Title
People vs. Gaduyon y Tapispisan
Case
G.R. No. 181473
Decision Date
Nov 11, 2013
A father convicted of raping his 12-year-old daughter on multiple occasions, with threats and moral ascendancy, upheld by the Supreme Court despite his alibi and claims of fabrication.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 181473)

Factual Antecedents

Three separate informations were filed against the appellant, charging him with:

  1. Criminal Case No. 6572 for Qualified Rape: Occurred on August 22, 2002, involving forced carnal knowledge under conditions of moral ascendancy due to relationship and the victim's minority.
  2. Criminal Case No. 6573 for Sexual Abuse: Took place on August 21, 2002, where the appellant was accused of lasciviously touching his daughter.
  3. Criminal Case No. 6574 for Qualified Object Rape: Occurred on October 9, 2002, when the appellant allegedly inserted his finger into the victim's genitalia.

Version of the Prosecution

The prosecution's narrative indicates that while the mother and siblings of aAAAa were away, the appellant engaged in sexually abusive acts against her. The specific incidents included fondling and forced intercourse, supported by findings from a physical examination indicating non-virginity and psychological trauma.

Version of the Defense

The appellant denied all allegations, asserting he was not alone with aAAAa during the time of the alleged offenses. He presented an alibi involving family activities but was unable to disprove the prosecution's timeline. Furthermore, he suggested that the accusations arose from marital strife.

Ruling of the Regional Trial Court

The RTC found the testimony of aAAAa credible and corroborated by medical evidence. The court dismissed the appellant’s denial as unsubstantiated. The RTC imposed the following penalties:

  • Criminal Case No. 6572: Death for qualified rape.
  • Criminal Case No. 6573: An indeterminate sentence for sexual abuse.
  • Criminal Case No. 6574: Initially death for the object rape but later modified to a non-death penalty.

Ruling of the Court of Appeals

The Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC's decision, emphasizing the consistency and credibility of aAAAa's testimony over the appellant's denial. The appellate court concluded that the prosecution proved the appellant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Assignment of Errors

The appellant's appeal reiterated claims of being denied the presumption of innocence and alleged inconsistencies in the victim's testimony. He argued that these inconsistencies should lead to his acquittal.

Our Ruling

The Supreme Court upheld the findings below, reaffirming that minor inconsistencies in aAAAa's testimony did not negate the core elements of the crime, which included her detailed accounts of the assaults and corroborating medical evidence.

Applicable Law

Under Republic Act (RA) No. 8353, which amended the Revised Penal Code, the definition of rape includes both sexual intercourse and acts of sexual assault that exploit the victim's vulnerability, particularly for minors. The court applied the provisions of RA 7610 concerning child sexual abuse in determining the appropriate penalties.

The Proper Penalty

In light of

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.