EN BANC

[ G.R. No. 117472. June 25, 1996

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. LEO

ECHEGARAY y PILO, Accused-Appellant.

DECISION

PER CURIAM:

Amidst the endless debates on whether or not the

reimposition of the death penalty is indeed a deterrent as far
as the commission of heinous crimes is concerned and while
the attendant details pertaining to the execution of a death
sentence remain as yet another burning issue, we are tasked
with providing a clear-cut resolution of whether or not the
herein accused-appellant deserves to forfeit his place in
human society for the infliction of the primitive and bestial
act of incestuous lust on his own blood.

Before us for automatic review is the judgment of conviction,

dated September 7, 1994, for the crime of Rape, rendered
after marathon hearing by the Regional Trial Court of Quezon
City, Branch 104, the dispositive portion of which reads:

"WHEREFORE, judgment is hereby rendered finding accused

LEO ECHEGARAY Y PILO guilty beyond reasonable doubt of
the crime of RAPE as charged in the complaint, aggravated
by the fact that the same was committed by the accused who
is the father/stepfather of the complainant, he is hereby
sentenced to suffer the penalty of DEATH, as provided for
under RA. No. 7659; to pay the complainant Rodessa
Echegaray the sum of P50,000.00 as damages, plus all the
accessory penalties provided by law, without subsidiary
imprisonment in case of insolvency, and to pay the costs." 1crlwvirtualibrr y

We note, however, that the charge had been formulated in

this manner:
"C O M P L A I N T

The undersigned accuses LEO ECHEGARAY Y PILO of the

crime of RAPE, committed as follows:

That on or about the month of April 1994, in Quezon City,

Philippines, the above-named accused, by means of force
and intimidation, did then and there, wilfully, unlawfully and
feloniously have carnal knowledge of the undersigned
complainant his daughter, a minor, 10 years of age, all
against her will and without her consent, to her damage and
prejudice.

CONTRARY TO LAW." 2
crlwvirtualibrr y

Upon being arraigned on August 1, 1994, the accused-

appellant, assisted by his counsel de oficio, entered the plea
of "not guilty."

These are the pertinent facts of the case as summarized by

the Solicitor-General in his brief:

"This is a case of rape by the father of his ten-year old

daughter.

Complainant RODESSA ECHEGARAY is a ten-year old girl and

a fifth-grader, born on September 11, 1983. Rodessa is the
eldest of five siblings. She has three brothers aged 6, 5 and
2, respectively, and a 3-month old baby sister. Her parents
are Rosalie and Leo Echegaray, the latter being the accused-
appellant himself. The victim lives with her family in a small
house located at No. 199 Fernandez St., Barangay San
Antonio, San Francisco Del Monte, Quezon City (pp. 5-9, Aug.
9, 1994, TSN).

Sometime in the afternoon of April 1994, while Rodessa was

looking after her three brothers in their house as her mother
attended a gambling session in another place, she heard her
father, the accused-appellant in this case, order her brothers
to go out of the house (pp. 10-11, ibid.). As soon as her
brothers left, accused-appellant Leo Echegaray approached
Rodessa and suddenly dragged her inside the room (p.
12, ibid). Before she could question the appellant, the latter
immediately removed her panty and made her lie on the floor
(p. 13, ibid.). Thereafter, appellant likewise removed his
underwear and immediately placed himself on top of
Rodessa. Subsequently, appellant forcefully inserted his
penis into Rodessa's organ causing her to suffer intense pain
(pp. 14-15, ibid.). While appellant was pumping on her, he
even uttered: 'Masarap ba, masarap ba?' and to which
Rodessa answered: 'Tama na Papa, masakit' (p. 16, ibid.).
Rodessa's plea proved futile as appellant continued with his
act. After satisfying his bestial instinct, appellant threatened
to kill her mother if she would divulge what had happened.
Scared that her mother would be killed by appellant, Rodessa
kept to herself the ordeal she suffered. She was very afraid
of appellant because the latter, most of the time, was high
on drugs (pp. 17-18, ibid.). The same sexual assault
happened up to the fifth time and this usually took place
when her mother was out of the house (p. 19, ibid.).
However, after the fifth time, Rodessa decided to inform her
grandmother, Asuncion Rivera, who in turn told Rosalie,
Rodessa's mother. Rodessa and her mother proceeded to the
Barangay Captain where Rodessa confided the sexual
assaults she suffered. Thereafter, Rodessa was brought to
the precinct where she executed an affidavit (p. 21, ibid.).
From there, she was accompanied to the Philippine National
Police Crime Laboratory for medical examination (p.
22, ibid.).

