PEOPLE v. ROGER DURANO

FACTS:

The appellant was charged with four counts of rape and one count of robbery. He was acquitted of two counts of rape and the robbery charge but was convicted of two counts of rape involving the complainant, AAA. AAA is a working student who stays at a convent. On the day of the incident, the appellant approached AAA, identified himself as a police officer, and accused her of drug use and prostitution. He coerced her to accompany him to a park, took her to a lodge, and coerced her into having sexual intercourse. Afterward, two other men also raped AAA. She initially hesitated to report the incidents but eventually confided in her best friend.

AAA confided in her best friend, CCC, about the incident, who accompanied her to the Toril Police Station. They were then directed to the Women and Child Desk in Davao City, where SPO1 Christine Bitgue attended to them. AAA decided to report the incident upon the advice of CCC, as the appellant had shown up at their house and ordered AAA to meet him. CCC testified that AAA appeared agitated and afraid as she recounted the incident. Sis. DDD, a staff at the convent, noticed a change in AAA's behavior, as she was always crying and isolating herself. AAA eventually confided in Sis. DDD about the rape incident.

SPO1 Bitgue testified that when AAA came to the Women and Child Desk, she was crying and trembling, moving from one table to another. AAA was eventually moved to a closed room to make her feel safe and comfortable. Dr. Samuel Cruz, the Medical Officer, examined AAA and found bruises on her breast and a deep hymenal laceration. Dr. Marilou Villanueva, a psychiatrist, diagnosed AAA with acute stress disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, and major depression.

The appellant admitted to having sexual intercourse with AAA but alleged that it was consensual.

In a separate set of facts, it is stated that the accused and AAA engaged in consensual sexual intercourse at a lodge. They had multiple rounds of sexual activity and afterward, the accused offered to bring AAA home, but she declined, and he promised to visit her at her house after two days.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether the testimony of the complainant is credible.

  2. Whether the conduct of the complainant before, during, and after the incident affects her credibility.

  3. Whether the absence of force, intimidation, or deadly weapon negates the charge of rape.

  4. Whether the sexual act between the appellant and the complainant was voluntary or attended with force or intimidation.

  5. Whether the trial court's finding on the credibility of the complainant's testimony should be disturbed on appeal.

  6. Whether the absence of physical resistance by the complainant is an indication of consent or involuntary submission.

RULING:

  1. The Court of Appeals affirmed the appellant's conviction for two counts of rape. It held that the complainant's testimony was credible and that her conduct before, during, and after the incident did not affect her credibility. The court also ruled that the absence of force, intimidation, or deadly weapon does not negate the charge of rape.

  2. The determination of the appellant's innocence or guilt hinges on whether the sexual act between him and the complainant was voluntary or attended with force or intimidation. The trial court found the complainant's testimony credible and straightforward, and there is no reason to disturb this finding. The bruises found on the complainant's body also corroborate her testimony that she resisted the appellant. Physical evidence of bruises or scratches speaks of the force employed upon the rape victim. Thus, the sexual act was not consensual.

  3. The trial court's finding on the credibility of the complainant's testimony carries great weight and will not be disturbed on appeal, unless the trial court overlooked, misunderstood, or misapplied some facts of substance and value which, if considered, might affect the outcome of the case. In this case, there is no reason shown on the part of the complainant to testify against the appellant, making her testimony worthy of full faith and credit. The appellate court also found her narration candid, straightforward, and credible.

  4. The absence of physical resistance by the complainant does not necessarily indicate consent, but rather, it can be an indication of involuntary submission. Failing to resist the advances of the perpetrator is not a manifestation of consent. The Court acknowledged that different individuals may react differently to similar situations of sexual assault, with some resisting with a wild struggle and others becoming virtually catatonic due to the mental shock they experience. It was also noted that the complainant's consent was affected by the acute stress disorder caused by her traumatic experience, making her more submissive. Therefore, the lack of physical resistance does not undermine the credibility of the complainant's testimony.

PRINCIPLES:

  • Credibility of witnesses - The credibility of witnesses is determined by the trial court, as it has the opportunity to observe their demeanor and manner of testifying. Unless there are clear and cogent reasons to overturn the trial court's assessment of credibility, the appellate court will generally defer to its findings.

  • Conduct of the complainant - The conduct of the complainant before, during, and after the incident should not be used as a basis to discredit her testimony. The victim's reaction to the incident may vary, and it should not be interpreted as an indication that she consented to the sexual act.

  • Absence of force, intimidation, or deadly weapon - Rape can be committed even without the use of force, intimidation, or deadly weapon. The absence of physical resistance or the use of a weapon does not necessarily mean that the sexual act was consensual. Consent is determined based on the totality of the circumstances, including the age, mental capacity, and relationship between the parties.

  • Rape is committed when the accused has carnal knowledge of the victim by force or intimidation and without consent.

  • The credibility of the testimony of the complainant is crucial in rape cases.

  • The trial court is in a better position to evaluate testimonial evidence and its findings carry great weight and will not be disturbed on appeal.

  • A rape victim who testifies in a categorical, straightforward, spontaneous, and frank manner and remains consistent is a credible witness.

  • Lack of physical resistance does not imply consent in cases of rape.

  • The absence of physical resistance does not necessarily indicate consent but can indicate involuntary submission.

  • Different individuals may react differently to similar situations of sexual assault.

  • The presence of a psychiatric disorder caused by a traumatic experience can affect a person's response and willingness to resist.

  • The "sweetheart defense" cannot negate the crime of rape. Love is not a license for lust.

  • Civil indemnity and moral damages are mandatory upon the finding of rape.

  • Exemplary damages may be awarded when the crime was committed with one or more aggravating circumstances.