FACTS:

This is an appeal from the decision of the Regional Trial Court of Manila, wherein the accused was convicted of statutory rape. The complaint alleged that on March 7, 1984, the accused, Semion Mangalino, had carnal knowledge of the undersigned complainant's daughter Marichelle, a minor, 6 years of age, against her will and consent. The facts were supported by the testimonies of the victim, her mother, Dr. Roberto V. Garcia, and Staff Sergeant Mario Oser, as well as the testimonies of the defense witnesses. On the day of the incident, Marichelle was playing alone at the accused's apartment. The accused called her into his bedroom, handed her money, and proceeded to fondle and attempt to have sexual intercourse with her. Marichelle's mother later found her daughter and Marichelle narrated the incident. Marichelle was then examined and evidence of recent genital trauma was found. The accused denied the allegations and argued that the bruises may have been self-inflicted or caused by an accident. The lower court convicted the accused, and the appeal was made to the Supreme Court.

ISSUES:

1. Whether the act committed by the accused constitutes the offense of statutory rape.

2. Whether full penetration is necessary for the crime of rape to be committed.

3. Whether the absence of visible physical injuries on the victim's body affects the credibility of the victim's testimony.

4. Whether the testimony of the child victim can be relied upon given her tender age and little formal schooling.

5. Whether there are inconsistencies in the testimonies of the child victim and her mother that affect their credibility.

6. Whether the presence of other people in the house during the incident makes the commission of the crime impossible.

7. Whether the location of the crime, despite lacking privacy, is sufficient for the commission of rape.

8. Whether the trial court committed any reversible error in finding the accused-appellant guilty of the crime of statutory rape beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING:

1. The act committed by the accused constitutes the offense of statutory rape. The court held that the offense of statutory rape under Article 335, paragraph 3 of the Revised Penal Code is the carnal knowledge of a woman below 12 years of age, and Marichelle, who was a little over 6 years old at the time, was raped. The court emphasized that proof of intimidation or force used on the victim is immaterial.

2. Full penetration is not necessary for the crime of rape to be committed. The court clarified that it is enough for there to be proof of entrance of the male organ within the labia or pudendum of the female organ to constitute rape. Even the slightest penetration is sufficient to consummate the crime of rape.

3. The absence of visible physical injuries on the victim's body does not affect the credibility of the victim's testimony. The court considered the close relationship between the accused and the victim as neighbors, explaining the absence of visible signs of physical injuries. The court also highlighted that the absence of hymenal laceration adequately explains why the victim did not feel any pain during the attempted sexual intercourse. The court found the simplicity of the victim's testimony convincing and believed that she was telling the truth about being sexually abused.

4. The Court finds that the testimony of the child victim is credible considering her tender age and lack of motive to fabricate the charge of rape. The Court emphasizes that it is unlikely for a child of such young age to concoct such a serious accusation and narrate the details in a simple and unhesitating manner.

5. The alleged inconsistencies in the testimonies of the child victim and her mother are deemed minor and do not affect the basic aspects of the crime committed. These inconsistencies actually enhance the credibility of the witnesses as they indicate honest and unrehearsed responses.

6. The presence of other people in the house does not make the commission of the crime impossible. The accused could have easily enticed the child victim into his room, taking advantage of her innocence and trust. The short distance between the kitchen and the room and the distraction of the people in the kitchen during a chess game made it possible for the accused to commit the crime without attracting attention.

7. The Court agrees that rape can be committed even in places without privacy, as long as the accused has the opportunity and means to consummate the act. The complete innocence of the child victim and the presence of a divider, although with holes, were sufficient to facilitate the commission of the crime.

8. The trial court did not commit any reversible error in finding the accused-appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of statutory rape.

PRINCIPLES:

• The offense of statutory rape under Article 335, paragraph 3 of the Revised Penal Code is the carnal knowledge of a woman below 12 years of age.

• Proof of intimidation or force used on the victim is immaterial in the offense of statutory rape.

• Full penetration is not necessary for the crime of rape to be committed; it is enough for there to be proof of entrance of the male organ within the labia or pudendum of the female organ.

• The absence of visible physical injuries does not negate the commission of rape; it may be explained by factors such as the relationship between the offender and the victim and the absence of hymenal laceration.

• The credibility of a victim's testimony in rape cases should not be solely based on the presence or absence of physical injuries; other factors such as the simplicity of the testimony and consistency with other evidence should also be considered.

• The testimony of a child victim of rape should be given due regard and given credibility, especially considering their tender age and lack of motive to fabricate the charges.

• Minor inconsistencies in the testimonies of witnesses enhance their credibility as they indicate honesty and unrehearsed responses.

• The presence of other people in the vicinity of the crime does not necessarily make the commission of the crime impossible, especially when the accused takes advantage of distractions and the innocence of the victim.

• Rape can be committed even in places without privacy, as long as the accused has the opportunity and means to consummate the act.

• In a criminal case, the guilt of the accused must be proven beyond reasonable doubt.

• Monetary damages cannot fully compensate the pain and anguish suffered by a victim of rape and her family.

• The court has the discretion to modify the amount of damages imposed on the accused.