Rodessa testified that the said sexual assaults happened

only during the time when her mother was pregnant.
Rodessa added that at first, her mother was on her side.
However, when appellant was detained, her mother kept on
telling her: 'Kawawa naman ang Tatay mo, nakakulong' (pp.
39-40, ibid.).

When Rodessa was examined by the medico-legal officer in

the person of Dra. Ma. Cristina B. Preyna, 3 the complainant
was described as physically on a non-virgin state, as
evidenced by the presence of laceration of the hymen of said
complainant (TSN., Aug. 22,1995, pp. 8-9)." 4 crlwvirtualib rry

On the other hand, the accused-appellant's brief presents a

different story:

"x x x the defense presented its first witness, Rosalie

Echegaray. She asserted that the RAPE charge against the
accused was only the figment of her mother's dirty mind.
That her daughter's complaint was forced upon her by her
grandma and the answers in the sworn statement of Rodessa
were coached. That the accusation of RAPE was motivated by
Rodessa's grandmother's greed over the lot situated at the
Madrigal Estate-NHA Project, Barangay San Antonio, San
Francisco del Monte, Quezon City, which her grandmother's
paramour, Conrado Alfonso gave to the accused in order to
persuade the latter to admit that Rodessa executed an
affidavit of desistance after it turned out that her complaint
of attempted homicide was substituted with the crime of
RAPE at the instance of her mother. That when her mother
came to know about the affidavit of desistance, she placed
her granddaughter under the custody of the Barangay
Captain. That her mother was never a real mother to her.

She stated that her complaint against accused was for

attempted homicide as her husband poured alcohol on her
body and attempted to burn her. She identified the
certification issued by the NHA and Tag No. 87-0393 (Exh.
2). That the Certification based on the Masterlist (Exh. 3)
indicates that the property is co-owned by accused and
Conrado Alfonso. That Rodessa is her daughter sired by
Conrado Alfonso, the latter being the paramour of her
mother. That Conrado Alfonso waived his right and
participation over the lot in favor of the accused in
consideration of the latter's accepting the fact that he is the
father of Rodessa to simulate the love triangle and to conceal
the nauseating sex orgies from Conrado Alfonso's real Wife.
Accused testified in his behalf and stated that the
grandmother of the complainant has a very strong motive in
implicating him to the crime of RAPE since she was
interested to become the sole owner of a property awarded
to her live-in partner by the Madrigal Estate-NHA Project.
That he could not have committed the imputed crime
because he considers Rodessa as his own daughter. That he
is a painter-contractor and on the date of the alleged
commission of the crime, he was painting the house of one
Divina Ang of Barangay Vitalis, Paraaque, Metro Manila (Exh
4). The travel time between his work place to his residence is
three (3) hours considering the condition of traffic. That the
painting contract is evidenced by a document denominated
'Contract of Services' duly accomplished (see submarkings of
Exh. 4). He asserted that he has a big sexual organ which
when used to a girl 11 years old like Rodessa, the said
female organ will be 'mawawarak.' That it is abnormal to
report the imputed commission of the crime to the
grandmother of the victim.

Accused further stated that her(sic) mother-in-law trumped-

up a charge of drug pushing earlier and he pleaded guilty to
a lesser offense of using drugs. The decretal portion of the
judgment of conviction ordering the accused to be confined
at the Bicutan Rehabilitation Center irked the grandmother
of Rodessa because it was her wish that accused should be
meted the death penalty.

Accused remain steadfast in his testimony perorating the

strong motive of Rodessa's grandmother in implicating him
in this heinous crime because of her greed to become the
sole owner of that piece of property at the National Housing
Authority-Madrigal Project, situated at San Francisco del
Monte, Quezon City, notwithstanding rigid cross-
examination. He asserted that the imputed offense is far
from his mind considering that he treated Rodessa as his
own daughter. He categorically testified that he was in his
painting job site on the date and time of the alleged
commission of the crime.
Mrs. Punzalan was presented as third defense witness. She
said that she is the laundry woman and part time baby sitter
of the family of accused. That at one time, she saw Rodessa
reading sex books and the Bulgar newspaper. That while
hanging washed clothes on the vacant lot she saw Rodessa
masturbating by tinkering her private parts. The
masturbation took sometime.

