[G.R. Nos.

 136592-93. November 27, 2003.]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, appellee, vs.

MANOLITO PANCHO,  appellant.

The Solicitor General for plaintiff-appellee.

Public Attorney's Office for accused-appellant.

SYNOPSIS

Appellant was found guilty by the trial court of rape and

attempted rape committed on separate occasions. In this appeal,
appellant assailed the sufficiency of evidence for his conviction.
The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's decision convicting
appellant of the crime of rape. In the Information, appellant was being
charged of statutory rape considering that the victim was then below
twelve years old. The gravamen of the offense of statutory rape is
carnal knowledge of a woman below twelve years old. In statutory
rape, force, intimidation or physical evidence of injury is immaterial.
Where the girl is below twelve years of age, violence or intimidation is
not required, and the only subject of inquiry is whether carnal
knowledge took place.
The Court likewise ruled that in rape cases, the absence of fresh
lacerations does not preclude the finding of rape, especially when the
victim is of tender age. Rape is consummated by the slightest penile
penetration of the labia majora or pudendum of the female organ.
Anent the charge of attempted rape, the Supreme Court held
that the prosecution failed to prove that appellant started to rape the
victim and commenced the performance of acts of carnal knowledge.
He did not force her to lie down or remove her garment. In short,
there was no showing that he did commence at all the performance of
any act indicative of an intent or attempt to rape the victim. The Court
cannot conclude that he attempted to rape her. Thus, the Court
acquitted appellant of the crime of attempted rape.

SYLLABUS
 1. CRIMINAL LAW; STATUTORY RAPE; FORCE, INTIMIDATION OR
PHYSICAL EVIDENCE OF INJURY IS IMMATERIAL. — The gravamen of
the offense of statutory rape is carnal knowledge of a woman below
twelve (12) years old. In statutory rape, force, intimidation or physical
evidence of injury is immaterial. Where the girl is below 12 years of
age, violence or intimidation is not required, and the only subject of
inquiry is whether carnal knowledge took place.
2. REMEDIAL LAW; EVIDENCE; CREDIBILITY OF WITNESSES; IN
RAPE CASES, ACCUSED MAY BE CONVICTED SOLELY ON THE
TESTIMONY OF RAPE VICTIM IF HER TESTIMONY IS CREDIBLE,
NATURAL AND CONVINCING; CASE AT BAR. — Michelle's testimony is
straightforward, unflawed by significant inconsistency, and unshaken
by rigid cross-examination. It deserves full faith and credence. In rape
cases, the accused may be convicted solely on the testimony of the
rape victim if her testimony is credible, natural, and convincing. When
a woman says she was raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to
show that rape had been committed, and if her testimony meets the
test of credibility, the accused may be convicted on the basis thereof.
It bears stressing that Michelle, a girl of tender years, innocent and
guileless, cannot be expected to brazenly impute a crime so serious as
rape to her step-father if it were not true.
3. CRIMINAL LAW; RAPE; NOT NEGATED BY ABSENCE OF
HYMENAL RUPTURE OR ANY INDICATION OF VAGINAL LACERATION
OR GENITAL INJURY. — [I]n rape cases the absence of fresh
lacerations does not preclude the finding of rape, especially when the
victim is of tender age. Moreover, laceration of the hymen is not an
element of the crime of rape. Hymenal rupture or any indication of
vaginal laceration or genital injury is not necessary for the
consummation of rape. Its absence does not negate a finding of forced
sexual coitus.
4. ID.; ID.; CONSUMMATED BY THE SLIGHTEST PENILE
PENETRATION OF THE LABIA MAJORA OR PUDENDUM OF THE FEMALE
ORGAN. — [R]ape is consummated by the slightest penile penetration
of the labia majora or pudendum of the female organ. Indeed, the
evidentiary weight of the medical examination of the victim, as well as
the medical certificate, is merely corroborative in character and is not
an indispensable element for conviction for rape.
5. REMEDIAL LAW; EVIDENCE; DENIAL; CANNOT BE GIVEN
GREATER EVIDENTIARY WEIGHT THAN THE TESTIMONY OF VICTIM
WHO TESTIFIED ON AFFIRMATIVE MATTERS. — Appellant's denial is
an inherently weak defense. It has always been viewed upon with
disfavor by the courts due, to the ease with which it can be concocted.
Inherently weak, denial as a defense crumbles in the light of positive
identification of the accused, as in this case. The defense of denial
assumes significance only when the prosecution's evidence is such that
it does not prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Verily, mere denial,
unsubstantiated by clear and convincing evidence, is negative self-
serving evidence which cannot be given greater evidentiary weight
than the testimony of the complaining witness who testified on
affirmative matters.
6. CRIMINAL LAW; RAPE; WHEN ATTEMPTED. — Under Art. 6, in
relation to Art. 335, of the Revised Penal Code, rape is attempted
when the offender commences the commission of rape directly by
overt acts, but does not perform all the acts of execution which should
produce the crime of rape by reason of some cause or accident other
than his own spontaneous desistance.
7. ID.; ID.; THE THIN LINE THAT SEPARATES ATTEMPTED RAPE
FROM CONSUMMATED RAPE IS THE ENTRANCE OF THE MALE ORGAN
INTO THE LABIAL THRESHOLD OF THE FEMALE GENITALIA. —
In People vs. Campuhan, we held that the thin line that separates
attempted rape from consummated rape is the entrance of the male
organ into the labial threshold of the female genitalia. In that case, the
accused was caught by the mother of the victim kneeling on top of
her. The victim testified that the accused's organ merely touched but
did not penetrate her vagina. We held that he could not be convicted
of statutory rape but only attempted rape.
8. CIVIL LAW; DAMAGES; CIVIL INDEMNITY AND MORAL
DAMAGES; AWARDED IN CASE AT BAR. — We have consistently ruled
that upon a finding of the fact of rape, the award of civil indemnity is
mandatory. If the death penalty is imposed, the indemnity ex
delicto should be P75,000.00. Where, as here, the death penalty is not
decreed, the victim should be entitled to P50,000.00 only. In line with
current jurisprudence, we also award the victim moral damages in the
amount of P50,000.00 without need of pleading or proof of the basis
thereof. The anguish and pain she has endured are evident.

