People v. XXX
G.R. No. 235662
July 24, 2019
FACTS:
The CA
convicted XXX for the crime of 2 counts of Qualified Rape and 1 count of
Lascivious Conduct. omplainants AAA and BBB are appellant's daughters with MMM.
AAA was born on August 12, 1993, and BBB, on February 7, 1996. Appellant was a
tricycle driver while their mother, MMM, was an Overseas Filipino Worker. AAA
testified that on March 14, 2009, she was alone with appellant in their home.
He brought her to a room, laid her down on the bed, and undressed her.
Appellant took off his shorts and inserted his penis into her vagina. She felt
pain and blood came out of her vagina and she could not do anything. After
sexually ravishing her, appellant told her to put on her dress while he also
put on his shorts. Appellant also promised to give her money. AAA further
recounted that appellant sexually abused her many times more but she could not
remember the dates. In some instances, her younger sister BBB was even in the
room. She kept her silence for three (3) years because her mother MMM did not
believe her. Eventually, she left their house and told her aunt what appellant
had done to her. Her aunt rescued her. While intensely crying, BBB testified
that sometime in 2009, she and appellant were left alone in their house.
Appellant asked her if she wanted money then suddenly pulled down her shorts
and panty and raised her t-shirt, exposing her breasts. She resisted but
appellant did not stop touching and kissing her private parts. He then took off
his t-shirt, shorts, and brief. As he was about to insert his penis into her
vagina, CCC, her younger brother arrived. Appellant hurriedly dressed and told
her to do the same. BBB added that appellant would usually move from his room
into theirs while they were asleep. Appellant would usually lie beside them and
touch her and AAA's private parts. Eventually, he would have carnal knowledge
of her even though AAA and CCC were in the same room. She knew that appellant
also raped AAA. Appellant would wake her up by holding her hands while raping AAA.
They could not do anything because they were so scared of appellant. The
prosecution and the defense stipulated that AAA and BBB are appellant's
legitimate children.
ISSUE:
Whether
or not the CA erred in affirming the RTC
HELD:
No. First. The fact that AAA and BBB still
went on with their respective daily routines should not dent their credibility.
People v. Prodenciado is apropos:
This hardly convinces. It has been held that "different people react
differently to different situations and there is no standard form of human
behavioral response when one is confronted with a strange, startling or
frightful experience," such as rape. Verily, some victims choose to suffer
in silence; while others may be moved to action out of a need to seek justice
for what was done to them. Then there are those who opt not to dwell on their
experience and try to live as though it never happened. To the Court's mind,
this is how "AAA" tried to cope with the harrowing experience that
befell her. Moreover, since she was just a young girl when all these rapes were
committed against her, "AAA" simply knew no other way of life than
what she was accustomed to. Second.
Rape victims react differently. Some may offer strong resistance while others
may be too intimidated to offer any resistance at all. There is no standard
form of reaction for a woman when facing a shocking and horrifying experience
such as a sexual assault. The workings of the human mind placed under emotional
stress are unpredictable. People react differently - some may shout, some may
faint, and some may be shocked into insensibility, while others may openly
welcome the intrusion. But any of these reactions does not impair the
credibility of a rape victim. Additionally, failure to physically resist the
attack does not detract from the established fact that a reprehensible act was
done to a child-woman by her own biological father. Lastly, failure to shout or
offer tenuous resistance does not make voluntary the victim's submission to the
criminal acts of the accused.
Indeed, just because AAA or BBB did
not offer tenacious resistance nor even shout whenever their father sexually
ravished them did not make them less credible as witnesses. Third. It is not true that AAA and BBB
took three (3) years before they reported the sex crimes appellant perpetrated
on them. As aptly observed by the trial court, AAA confided in their mother
their sexual ravishment in appellant's hands but their mother did not believe
her. They were young and helpless victims of their own father's bestiality. He
treated them like sex slaves in never ending horrendous ways. The person they
thought would protect them did not even care to believe them. Where else would
they go? Who else could help them? They were obviously driven into helplessness
and cowed silence.
Get a $200 Bonus at Harrah's Casino in Las Vegas
ReplyDeleteThe new Harrah's Casino is febcasino one of the 바카라사이트 most well-known Las 바카라 사이트 Vegas-style https://jancasino.com/review/merit-casino/ casino resorts. It aprcasino features a full-service spa, a full-service spa and