This sexual fling of Rodessa were corroborated by Silvestra

Echegaray, the fourth and last witness for the defense. She
stated that she tried hard to correct the flirting tendency of
Rodessa and that she scolded her when she saw Rodessa
viewing an X-rated tape. Rodessa according to her was fond
of going with friends of ill-repute. That (sic) she
corroborated the testimony of Mrs Punzalan by stating that
she herself saw Rodessa masturbating inside the room of her
house." 5crlwvirtualibr ry

In finding the accused-appellant guilty beyond reasonable

doubt of the crime of rape, the lower court dismissed the
defense of alibi and lent credence to the straightforward
testimony of the ten-year old victim to whom no ill motive to
testify falsely against accused-appellant can be attributed.
The lower court likewise regarded as inconsequential the
defense of the accused-appellant that the extraordinary size
of his penis could not have insinuated itself into the victim's
vagina and that the accused is not the real father of the said
victim.

The accused-appellant now reiterates his position in his

attempt to seek a reversal of the lower court's verdict
through the following assignment of errors:

"1. THE LOWER COURT FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE

SINISTER MOTIVE OF PRIVATE COMPLAINANT'S
GRANDMOTHER THAT PRECIPITATED THE FILING OF THE
CHARGE OF RAPE, HENCE IT ERRED IN HOLDING ACCUSED
GUILTY AS CHARGED.
2. THE COURT BELOW OVERLOOKED THE FACT THAT THE
HEALED LACERATIONS AT 3 AND 7 O'CLOCK COULD NOT
HAVE BEEN DUE TO THE PUMPING OF THE PENIS OF
ACCUSED TO THE VAGINA OF PRIVATE COMPLAINANT,
HENCE IT ERRED IN HOLDING THAT ACCUSED COMMITTED
THE CRIME CHARGED, NOTWITHSTANDING VEHEMENT
DENIAL.

3. THE COURT A QUO WHIMSICALLY IGNORED THE DEFENSE

OF ALIBI THAT ACCUSED WAS IN PARAAQUE ON THE DATE
AND TIME OF THE IMPUTED CRIME HENCE, IT ERRED IN
HOLDING THAT ALIBI IS NOT SUSTAINABLE IN THE CASE AT
BAR." 6crlwvirtualibr ry

Considering that a rape charge, in the light of the

reimposition of the death penalty, requires a thorough and
judicious examination of the circumstances relating thereto,
this Court remains guided by the following principles in
evaluating evidence in cases of this nature: (a) An
accusation for rape can be made with facility; it is difficult to
prove but more difficult for the accused though innocent to
disprove; (b) In view of the intrinsic nature of the crime of
rape where only two persons are involved, the testimony of
the complainant must be scrutinized with extreme caution;
and (c) The evidence for the prosecution must stand and fall
on its own merits, and cannot be allowed to draw strength
from the weakness of the evidence for the defense." 7

Anent the first assigned error, no amount of persuasion can

convince this Court to tilt the scales of justice in favor of the
accused-appellant notwithstanding that he cries foul
insisting that the rape charge was merely concocted and
strongly motivated by greed over a certain lot situated at the
NHA-Madrigal Estate Housing Project, Barangay San Antonio,
San Francisco del Monte, Quezon City. The accused-appellant
theorizes that prosecution witness Asuncion Rivera, the
maternal grandmother of the victim Rodessa, concocted the
charge of rape so that, in the event that the accused-
appellant shall be meted out a death sentence, title to the lot
will be consolidated in her favor. Indeed, the lot in question
is co-owned by the accused-appellant and Conrado Alfonso,
the live-in partner of Asuncion Rivera, according to the
records of the National Housing Authority (Exh. "3"). The
accused-appellant would want us to believe that the rape
charge was fabricated by Asuncion Rivera in order to
eliminate the accused-appellant from being a co-owner. So,
the live-in partners would have the property for their own. 8 crlwvirtualibr ry

We believe, as did the Solicitor-General, that no grandmother

would be so callous as to instigate her 10-year old
granddaughter to file a rape case against her own father
simply on account of her alleged interest over the disputed
lot. 9
crlwvirtualibr ry

It is a well-entrenched jurisprudential rule that the

testimony of a rape victim is credible where she has no
motive to testify against the accused. 10 crlwvirtualibrry

We find no flaws material enough to discredit the testimony

of the ten-year old Rodessa which the trial court found
convincing enough and unrebutted by the defense. The trial
court not surprisingly noted that Rodessa's narration in
detail of her father's monstrous acts had made her
cry. 11 Once again, we rule that:

