FACTS:

Ferdinand Banzuela was convicted of Rape and Acts of Lasciviousness by the Court of Appeals. He was charged with Rape and Attempted Rape in 2003 before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Mandaluyong City. The first charge involved the accused having carnal knowledge with a six-year-old minor against her will and consent. The second charge involved the accused attempting to have carnal knowledge with another minor but was interrupted by a third party. Banzuela pleaded not guilty to both charges and the trial proceeded.

The prosecution presented evidence that Banzuela took the two victims to a cemetery, where he undressed them and performed sexual acts on them. Banzuela threatened the victims if they spoke of the incidents. The defense denied the accusations and presented evidence of Banzuela's alibi, claiming that he was working during the time the incidents allegedly occurred.

After hearing the case, the RTC convicted Banzuela and sentenced him to Reclusion Perpetua for Rape and an indeterminate penalty for Attempted Rape. The RTC considered the intact hymen of one of the victims as insignificant, stating that the mere touching of the labia is sufficient to consummate rape. The court also deemed the medical examination as merely corroborative and not essential in a rape case.

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction of Ferdinand Banzuela for the crimes of rape and acts of lasciviousness against his two minor cousins, AAA and BBB. The trial court found Banzuela guilty based on the testimonies of AAA and BBB, which the court considered to be credible and consistent. The court also rejected Banzuela's defense of alibi as weak, as the presented documentary evidence was not authenticated and verified.

The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision but modified the penalty for the crime of acts of lasciviousness to fit the elements of the offense. Banzuela appealed to the Supreme Court, claiming that the testimonies of AAA and BBB were inconsistent and not credible. The Supreme Court found no reason to reverse the conviction and upheld the credibility of the witnesses.

The court discusses the general rule that when reviewing the assessments and conclusions of the trial court, the reviewing court is generally bound by the lower court's findings, particularly when no significant facts and circumstances affecting the outcome of the case are overlooked or disregarded. The court also mentions that when the Court of Appeals concurs with the trial court, the rule is even more stringently applied.

The court then emphasizes that the determination of the credibility of witnesses is best left to the trial court, which has the unique opportunity to observe the demeanor and bodily movements of all the witnesses. The court cites the case of People v. Sapigao, Jr. to support this rule. It explains that the trial court is in the best position to assess the truthfulness of witnesses and to uncover the truth, especially in the face of conflicting testimonies. The trial court can take into account non-verbal cues such as emphasis, gesture, and inflection of voice, which are important in assessing the credibility of witnesses. These elements cannot be captured in the transcript of testimonies, making it difficult for the appellate court to fully evaluate the witness's credibility.

In this particular case, both the trial court and the Court of Appeals found the testimonies of the witnesses to be credible. The Supreme Court, after conducting its own independent examination of the records, agreed with the lower courts' assessment that the witnesses' testimonies were straightforward, detailed, and consistent. The credibility of the witnesses, specifically AAA and BBB, is further strengthened by their clear testimonies.

ISSUES:

1. Whether the testimonies of the witnesses are credible.

2. Whether the inconsistencies in the testimony of one of the witnesses affect credibility.

3. Whether the actions of the victim and her cousin during the rape are enough to discredit their testimonies.

4. Whether the elements of the crime of rape have been proven beyond reasonable doubt.

5. Whether the evidence is sufficient to establish the crime of rape.

6. Whether the evidence is sufficient to establish the crime of attempted rape.

7. Whether the evidence is sufficient to establish the crime of acts of lasciviousness.

8. Whether the defense of alibi is credible and should be given weight.

9. Whether the accused should be held liable for statutory rape and acts of lasciviousness.

10. Whether the accused is guilty of rape and acts of lasciviousness.

11. Whether the damages awarded to the victims are in accordance with the law.

RULING:

1. The testimonies of the witnesses are credible, as determined by both the trial court and the Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court also independently examined the records and reached the same conclusion.

2. The inconsistencies in the testimony of one of the witnesses are too trivial to affect credibility and are not relevant to the determination of guilt or innocence.

3. The actions of the victim and her cousin during the rape are not enough to discredit their testimonies, as it is established that the reactions of victims of rape cannot be predicted and may vary.

4. The elements of the crime of rape have been proven beyond reasonable doubt. The age of the complainant, the identity of the accused, and the carnal knowledge between the accused and the complainant have all been established.

5. The court finds that there is sufficient evidence to establish the crime of rape. The court held that penetration of the penis into the lips of the vagina, even without laceration of the hymen, is enough to constitute rape. In this case, there was proof of entry of the male organ into the labia of the pudendum of the female organ. The court also considered the pain suffered by the victim and the testimony of a witness who witnessed the incident.