DECISION
SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ,  J  : p

This is an appeal from the Joint Decision 1 dated June 19, 1998 of

the Regional Trial Court, Branch 15, Malolos, Bulacan, finding appellant
Manolito Pancho guilty beyond reasonable doubt of rape in Criminal
Case No. 837-M-96 and attempted rape in Criminal Case No. 838-M-
96. In Criminal Case No. 837-M-96, the trial court sentenced him to
suffer reclusion perpetua, while in Criminal Case No. 838-M-96, the
penalty of 10 years and 1 day, as minimum, to 12 years, as maximum
of prision mayor, was imposed upon him.
The Informations in both Criminal Case Nos. 837-M-96 and 838-
M-96 read:
For Criminal Case No. 837-M-96 (For Rape):
"That in or about the month of August, 1994, in the
municipality of Malolos, province of Bulacan, Philippines, and
within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-
named accused, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and
feloniously, by means of force, threats and intimidation and
with lewd designs, have carnal knowledge of said Michelle L.
dela Torre, 11 years of age, against her will and without her
consent.
"Contrary to law."
For Criminal Case No. 838-M-96 (For Attempted Rape):
"That in or about the month of December, 1995, in the
municipality of Malolos, province of Bulacan, Philippines, and
within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-
named accused, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and
feloniously, by means of force, threats and intimidation and
with lewd designs, have carnal knowledge of said Michelle L.
dela Torre, 11 years of age, against her will and without her
consent.
"Contrary to law."
Upon arraignment, appellant, assisted by counsel, pleaded not
guilty to the crimes charged.
Thereafter, trial ensued. The evidence for the prosecution shows
that complainant Michelle dela Torre was born on April 2, 1984 2 to
spouses Exequiela Lacanilao and Eduardo dela Torre. After Michelle's
father passed away, her mother contracted a second marriage with
appellant. Michelle and her two (2) brothers live with the couple at
Look First, Malolos, Bulacan.
On August 1, 1994, at around 6:00 o'clock in the morning,
Michelle, who was then only ten years old, went home after spending
the night at her aunt's house. While she was about to undress,
appellant suddenly dragged her and forced her to lie down on the
floor. Although frightened, she struggled by kicking and boxing him.
However, he forcibly removed her clothes and underwear. Then he
took off his clothing. Appellant started kissing and holding her breast
and eventually had carnal knowledge of her. She felt pain when he
inserted his organ into her vagina which bled. She tried to resist but
he held her both arms. He was on top of her making push and pull
movements for four (4) minutes. Then he dressed up, threatening to
kill her should she complain or tell anyone about the incident.
Sometime in December, 1995 at the family's new residence at
Bayugo, Meycauayan, Bulacan, appellant arrived from work. When
Michelle opened the door and saw him, she got scared. While he was
approaching her, she managed to hit him. Then she attempted to jump
out of the window, but he dragged her by her feet. At that instance,
her uncle (Tito Onio) suddenly arrived. 3 Immediately, appellant
stopped, thus thwarting his bestial desire. THAECc

