People v. Apattad

G.R. No. 193188 (August 10, 2011)

Facts:

The accused, Juanito Apattad, was charged with four separate counts of rape against his minor daughter, referred to as AAA, who was below 12 years of age at the time of the incidents. The charges were based on events that occurred in the Municipality of Peñablanca, Province of Cagayan, during the years 2001, 2002, and 2003. The prosecution alleged that Apattad, having moral ascendancy over AAA, committed sexual intercourse with her through force and lewd design.

During the trial, AAA testified that the first incident occurred in 2001 when she was seven years old. She recounted that while sleeping with her sisters, her father pulled her away and molested her. The subsequent incidents took place on June 10 and June 11, 2003, where she described being carried by her father, having her mouth covered, and being sexually assaulted. AAA reported the abuse to her mother on June 13, 2003, after being threatened by her father not to tell anyone.

The prosecution presented AAA's testimony and a medico-legal report from Dr. Mila Lingan-Simangan, who examined AAA and found evidence of sexual abuse. The defense, on the other hand, presented Apattad's denial of the charges and an alibi supported by a witness, Louie Calimag, who claimed that Apattad was with him during the times the rapes were alleged to have occurred.

The Regional Trial Court (RTC) found Apattad guilty of three counts of rape and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua, while acquitting him of one count due to lack of evidence. The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the RTC's decision with modifications regarding the civil indemnity and damages awarded to AAA.

Legal Issues:

1. Whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
2. Whether the defense of alibi and denial presented by the accused was sufficient to exonerate him from the charges.

Arguments:

• Prosecution's Argument: The prosecution argued that AAA's testimony was credible and detailed, providing a clear account of the sexual assaults. They emphasized the moral ascendancy of the father over the victim and the corroborative medical evidence that supported AAA's claims.

• Defense's Argument: The defense contended that the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. They argued that the alibi presented by Calimag was credible and that AAA's testimony was influenced by her mother, who allegedly had a motive to fabricate the charges due to personal issues with Apattad.

Court's Decision and Legal Reasoning:

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of Apattad, emphasizing that the defense of alibi and denial are inherently weak and cannot prevail over positive identification by credible witnesses. The Court noted that AAA's testimony was consistent and detailed, making it difficult to fabricate, especially for a child of her age. The Court also highlighted that the medical examination corroborated AAA's account of the abuse.

The Court reiterated the principle that in cases of statutory rape, the mere fact that the victim is below 12 years old suffices to establish the crime, regardless of the presence of force or intimidation. The Court found that the prosecution had established the elements of the crime beyond reasonable doubt, particularly the carnal knowledge of AAA by her father.

Significant Legal Principles Established:

1. The testimony of a child-victim is given full weight and credence, especially in cases of sexual abuse, where the victim's account is often the primary evidence.
2. The defense of alibi must not only prove that the accused was elsewhere but also that it was physically impossible for him to be at the crime scene at the time of the commission of the crime.
3. In statutory rape cases, the age of the victim is a critical factor, and the moral ascendancy of the perpetrator can substitute for the need for physical force.