Title
People vs. Magdaraog
Case
G.R. No. L-40988
Decision Date
Apr 15, 1988
Adelaida Vicario abducted, raped by Arcito Magdaraog; court rejects consent claim, affirms guilt, increases indemnity to P30,000.

Case Summary (A.C. No. 13035)

Applicable Law

The relevant legal framework applicable for this decision is anchored in the 1987 Philippine Constitution and provisions under the Revised Penal Code regarding the crimes of forcible abduction and rape.

Factual Background

On May 28, 1972, Adelaida Vicario went to the poblacion of Capul with her fiancé, Macario Castillo, and her mother to have her wedding dress sewn. After having her measurements taken by seamstress Marcelina Magloyoan, Adelaida and her companions were attacked by Arcito Magdaraog, who forcibly abducted her at gunpoint while threatening Diena Castillo with a revolver. He dragged her to the seashore, then to Mrs. Maria Manaog's house, where he raped her despite her resistance and pleas. The following morning, Adelaida escaped and reported the incident to her father.

Medical Evidence

Adelaida underwent a medical examination by Dr. Conchita O. Tomada, who found fresh lacerations in her vagina and abrasions on her feet. The examination confirmed she suffered from physical pain consistent with her testimony regarding the assault.

Complainant’s Response and Reporting

Adelaida promptly went to the Fiscal's office to file a complaint against Magdaraog. She executed a letter-complaint and was assisted by Diena Castillo, who corroborated her claims. This swift action illustrates her intention to seek justice rather than imply any form of consent.

Defendant’s Assertion of Consent

Magdaraog admitted to having sexual intercourse with Adelaida but claimed it was consensual. He presented evidence of a prior romantic relationship with her, suggesting they planned to elope. However, this claim was significantly disputed by Adelaida’s testimony, which depicted a forcible abduction with no youthful elopement as asserted by the appellant.

Trial Court's Findings

The trial court rendered a verdict of guilt, expressing disbelief in the appellant's defense, which it viewed as fabricated to evade accountability. The court underscored that the serious nature of the charges warranted a stringent approach, especially given that Magdaraog utilized his position as a police officer to commit the abduction and rape.

Credibility Assessment

The court emphasized the credibility of Adelaida, noting that her prompt reporting of the crime lessened the potential for any alleged consensual narrative advanced by Magdaraog. The established presumption that a woman of decent repute would not falsely claim such a severe injustice provided further corroboration of her account.

Appeal and Affirmation of Decision

In the appeal, Magdaraog continued to claim that the act was consensual and that the charges stemmed from external pressures. Nonetheless, the appellate court affirmed the trial court's verdict, recognizing the deeply compelling evidence supporting the complainant's experience and the gravity of Magdaraog’s abuse

...continue reading

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