), August 23, 2006 (CR-06-8597), and September 8, 2006 (CR-06-8598). Each Information alleged that the victim was fifteen years old, a relative within the third civil degree, and living in the same house as the accused. The three cases were tried jointly in the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 40, Calapan City, Oriental Mindoro.
At trial the prosecution presented the victim "AAA", Dr. Angelita C. Legaspi (the examining physician), and "BBB" (the victim’s younger brother). "AAA" recounted three occasions when her father allegedly forced her into sexual intercourse, described threats and the fear that prevented her from shouting, and testified she did not sleep in her father’s house after the first incident. Dr. Legaspi testified to healed hymenal lacerations at several clock positions and that such lacerations could have been caused by penile insertion. "BBB" testified that on the morning of September 8, 2006 he saw the appellant half-naked on top of "AAA" and later executed an affidavit recounting what he saw; he also stated he had been pressured in family dynamics to participate in the proceedings and had sought later to have the case dismissed.
The defense rested on appellant’s denial, asserting the allegations were fabricated by "EEE" (the victim’s uncle) out of personal animus and that "BBB" had misinterpreted seeing appellant put on work clothes. After trial, the RTC, by Joint Decision dated August 24, 2011, found appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of three counts of qualified rape, sentencing him to three terms of reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole and awarding P75,000 civil indemnity, P75,000 moral damages, and P25,000 exemplary damages for each count.
Appellant appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 05478). The Court of Appeals, in its May 19, 2014 Decision, affirmed the RTC in toto, holding the victim’s testimony credible and rejec...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the Court of Appeals err in affirming the RTC’s conviction by crediting "AAA"’s testimony despite alleged inconsistencies, delay in reporting, and her continuing to frequent the house of the accused?
- Do the medical findings (absence of fresh external injuries but healed hymenal lacerations) and the victim’s lack of strong physical resistance defeat the prosecution’s case?
- Were the elements of qualified rape established and were the pen...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)