"x x x The testimony of the victim who was only 12 years old
at the time of the rape as to the circumstances of the rape
must be given weight for testimony of young and immature
rape victims are credible (People v. Guibao, 217 SCRA 64
[1993]). No woman especially one of tender age, practically
only a girl, would concoct a story of defloration, allow an
examination of her private parts and thereafter expose
herself to a public trial, if she were not motivated solely by
the desire to have the culprit apprehended and punished
(People v. Guibao, supra)." 12crlw virtualibrr y

The accused-appellant points out certain inconsistencies in

the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses in his attempt
to bolster his claim that the rape accusation against him is
malicious and baseless. Firstly, Rodessa's testimony that the
accused-appellant was already naked when he dragged her
inside the room is inconsistent with her subsequent
testimony that the said accused-appellant was still wearing
short pants when she was dragged inside the room.
Secondly, Rodessa's sworn statement before the police
investigator which indicated that, while the accused was
executing pumping acts, he uttered the words "Masarap
ba?", differ from her testimony in court wherein she related
that when the accused took out his penis from her vagina,
the accused said "Masarap, tapos na." Thirdly, the victim's
grandmother, Asuncion Rivera, recounted in her sworn
statement that it was the accused who went to see her to
apprise her of the rape committed on her granddaughter.
However, in her testimony in court, Asuncion Rivera claimed
that she was the one who invited the accused-appellant to
see her in her house so as to tell her a secret. 13These
alleged discrepancies merely pertain to minor details which
in no way pose serious doubt as to the credibility of the
prosecution witnesses. Whether or not the accused was
naked when he dragged Rodessa inside the room where he
sexually assaulted her bears no significant effect on
Rodessa's testimony that she was actually raped by the
accused-appellant. Moreover, a conflicting account of
whatever words were uttered by the accused-appellant after
he forcefully inserted his penis into Rodessa's private organ
against her will cannot impair the prosecution's evidence as
a whole. A determination of which version earmarks the
truth as to how the victim's grandmother learned about the
rape is inconsequential to the judgment of conviction.

As we have pronounced in the case of People v. Jaymalin: 14

crlwvirtualibr ry

"This Court has stated time and again that minor

inconsistencies in the narration of a witness do not detract
from its essential credibility as long as it is on the whole
coherent and intrinsically believable. Inaccuracies may in
fact suggest that the witness is telling the truth and has not
been rehearsed as it is not to be expected that he will be
able to remember every single detail of an incident with
perfect or total recall."

After due deliberation, this Court finds that the trial judge's
assessment of the credibility of the prosecution witnesses
deserves our utmost respect in the absence of arbitrariness.

With respect to the second assigned error, the records of the

instant case are bereft of clear and concrete proof of the
accused-appellant's claim as to the size of his penis and that
if that be the fact, it could not have merely caused shallow
healed lacerations at 3:00 and 7:00 o'clock. 15 In his
testimony, the accused- appellant stated that he could not
have raped Rodessa because of the size of his penis which
could have ruptured her vagina had he actually done
so. 16 This Court gives no probative value on the accused-
appellant's self-serving statement in the light of our ruling in
the case of People v. Melivo, supra, 17 that:

"The vaginal wall and the hymenal membrane are elastic

organs capable of varying degrees of distensibility. The
degree of distensibility of the female reproductive organ is
normally limited only by the character and size of the pelvic
inlet, other factors being minor. The female reproductive
canal being capable of allowing passage of a regular fetus,
there ought to be no difficulty allowing the entry of objects
of much lesser size, including the male reproductive organ,
which even in its largest dimensions, would still be
considerably smaller than the full-term fetus.

xxx xxx xxx

In the case at bench, the presence of healed lacerations in

various parts of the vaginal wall, though not as extensive as
appellant might have expected them to be, indicate
traumatic injury to the area within the period when the
incidents were supposed to have occurred." (At pp. 13-14,
Italics supplied)
In rape cases, a broken hymen is not an essential element
thereof. 18 A mere knocking at the doors of the pudenda, so
to speak, by the accused's penis suffices to constitute the
crime of rape as full entry into the victim's vagina is not
required to sustain a conviction. 19 In the case, Dr. Freyra,
the medico-legal examiner, categorically testified that the
healed lacerations of Rodessa on her vagina were consistent
with the date of the commission of the rape as narrated by
the victim to have taken place in April, 1994. 20
crlwvirtualibr ry

Lastly, the third assigned error deserves scant consideration.

