Case Digest (A.C. No. 10627)
Facts:
The case involves Teodorico Silfavan as the accused-appellant and Josephine Tesoro as the complainant. It was decided by the Second Division of the Supreme Court on June 30, 1987. The Regional Trial Court of Iloilo City, Branch 23, convicted Silfavan for the crime of rape against the minor Josephine. The information submitted by the Provincial Fiscal alleged that on several occasions—in November 1979, February 3, 1980, and February 24, 1980—Silfavan, armed with a knife, forcibly raped Josephine, who was only fifteen years old at the time. As a result of these encounters, Josephine became pregnant. The prosecution's evidence included Josephine's testimony, medical examinations, and witness statements from her mother Elena Tesoro and uncle Joaquin Tesoro. Dr. Irene A. Tillo confirmed that Josephine was pregnant and exhibited signs of having been raped.
Josephine recounted that during one incident, Silfavan threatened her with a knife and brought her to a coconut plantati
Case Digest (A.C. No. 10627)
Facts:
- Case Background
- The case involves the conviction of Teodorico Silfavan for the crime of rape by the Regional Trial Court, Branch 23 at Iloilo City.
- The conviction was based on the rape of Josephine Tesoro, a minor of fifteen years of age, committed on three separate occasions.
- The crime was further compounded by the resulting pregnancy of the victim and the subsequent birth of a child, for which the accused was ordered to give support and acknowledge paternity.
- Chronology of the Rape Incidents
- First Incident (November, 1979)
- During the evening of November 1979, while the victim was returning home from her late uncle’s wake, she encountered the accused near her residence.
- The accused, armed with a knife, threatened her not to shout and forced her into a coconut plantation where the act was committed.
- The victim’s testimony emphasized that the accused held her and forcibly conducted the rape under the threat of death.
- Second Incident (February 3, 1980)
- While assisting with household chores along the seashore, the victim experienced a stomach ache and went home.
- As she attempted to leave the toilet, she was confronted at the door by the accused, who forcibly pushed her back into the room and caused her to hit a wall, rendering her unconscious.
- Upon regaining consciousness, the victim experienced pain and recalled the accused intimidating her with a threat not to disclose the incident.
- Third Incident (February 24, 1980)
- On the evening of February 24, 1980, while the victim was engaged in washing clothes, the accused grabbed her and brought her to his house.
- The accused proceeded to undress the victim and rape her despite her pleas for him to stop, and thereafter threatened her silence by warning that disclosure would result in further harm.
- Following the incident, the accused even suggested that if the victim became pregnant, she should seek a boyfriend and get married.
- Evidence Presented and Testimonies
- Testimonies of the Complainant and Witnesses
- Josephine Tesoro provided detailed accounts of the three separate episodes of rape, including the use of force, the presence of a knife, and the resultant pregnancy.
- Dr. Irene A. Tillo testified regarding her medical examination of the complainant, noting a ruptured hymen and confirming the pregnancy (23 weeks as per the medical certificate).
- Additional testimonies from Elena Tesoro (the victim’s mother) and Joaquin Tesoro (the victim’s uncle) provided supporting evidence regarding the circumstances of the incidents.
- Documentary Evidence
- A medical certificate (Exhibit “B”) established the timeline and physical evidence of the pregnancy and injuries sustained by the victim.
- The record of the birth of the child further corroborated the timeline of events relating to the alleged rapes.
- Accused’s Defense Arguments
- Allegations of Ill-Motive
- The accused argued that the rape complaint was motivated by monetary and personal ill-will on the part of the complainant and her mother.
- It was claimed that the charge was filed to prevent the accused from receiving his retirement pay and as a cover-up for the complainant’s supposed wrongful behavior.
- Defense of Alibi
- The accused contended that he was in the company of his wife during the times when the crimes allegedly occurred, supporting an alibi that would preclude his physical presence at the scene of the crime.
- Characterization of the Complainant’s Testimony
- The appellant challenged the weight given to the complainant’s testimony, alleging that her narrative was influenced by an assumed moral ascendancy of the accused over her.
- Other Contentions
- The accused also disputed the factual findings regarding his visit to Joaquin Tesoro for assistance and the timeline regarding the birth of the child, alleging inconsistency in the record and errors in the trial court’s factual appreciation.
Issues:
- Allegation of Motive
- Whether the prosecution’s characterization of the rape complaint as genuine is sustained by the evidence despite the accused’s claim that the complainant and her mother acted out of ill-motive and monetary interest.
- Evaluation of the Defense of Alibi
- Whether the trial court erred in rejecting the accused’s alibi defense, which stated that he was accompanied by his wife during the times of the alleged crimes.
- Credibility of the Complainant’s Testimony
- Whether the trial court improperly gave credence to the complainant’s testimony based on an alleged moral ascendancy of the accused over the victim.
- Factual Findings Regarding Intercession
- Whether there was error in the trial court’s findings that the accused sought the help of Joaquin Tesoro in an attempt to settle the charges.
- Determination of the Child’s Parentage
- Whether the evidence sufficiently establishes that the child born to the complainant was the product of the alleged rapes committed by the accused.
- Overall Sufficiency of Evidence
- Whether the cumulative evidence proves the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, justifying the conviction and the imposed penalty of reclusion perpetua, alongside the indemnity for moral damages.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)