After sometime, Michelle mustered enough courage to report the

incidents to her mother, but the latter casually ignored her. So, she
turned to her grandmother Natividad Lacanilao, who brought her,
sometime in February, 1996, to the National Bureau of Investigation
(NBI) for examination by a medico-legal officer. 4 Thereafter, they
proceeded to the Malolos Police Station where she executed a sworn
statement. 5
 
Dr. Ida P. Daniel, a Medico-Legal Officer of the NBI, testified that
she conducted a medico-genital examination of Michelle dela Torre.
Her findings, 6 which she confirmed on the witness stand, are as
follows:
"GENERAL PHYSICAL EXAMINATION:
Height: 132.0 cms
Weight: 78.0 cms
 Normally developed, fairly nourished, conscious,
coherent, cooperative, ambulatory subject.
Breasts, developing, conical, firm. Areolae, brown, 2.5
cms in diameter. Nipples, brown, protruding, 0.5 cm in
diameter.
No sign of extragenital physical injury noted.
"GENITAL EXAMINATION:
Pubic hair, fine, scanty. Labia majora and minora,
coaptated. Fourchette, tense. Vestibular mucosa, pinkish.
Hymen, moderately tall, moderately thick, intact. Hymenal
orifice, annular, admits a tube 2.0 cms in diameter with
moderate resistance. Vaginal walls, tight. Rugosities,
prominent.
"CONCLUSIONS:
1. No evident sign of extragenital physical injury noted
on the body of the subject at the time of examination.
2. Hymen, intact and its orifice small (2.0 cms in
diameter) as to preclude complete penetration by an average
sized adult Filipino male organ in full erection without
producing any genital injury."
For his part, appellant strongly denied the charges, contending
that it was impossible for him to commit the crimes considering that
during the incidents, his wife and her two sons were also inside the
house. 7 Moreover, the charge of rape is totally belied by the finding of
the NBI Medico-Legal Officer that Michelle's hymen has remained
intact with no sign of extra-genital or genital injuries.
After trial, the lower court rendered a Joint Decision dated June
19, 1998, the dispositive portion of which reads:
"In view of all the foregoing and by proof beyond
reasonable doubt, the Court hereby renders judgment as
follows:
1. With respect to Criminal Case No. 837-M-96, the Court
finds the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime
charged and hereby sentences accused MANOLITO PANCHO to
suffer the penalty of RECLUSION PERPETUA.
2. With respect to Criminal Case No. 838-M-96, the Court
finds the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime
 of Attempted Rape, and hereby sentences accused MANOLITO
PANCHO to suffer an imprisonment of TEN (10) YEARS and
ONE (1) DAY to TWELVE (12) YEARS.
3. To indemnify the victim Michelle dela Torre the amount
of P20,000.00 — each case.
"The period of the accused's detention is credited in his
favor.
"SO ORDERED."
In this appeal, appellant ascribes to the trial court the following
errors:
"I
THE LOWER COURT ERRED IN FINDING ACCUSED-APPELLANT
GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT OF THE CRIMES OF
RAPE AND ATTEMPTED RAPE, DESPITE INSUFFICIENCY OF
EVIDENCE.
"II
THE LOWER COURT ERRED IN DISREGARDING THE DEFENSE
PUT UP BY ACCUSED-APPELLANT."
As alleged in the Informations, the crimes charged were
committed sometime in August, 1994 and December, 1995. Thus, the
governing law is Article 335 8 of the Revised Penal Code which, as
amended by Republic Act No. 7659 (The Death Penalty
Law), 9 provides:
"ART. 335. When and how rape is committed. — Rape is
committed by having carnal knowledge of a woman under any
of the following circumstances:
1. By using force or intimidation;
2. When the woman is deprived of reason or otherwise
unconscious; and
3. When the woman is under twelve years of age or is
demented.
"The crime of rape shall be punished by reclusion
perpetua.
xxx xxx xxx
 "The death penalty shall also be imposed if the crime or
rape is committed with any of the following attendant
circumstances:
1. When the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age
and the offender is a parent, ascendant, step-parent, guardian,
relative by consanguinity or affinity within the third civil degree
or the common-law spouse of the parent of the victim.  HSaCcE

