FIRST DIVISION
[G.R. Nos. 116716-18.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ANTONIO GABAN Y FROMENTO, accused-appellant.
D E C I S I O N
BELLOSILLO, J.:
Three times the accused Antonio Gaban y Fromento raped his 15-year old daughter. This the trial court found. Taking into account the manner by which he
ravished his own kin, coupled with the pain that accompanied every defloration,
and aggravated by the mother's taking
her own life when she could no longer endure the shame and agony as a result
thereof, the accused, along with the likes of Leo Echegaray,[1] should
have been an early recipient of the lethal syringe were it not for the
proscription of the death penalty at the
time he succumbed to his libido.
Antonio Gaban lived with his family in a small house in Sitio
Siwayan, Aroroy,
One Saturday morning in April 1990 when his wife went out on her
usual chore and their children were sound asleep Antonio woke Cristina up. With a knife on hand he told Cristina that he
was going to have sex with her. He
threatened her with death if she made any move to resist. After cowing his daughter into submission
Antonio proceeded with his evil scheme.
He undressed himself and then pulled down Cristina's shorts and panty. He spread out her legs, laid on top of
her, kissed her body and finally inserted his penis into her vagina, while all
the time his knife was pointed at her neck.[2] Shocked and petrified, Cristina could do
nothing but cry. She could not utter a
word in fear for her life.
Meanwhile, Cristina kept her ordeal to herself. She thought everything would be over. But contrary to Cristina's expectation, her
father's lust for her was not to be his last.
He molested her again in September and repeated the sexual assault in
November 1990. Still Cristina did not
divulge these incidents to her mother obviously because of her father's constant
threats to kill
not only her but also her mother, brother and two younger sisters.[3] However, time came when she could no longer
keep her woe to herself. On
Sometime in September 1991, after having cried and cried that
brought her into a state of shock, Cristina's mother, obviously in utter dismay
and humiliation, took her own life by drinking poison.[4]
Soon after the interment
of her mother, Cristina received a letter from her father expressing his
repentance and pleading for forgiveness.[5] But, despite her father's entreaty, Cristina
went to the police authorities in the company of Helen Mariņo and Lydia Gaban
to file her complaint. When the case was
being tried the defense counsel asked Cristina if she could forgive her
father. But Cristina was averse to the
idea as she likened her father to the
devil.
Accused-appellant invokes alibi. He said that in the months of April, September and November 1990 he was away from home as he was in Metro Manila attending to his business of renting sidecars in Dagat-dagatan, Navotas. He claims that the relatives of his wife merely concocted the rape charges against him as he was a womanizer, and that they did so only after they had abandoned their previous plan to charge him with parricide for the death of his wife.
After trial, the court a
quo found appellant guilty of rape
on three counts, sentenced him to reclusion
perpetua in each case, and
ordered him to indemnify his daughter Cristina P50,000.00 for the three
cases.[6]
Appellant still insists on his innocence. First, he harps on the failure of
Cristina to resist and to shout for help.
Second, he claims he was in Navotas, Metro Manila, when he
allegedly abused her in his house in Siwayan, Aroroy,
The defense must fail. The trial court found the testimony of
complaining witness Cristina candid, straightforward and persuasive. We have no reason to hold otherwise. We accord full faith and credence to her
narration that she was ravished three times on separate dates by her own
father. We are convinced that the acts
complained of did occur and were perpetrated by appellant and confirmed by the
court a quo. It has always been
the position of the Court that when the question arises as to which of the
conflicting versions of the prosecution and the defense is worthy of belief the
assessment of the trial court is generally viewed as correct and entitled to
great weight. Highest respect is given
to the factual findings of the court below unless it is shown that certain
facts of value have been plainly overlooked which, if considered, could affect
the result of the case. But appellant
has not presented any substantial argument, much less pointed to any material
evidence in support of his defense, which
may have been overlooked by the trial court to justify a reversal of its
conclusion.[7]
The detailed narration of the complaining witness, a girl in her
teens, on how she was repeatedly violated by her father is certainly worth
credence. It is extremely difficult to
believe that the complainant, young as she was, could have the guile and craft
to accuse her father of such heinous
crime. Hence, the defense of sinister
motivation in the filing of the rape charges is incredible aside from its being
bereft of evidentiary support. This
Court has often held that a 15-year old country girl who barely finished
elementary grades would not just complain that she had been raped because no
one would wish to be exposed to public ridicule, shame and dishonor, nor would
allow her private parts to be examined.
