G.R. No. 136374 - Baluyot vs. Holganza

The case involves two complaints for rape committed by the accused, Romeo Salazar.
The victim is Josephine Lopez y Sepriano, a 12-year-and-six-month-old girl, who resided at Sitio Macabal-Ong, Brgy. Magsaysay, Cadiz City, Negros Occidental.
The accused is also the common-law husband of the victim’s mother, Rosalia Lopez, and had provided for the support and education of Josephine and her siblings.

The first complaint alleges that on the evening of April 2, 1989, Romeo Salazar, armed with a bladed weapon, used violence, force, and intimidation to commit rape on Josephine.
The second complaint alleges that a similar act was committed on the evening of April 3, 1989.

Both incidents occurred while Josephine, together with her younger sisters, was left in the care of the accused, as her mother had temporarily left for Sitio Talabaan.

On April 2, 1989, around 10:00 p.m., while Josephine was sleeping upstairs, she was awakened by the presence of Salazar beside her.
Salazar pointed a knife at her neck and threatened to kill her if she disclosed his intentions.
He removed her clothing, inserted his organ into her genital organ, and performed push-pull movements, during which Josephine experienced pain, bled, and cried.
On April 3, 1989, a similar circumstance occurred around 8:00 p.m., where again the victim was intimidated by a knife and forced into sexual intercourse.
The victim admitted that she neither screamed nor resisted for fear of the serious threat against her life.

On April 17, 1989, following the incident, Josephine underwent a medical examination at the Cadiz City Health Office by Dr. Grace M. Doromal.
The medico-legal report noted findings such as “old hymenal lacerations” at various clock positions, moderate vaginal discharge, and other signs that suggested repeated sexual penetration.
Although the lesions were described as “old,” they were consistent with repeated abuses inflicted by the accused.

Romeo Salazar admitted to having sexual intercourse with the victim on the evenings in question.
He asserted that the intercourse was consensual and described events in a manner that minimized or omitted the elements of threat and intimidation.
He claimed that incompatible details, such as his being at home earlier and the victim even requesting a glass of hot water, establish a consensual context.

The victim delayed reporting the incident until her mother’s return on April 4, 1989, later making the official police report on April 17, 1989.
The circumstances, including the victim’s age, the stepfather relationship, and the intimidation by the use of a knife, contributed to the credibility of her account despite the absence of immediate outcry.
Appellant’s contention regarding alleged bias on the part of the trial judge due to a taped broadcast interview was also raised but ultimately dismissed due to lack of evidence on influence.

Whether the trial court erred in giving credence to the prosecution witnesses, particularly the victim and the medical officer, in establishing the commission of the crime.
Whether the victim’s failure to immediately report the incident or to seek help from nearby relatives indicates implied consent or condonation of the abuse.

Whether the use of moral and psychological intimidation (i.e., the threat with a knife) met the requisite elements of force or intimidation under Article 335, paragraph 1 of the Revised Penal Code.
Whether lapses or inconsistencies in the accused’s version of events sufficiently discredit his claim of consensual intercourse.

Whether the admissibility and reliability of the medical report should have affected the outcome.
Whether other circumstantial evidence and the overall credibility of testimonies were properly evaluated to substantiate the conviction.