6. The court finds that the evidence is not sufficient to establish the crime of attempted rape. In order for the crime of attempted rape to be established, the offender must have commenced the act of inserting his sexual organ into the vagina, but due to some cause or accident, excluding his own spontaneous desistance, he wasn't able to even slightly penetrate the victim. In this case, the accused was not able to commence the act of sexual intercourse as he still had his pants on.

7. The court finds that the evidence is sufficient to establish the crime of acts of lasciviousness. The accused's acts of laying the victim on the ground, undressing her, and kissing her constitute lascivious conduct. The court determined that the elements of acts of lasciviousness were present, including the act of lasciviousness or lewdness committed by the offender, the circumstances under which it was done (using force or intimidation), and that the offended party is another person of either sex. The court noted that although the crime charged was attempted rape, convicting the accused for acts of lasciviousness does not violate his rights as such crime is included in the crime of rape.

8. The defense of alibi is not credible and should not be given weight. In order for alibi to be a successful defense, the accused must establish their presence at another place during the time the offense was committed and the physical impossibility of their presence at the scene of the crime. In this case, the accused himself admitted that it was not physically impossible for him to be at the cemetery where the crimes occurred. Additionally, the presentation of the accused's daily time records (DTRs) was not persuasive due to lack of corroboration.

9. The accused should be held liable for statutory rape and acts of lasciviousness. The accused was found guilty of qualified rape as the victim was below seven years old, which qualifies for the death penalty. However, due to the prohibition of the death penalty under Republic Act No. 9346, the accused is instead sentenced to reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole. The accused is also convicted of acts of lasciviousness under Article 336 of the Revised Penal Code and is sentenced to 6 months of arresto mayor as minimum and 4 years and 2 months of prision correccional as maximum.

10. The accused is guilty of rape and acts of lasciviousness. He is sentenced to reclusion perpetua without the possibility of parole for the rape charge, and an indeterminate prison term of 6 months of arresto mayor to 4 years and 2 months of prision correccional for the acts of lasciviousness charge.

11. The damages awarded to the victims are modified. The exemplary damages for rape is increased from P25,000 to P30,000 for one victim, and the other victim is awarded P20,000 as civil indemnity, P30,000 as moral damages, and P10,000 as exemplary damages.

PRINCIPLES:

• The emphasis, gesture, and inflection of the voice are potent aids in ascertaining the credibility of witnesses, and the trial court has the opportunity to observe these aids.

• Inconsistencies in a witness's testimony may not be enough to affect credibility if they are trivial or not relevant to the determination of guilt or innocence.

• Rape victims cannot be expected to act with reason or in conformity with society's expectations, especially when they are children.

• In cases of statutory rape, proof of force, threat, or intimidation is unnecessary as the absence of free consent is conclusively presumed.

• "Carnal knowledge" in the context of rape does not necessarily require full penetration or the rupturing of the hymen. Entry of the male organ into the labia of the female organ is sufficient.

• Penetration, however slight, is an essential act of execution that produces rape.

• The pain suffered by the victim is an indicator of the commission of rape.

• In an attempt to commit a felony, the offender commences the commission of such felony directly by overt acts, but does not perform all the acts of execution.

• Attempted rape is committed when the touching of the vagina by the penis is coupled with the intent to penetrate.

• Acts of lasciviousness are committed when the intent to lie with the woman is absent.

• Failure of the offended party to make a struggle, ask for help, or shout does not negate the commission of the crime.

• Failure of the victim to make a struggle or outcry is immaterial in the rape of a child below twelve years of age as the law presumes that the victim, due to her age, does not have a will of her own.

• Alibi is a weak defense and must be proven by clear and convincing evidence, establishing the accused's presence at another place during the time of the offense and the physical impossibility of their presence at the scene of the crime.

• In order for the acts to be considered sexual abuse under Section 5, Article III of Republic Act No. 7610, it must be established that the act is performed with a child exploited in prostitution or subjected to other sexual abuse. If this element is not alleged in the information or proven during the trial, the accused can only be punished under the corresponding provision of the Revised Penal Code.

• Rape is defined and penalized under Articles 266-A and 266-B of the Revised Penal Code.

• Acts of Lasciviousness is defined and penalized under Article 336 of the Revised Penal Code.

• Exemplary damages may be awarded to deter the commission of similar acts in the future.

• Civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary damages may be awarded to compensate the victim for the harm suffered.