2. . . .."
A. — G.R. No.  136592  for rape:
Rape under the above provisions is either simple or qualified. It
is qualified when the age of the victim (below 18) and her relationship
with the appellant are both alleged in the Information and
proved. 10 In this case, the prosecution failed to allege in the
Information the qualifying circumstance that appellant is the victim's
step-parent. Thus, he may only be convicted of simple rape.
Simple rape is committed under any of the following
circumstances:
1. By using force or intimidation;
2. When the woman is deprived of reason or otherwise
unconscious; and
3. When the woman is under twelve years of age
(statutory rape) or is demented.
In the Information, appellant is being charged of statutory rape
considering that Michelle was then below 12 years old.
The gravamen of the offense of statutory rape is carnal
knowledge of a woman below twelve (12) years old. 11 In statutory
rape, force, intimidation or physical evidence of injury is
immaterial. 12 Where the girl is below 12 years of age, violence or
intimidation is not required, and the only subject of inquiry is whether
carnal knowledge took place. 13
As shown by her Certificate of Live Birth, 14 Michelle was born on
April 2, 1984. Thus, on August 1, 1994 when the incident took place,
she was only 10 years and 3 months old.
Michelle identified appellant in open court as the culprit who
raped her. She testified as follows:
"FISCAL:
Q: Ms. Witness, you claim in your testimony that you were
raped by your step father Manolito Pancho last August 1,
1994, will you please tell this Honorable Court how
Manolito Pancho raped you?
A: About 6:00 o'clock in the morning I went home, sir.
Q: And where is your home located?
A: I went home at Look First, Malolos, Bulacan.
Q: And what happened when you went home at Look, Malolos,
Bulacan?
A: Manolito Pancho dragged me and forced me to lie on the
floor.
Q: And what happened when after Manolito Pancho lay you on
the floor?
A: He took off all my clothes.
Q: And what clothes you are wearing at that time, Ms. witness?
A: I was wearing a t-shirt and short, sir.
Q: What else Manolito Pancho removed?
A: My clothes, short and panty, sir.
Q. And what was your appearance after these clothes were
removed by Manolito Pancho?
A: I was naked, sir.
Q: How about Manolito Pancho, what did he do after he
removed your dress?
A: He also took-off his clothes, sir.
Q: What clothes did he remove?
A: His t-shirt, short and brief, sir.
Q: After Manolito removed all these: his short, brief and t-shirt,
what did he do?
A: He placed himself on top of me.
Q: And what happened after he placed himself on top of you?
A: He inserted his penis on my vagina.
Q: Were you able to see his organ when he inserted it on your
vagina?
A: Yes, sir.
Q: What happened when he inserted his organ on your vagina?
A: He was kissing me and touching my body, sir.
Q: What particular parts of your body did Manolito Pancho kiss
and touch, Ms. witness?
A: My both breasts, sir.
Q: And what did you feel when Manolito Pancho inserted his
organ on your vagina?
A: It hurts, sir.  ACTESI