No one indeed would want to go through the troubles and humiliation of a
trial for such debasing offense unless she was really raped and her motive was
solely to seek justice.[8] The innocent but natural and straightforward
testimony of Cristina alone is sufficient to sustain the conviction of her
father. In fact it is entitled to greater
weight since her accusing words are directed against a close relative, her own
father.[9] As the court a quo would succinctly put it -
Cristina Gaban was 15 years old and was in Grade Five in 1990. Brought up in a poor family in a barangay
deprived of the economic and social abundance and amenities enjoyed by her
counterparts in urban centers, Cristina Gaban appeared to be modest and simple
in ways, taste, and outlook in life. And
yet she was very candid and straightforward when she denounced her father as a
devil and the very one who deflowered her in her youth. It is uncommon to see a girl of her likes and
upbringing to fabricate a criminal story and come out with a shocking
revelation about the beastly act done by her father to her if, indeed, nothing
revolting and unconscionable to the conscience of man was ever inflicted upon
her person and honor.[10]
The fact that Cristina did not put up a
strong resistance nor shout for help did not diminish her credibility. Appellant's threats and intimidation must be
considered in light of the perception and judgment of the complainant at the
time of the rape and not by any hard and fast rule.[11] Physical resistance need not be established
in rape when threats and intimidation are employed and the victim submits herself
to the embrace of her rapist because of fear.[12] In rape, the force used need not be
irresistible, as long as it is present and brings the desired result.[13] In this case, not only is appellant her own
parent who exercised an overpowering influence, if not moral ascendancy, over
her but, worse, he even used a knife to threaten her to submit to his bestial
lust and desires. That Antonio resorted
to force and intimidation in raping his 15-year old daughter magnifies no end
his animal instinct. The failure of
Cristina to resist was aptly explained by the court below thus -
True, Cristina Gaban was always in the company of her younger
siblings on those occasions when her father had sex with her. But her father seemed to be using his head as
he did the thing when his wife was not around and his small children were still
sleeping. To shout for help could be her
natural reaction, as anyone similarly situated would do, to protect herself
from the animalistic and demonic assault of her father. But to Cristina's mind, to shout for help
would be very risky for her. Note that
her father threatened to kill her, including her mother and the other children
if she refused to give in to his beastly desire.[14]
Alibi cannot prevail over the positive and unwavering identification
of appellant by the complainant.[15] His allegation that he only went home to
Significantly, appellant did not endeavor to refute the evidence
for the government that after the commission of the crimes but soon after his
wife's demise he sent a letter to Cristina pleading for forgiveness. In that letter Antonio expressly acknowledged
the wrong he had done to her, begged for her forgiveness and promised to be a
good father to her again. This letter
eloquently manifested his admission of guilt.[18]
In fine, we find accused-appellant guilty of raping his own
daughter on three separate occasions.
The prison terms imposed on him by the court a quo, i.e., reclusion
perpetua in each of the three counts, are proper. However, the civil indemnity of P50,000.00
should be for moral damages in each case or a total of P150,000.00.[19] An award of P25,000.00 in each case
or a total of P75,000.00 for exemplary damages to deter other sex
perverts or two-legged beasts from sexually assaulting or molesting innocent
minors and hapless victims, especially their own kins, is likewise appropriate.[20]
WHEREFORE, the decision appealed from finding
accused-appellant ANTONIO GABAN Y FROMENTO guilty of rape on three counts and
sentencing him to reclusion perpetua
in each case is AFFIRMED, with the modification that he should
indemnify Cristina Gaban a total of P150,000.00 for moral damages and P75,000.00
for exemplary damages or a total of P225,000.00. Costs against accused-appellant.
SO ORDERED.
Padilla, (Chairman), Vitug, Kapunan, and Hermosisima, Jr., JJ., concur.
[1] Sentenced to death under R.A. 7659 for raping his
10-year old daughter (G. R. No. 117472),
25 June 1996.
[2] Decision,
p. 1; Rollo, p. 9.
[3] TSN,
9 February 1993, pp. 2-4.
[4] Id., p. 7.
[5] Records,
p. 100.
[6] Decision
penned by Judge Manuel S. Pecson, RTC-Br. 47, Masbate.
[7] People
v. Lazaro, G.R. No. 99263, 12 October 1995, 249 SCRA 234.
[8] People
v. Campesino, No. L-45480, 31 July 1984, 131 SCRA 56.
[9] People
v. Lao, G.R. No. 117092, 6 October 1995, 249 SCRA 137.
[10] Decision,
p. 3; Rollo, p. 11.
[11] See
Note 6.
[12] People
v. Padre-e, G.R. Nos.
112969-70, 24 October 1995, 249 SCRA 422.
[13] People
v. Bugtong, G.R. No. 75853, 31 January 1989, 169 SCRA 797.
[14] Decision,
p.4; Rollo, p. 12.
[15] People
v. Munar, No. L-40462, 31 July 1984, 131 SCRA 44.
[16] TSN,
14 January 1994, p. 7.
[17] People
v. Tampus, No. L-42608, 8 February 1979, 88 SCRA 217.
[18] People
v. Calimquim, G.R. No. 61255, 28 October 1993, 125 SCRA 499.
[19] People
v. Villanueva, G.R. Nos. 112164-65, 28 February 1996.
[20] Ibid.