The accused-appellant erroneously argues that the Contract
of Services (Exhibit 4) offered as evidence in support of the
accused-appellant's defense of alibi need not be
corroborated because there is no law expressly requiring
so. 21 In view of our finding that the prosecution witnesses
have no motive to falsely testify against the accused-
appellant, the defense of alibi, in this case, uncorroborated
by other witnesses, should be completely
disregarded. 22 More importantly, the defense of alibi which
is inherently weak becomes even weaker in the face of
positive identification of the accused-appellant as
perpetrator of the crime of rape by his victim, Rodessa. 23 crlw virtualibrr y

The Contract of Services whereby the accused-appellant

obligated himself to do some painting Job at the house of
one Divina Ang in Paranaque, Metro Manila, within 25 days
from April 4, 1994, is not proof of the whereabouts of the
accused-appellant at the time of the commission of the
offense.

The accused-appellant in this case is charged with Statutory

Rape on the basis of the complaint, dated July 14, 1994. The
gravamen of the said offense, as stated in paragraph 3,
Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, is the carnal
knowledge of a woman below twelve years old. 24 Rodessa
positively identified his father accused-appellant, succeeded
in consummating his grievous and odious sexual assault on
her is free from any substantial self-contradiction. It is
highly inconceivable that it is rehearsed and fabricated upon
instructions from Rodessa's maternal grandmother Asuncion
Rivera as asserted by the accused-appellant. The words of
Chief Justice Enrique M. Fernando, speaking for the Court,
more than two decades ago, are relevant and worth
reiterating, thus:

"x x x it is manifest in the decisions of this Court that where

the offended parties are young and immature girls like the
victim in this case, (Cited cases omitted) there is marked
receptivity on its part to lend credence to their version of
what transpired. It is not to be wondered at. The state,
as parens patria, is under the obligation to minimize the risk
of harm to those, who, because of their minority, are as yet
unable to take care of themselves fully. Those of tender
years deserve its utmost protection. Moreover, the injury in
cases of rape is not inflicted on the unfortunate victim alone.
The consternation it causes her family must also be taken
into account. It may reflect a failure to abide by the
announced concern in the fundamental law for such
institution. There is all the more reason then for the rigorous
application of the penal law with its severe penalty for this
offense, whenever warranted. It has been aptly remarked
that with the advance in civilization, the disruption in public
peace and order it represents defies explanation, much more
so in view of what currently appears to be a tendency for
sexual permissiveness. Where the prospects of relationship
based on consent are hardly minimal, self-restraint should
even be more marked." 25 crlwvirtu alibrry

Under Section 11 of Republic Act No. 7659 often referred to

as the Death Penalty Law, Art. 335 of the Revised Penal Code
was amended, to wit:

"The death penalty shall also be imposed if the crime of 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.

xxx xxx xxx

(Italics supplied)

Apparently, as a last glimpse of hope, the accused-appellant

questions the penalty imposed by the trial court by declaring
that he is neither a father, stepfather or grandfather of
Rodessa although he was a confirmed lover of Rodessa's
mother. 26 On direct examination, he admitted that before
the charge of rape was filed against him, he had treated
Rodessa as his real daughter and had provided for her food,
clothing, shelter and education. 27The Court notes that
Rodessa uses the surname of the accused-appellant, not
Rivera (her mother's maiden name) nor Alfonso (her
grandmother's live-in partner). Moreover, Rodessa's mother
stated during the cross-examination that she, the accused-
appellant and her five children, including Rodessa, had been
residing in one house only. 28 At any rate, even if he were not
the father, stepfather or grandfather of Rodessa, this
disclaimer cannot save him from the abyss where
perpetrators of heinous crimes ought to be, as mandated by
law. Considering that the accused-appellant is a confirmed
lover of Rodessa's mother, 29 he falls squarely within the
aforequoted portion of the Death Penalty Law under the term
"common-law spouse of the parent of the victim."

The fact that the ten-year old Rodessa referred to the

accused-appellant as "Papa" is reason enough to conclude
that accused-appellant is either the father or stepfather of
Rodessa. Thus, the act of sexual assault perpetrated by the
accused on his young victim has become all the more
repulsive and perverse. The victim's tender age and the
accused-appellant's moral ascendancy and influence over her
are factors which forced Rodessa to succumb to the
accused's selfish and bestial craving. The law has made it
inevitable under the circumstances of this case that the
accused-appellant face the supreme penalty of death.

WHEREFORE, we AFFIRM the decision of the Regional Trial

Court of Quezon City, Branch 104.

SO ORDERED.

Narvasa, C.J., Padilla, Regalado, Davide, Jr., Romero,

Bellosillo, Melo, Puno, Vitug, Kapunan, Mendoza, Francisco,
Hermosisima, Jr., Panganiban, and Torres, Jr., JJ., concur.