Q: What motion did he do if you can still remember when

Manolito Pancho was on top of you?
A: He was kissing me, touching me and then I tried to struggle
against him but he was holding my both hands so that I
could not struggle.
Q: And what happened to your vagina after he inserted his
penis?
A: It bled, sir.
Q: How long did Manolito Pancho stay on top of you?
A: Four (4) minutes, sir.
Q: And after four (4) minutes, what did Manolito Pancho do?
A: I already dressed up because he already dressed-up, sir.
Q: And what did Manolito Pancho tell you, if any?
A: He said, do not complain because if you do so, I am going to
kill you.
Q: How are you related with Manolito Pancho, Ms. witness?
A: My step father, sir.
Q: At the time you claimed that you were raped by Manolito
Pancho, will you please tell this Honorable Court, how
young were you then?
A: Ten (10) years old, sir.
 Q: Do you have evidence to show Ms. witness that you are ten
(10) years old at that time?
A: My birth certificate, sir.
Q: Do you have with you your birth certificate?
A: Yes, sir. (The grandmother is producing the Live Birth
Certificate of the complainant Michelle dela Torre.)
Q: Will you please tell this Honorable Court what is your date of
birth, Ms. witness?
A: April 2, 1984.
Q: And you claimed that you were 10 years old when you were
raped by Manolito Pancho?
A: Yes, sir.
xxx xxx xxx." 15
Michelle's testimony is straightforward, unflawed by significant
inconsistency, and unshaken by rigid cross-examination. It deserves
full faith and credence. In rape cases, the accused may be convicted
solely on the testimony of the rape victim if her testimony is credible,
natural, and convincing. 16
When a woman says she was raped, she says in effect all that is
necessary to show that rape had been committed, and if her testimony
meets the test of credibility, the accused may be convicted on the
basis thereof. 17 It bears stressing that Michelle, a girl of tender years,
innocent and guileless, cannot be expected to brazenly impute a crime
so serious as rape to her step-father if it were not true.
Appellant vigorously denied the charge, contending that per the
Medical Report of Dr. Ida Daniel, Michelle's hymen has remained
intact. 18
We are not persuaded.
Appellant heavily relies on the virgo intacta theory. 19 He
disregards Dr. Daniel's testimony that there are two types of hymen:
(1) one that remains intact even though there is penetration; (2) the
other is lacerated after penetration. 20 We have ruled that in rape
cases the absence of fresh lacerations does not preclude the finding of
rape, 21 especially when the victim is of tender age. 22 Moreover,
laceration of the hymen is not an element of the crime of
rape. 23 Hymenal rupture or any indication of vaginal laceration or
genital injury is not necessary for the consummation of rape. 24 Its
absence does not negate a finding of forced sexual coitus. 25 For the
rule is well settled that rape is consummated by the slightest penile
penetration of the labia majora or pudendum of the female
organ. 26 Indeed, the evidentiary weight of the medical examination
of the victim, as well as the medical certificate, is merely corroborative
in character and is not an indispensable element for conviction for
rape. 27
 
Appellant's denial is an inherently weak defense. It has always
been viewed upon with disfavor by the courts due to the ease with
which it can be concocted. 28 Inherently weak, denial as a defense
crumbles in the light of positive identification of the accused, as in this
case. The defense of denial assumes significance only when the
prosecution's evidence is such that it does not prove guilt beyond
reasonable doubt. 29 Verily, mere denial, unsubstantiated by clear and
convincing evidence, is negative self-serving evidence which cannot be
given greater evidentiary weight than the testimony of the complaining
witness who testified on affirmative matters. 30
B. — G.R.  No. 136593 for attempted rape:
Appellant also contends that his conviction of attempted rape in
Criminal Case No. 838-M-96 is not supported by evidence.
Michelle testified that when appellant "was coming near me, I hit
him and I saw that our door was opened. I tried to jump and that was
the time he dragged and he held my feet." 31 Appellant and Michelle
were in this snap situation when his Tito Onio arrived. 32 Her testimony
regarding this incident is quoted as follows:
"FISCAL:
xxx xxx xxx
Q: And what happened in that place at Bayugo, Meycauayan,
Bulacan?
A: When the door opened I thought it was my mother and
when I saw him I was scared, sir.  IHaCDE

Q: And what happened when you saw Manolito Pancho?

A: I closed the door, sir.
 Q: Thereafter, what happened?
A: When he was coming near me, I hit him and I saw that our
door was opened. I tried to jump and that was the time
he dragged and he held my feet.
Q: And what happened after Manolito Pancho held your feet?
A: When he was holding my feet I was not able to jump from
the window and that's the time the door opened and then
I saw my uncle that is why the rape was not committed.
xxx xxx xxx." 33
Under Art. 6, in relation to Art. 335, of the Revised Penal Code,
rape is attempted when the offender commences the commission of
rape directly by overt acts, but does not perform all the acts of
execution which should produce the crime of rape by reason of some
cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance. 34
In this second case, the prosecution failed to prove that appellant
started to rape the victim and had commenced the performance of
acts of carnal knowledge. He did not force her to lie down or remove
her garment. In short, there was no showing that he did commence at
all the performance of any act indicative of an intent or attempt to
rape the victim. What he did was to "drag" her and hold her feet. At
this juncture, we can not safely conclude that he was attempting to
rape her.
In People vs. Campuhan, 35 we held that the thin line that
separates attempted rape from consummated rape is the entrance of
the male organ into the labial threshold of the female genitalia. In that
case, the accused was caught by the mother of the victim kneeling on
top of her. The victim testified that the accused's organ merely
touched but did not penetrate her vagina. We held that he could
not be convicted of statutory rape but only attempted rape.
In the instant case, appellant was merely holding complainant's
feet when her Tito Onio arrived at the alleged locus criminis. Thus, it
would be stretching to the extreme our credulity if we were to
conclude that mere holding of the feet is attempted rape.
Anent the award of damages in G.R. No. 136592, we observed
that the trial court only awarded the victim civil indemnity in the
amount of P20,000.00. This must be corrected. We have consistently
ruled that upon a finding of the fact of rape, the award of civil
indemnity is mandatory. If the death penalty is imposed, the
indemnity ex delicto should be P75,000.00. Where, as here, the death
penalty is not decreed, the victim should be entitled to P50,000.00
only. 36
In line with current jurisprudence, we also award the victim
moral damages in the amount of P50,000.00 without need of pleading
or proof of the basis thereof. 37 The anguish and pain she has endured
are evident.
WHEREFORE, the Decision dated June 19, 1998 of the Regional
Trial Court, Branch 15, Malolos, Bulacan, in Criminal Case No.  837-M-
96, convicting appellant Manolito Pancho of rape and sentencing him
to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua is AFFIRMED, with the
MODIFICATION that he is ordered to pay the victim, Michelle dela
Torre, P50,000.00 as civil indemnity, and P50,000.00 as moral
damages.
In Criminal Case No. 838-M-96, the trial court's judgment
convicting the appellant of attempted rape is REVERSED AND SET
ASIDE and a new one is entered ACQUITTING him of the crime
charged.
Costs de oficio.
SO ORDERED.
 (People v. Pancho, G.R. Nos. 136592-93, [November 27, 2003], 462
|||

PHIL 193-209)