I.

[MODIFIED]
3&epublic of tbe $lbflipp'ine1,
·&uprtme Court
;fflaniia

FIRST DIVISION

PEOPLE OF THE PIDLIPPINES . '· G.R. No. 263227

Plaintiff-Appellee, .·
Present:

. GESMUNDO, CJ.,
·Chairperson,
- versus - HERNANDO,
ZALAMEDA,·
ROSARIO, and
MARQUEZ,JJ.

XXX Promulgated:
. 'I r
Accused-Appellant. ·•
AUG O2 2023
x- - - - " - .: ~ - - - - - .: - - - - - - - ~ - - - ~ - _._·_ - - - - C - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - X

DECISION

HERNANDO, J.:·

Accused-appellant XXX appeals the February 23, 2022 Decision2 of the

Court of Appeals (CA) in CA~G.R. CR-HC No. 02676-MIN, which affirr:iled
the August 25, 2020 Consolidated Jud ent3 of·the Re ·onal Trial Court
4 •
(RTC), ,m
Criminal Case Nos. 3068-2015, 3069~2015, an~ 3070-2015, finding XXX

1 Initials were used to identify the accused-appellant pursuant to the Supreme Court Amended Administrative
Circular No. 83-2015 dated September 5, 2017 entitled "Protocols and Procedures,in the Promulgation,
Public.ation, &nd Posting on the Websites ofD.ecisions, ·Final Resolutions, and Final Orders using_Fictitious
Names/Personal Circumstances."
2 Rollo, pp. 9'...30. Penned by Associate Justice Richard D: Mordeno· and con·curred in by ASsociate Justices
Oscar V. Badelles, and Evalyn M. Arellano-Morales. . . .
3 Records, Crim. Case No. 3068-2015, pp: 86-99. Penned by Presiding Judge Arvin Sadiri B. BaJagot. ·
4 Geographical location is blotted out pursuant to Supreme Court Amended AdministratiVe Circular No. 83-
2015. .
Decision G.R. No. 263227

guilty beyond r~asonable doubt of Incestuous Rape under Article 266-B of the
Revised Penal Code (RPC), as amended by Republic Act No. (RA) 8353.5

. On July 23, 2015, three Info~ations6 were filed charging XXX: with
three counts of Rape. The Informations read:- · ·

Criminal Case No. 3068s2015

,xxxx

That oh or about March 7, 2015, in the

_ , Philippines and within the jµrisdiction of this Honorable Court,
the said accused ;being the biological father of the complainant, with lewd
design, with force, threat and intimidation, did then and there willfully,
unlawfully and feloniously succeeded (sic) in having carnal knowledge [of]
· AAA,7 a fourteen (14) year old minor; against her will. .

CONTRARY TO LAW. 8 ..

Criminal Case No. 3069•2015

X.XXX

· That on or about March 9, 2015, in the

. . . . ., Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court,
the said accused being the biological father of the complainant, with lewd
design, with force, threat and intimidation, did then and there willfully,
unlawfully and feloniously succeeded (sic) in having carnal knowledge [of]
AAA, a fourteen (14) year old minor, against her wi!L ·

CONTRARY TO LAW. 9

Criminal Case No. 3070-2015

xxxx

That on or about March 13, 2015, in the Miinicipality of -

, Philippines and within.the jurisdiction of this Honorable
Court, the said accused being the biological fatqer of the complainant, with
' .

5 Entitled "AN ACT EXPANDING.THE DEFINJT]ON_·oF THE CRIME OF RAPE, RECLASSIFYING THE SAME AS A
CRIME AGAINST PERSONS, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE ACT No._381 ~- ASAMENDED, OTHERWISE KNOWN
As THE REVISED PENAL CODE AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES." Approved: September 30, I 997.
6
Id. at 88~89.
7 '.'The identity oft~e victim or any information which could establish or compromise her identity, as well as
those of her immediate family or household members, shall be withheld pursuant to Republic Act No. 7610, .
An Act Providing for Stronger Deterrence and Special Protection against Child Abuse, Exploitation and
Discrimination, Providing Penalties for its Violation, and for Other Purposes; Republic Act No: 9262; An
Act Defining Violence Against Women and Their Children, Providing for Protective Measures for Victims,
Prescribing Penalties Therefor, and for Other Purposes; and-Section 40 of A.M. No. 04-10-11-SC, known·
as the Rule on Violence again;! Women and their Children, effective November 15, 2004." (People v. ·
Dumadag, 667 Phil. 664, 669 [2011 ]). .
·8 Records, Crim. Case No. 3068-2015, Vol. I, p. 2.
9 Records, Crim. Case No, 3069-2015, Vol. II, p._ 2.
 Decision -3- · G.R. No. 263227

lewd design, with force, threat and· intimidation, did then and· there willfuliy;
unlawfully and feloniously succeeded. (sic)·. in having carnal lmowledge [of!
BBB, 11 years old minor; against her will.

CONTRARYTOLAW. 10 .

. On arraignment, XXX pleaded not guilty. 11 . Pre-trial and trial on the

merits followed. 12 - · ·

Version of the Prosecution

· The prosecution presented AAA, BBB, CCC, the older sister of AAA
and BBB, and - Municipal Health Officet Dr. Florilyn Pimentel (Dr.
Pimentel) who conducted the medical examination of AAA and BBB. 13

AAA was 16 years old when she testified in court on February 9, 2017. 14
She accused her father of raping her twice. The first was committed on March
7, 2015 and the second was COillllJ.itted on March 9, 2015. 15 Both incidents
happened when she was 14 years old. 16

On March 7, 2015, at around 10:00

siblings in their house located at
when XXX entere\i the room,. laid down beside AAA, and rernpved her short
pants, She protested and told XXX to leave but XXX threatened to kill her. At ·
. that moment, AAA as not able to move-due. to fear. XXX turned AAA sideways
and he inserted his penis into her vagina from behind. Thereafter, XXX left. 17

Two days after, on March 9, 2015, at around 7:00 a.m. XXX directed
AAA's minor brother, DDD and sister; BBB, to take a bath in the river. When
AAA's siblings left, XXX ordered AAA to go inside the house and then XXX
undressed AAA. AAA objected but XX..X ignored her protests. Instead, XXX ·
told her to bend down. From behind, XXX inserted his penis into AAA's
vagina. 18

On March 13, 2015 the third andlast incident of rape took place. This
time, the victim was BBB; BBB was 15 years old when she testified on
September 27, 2018. She narrated that her father raped her inside their house.
BBB recalled that her mother and older sister were not around as they looked

10 Rec"orqs, Crim .. Case No. 3070-2015, Vol. 111, p. 2.

" Rollo, p. 11. ·
. i2 Id. , .
13 Id. at 12.
14 Records, Cr;m. Case No. 3068-2015, p. 86.
1
' Id.
16 · Rollo, p. 12.
17 Id.
1s Id.
Decision G.R. No. 263227

for cassava to eat. Her younger brother, ])DD, ori the other hand, fetched water.
. BBB was cooking when XXX appeared wearing only his underwear. XXX
ordered her to lie do;wn. XXX then placed himself on top of BBB and removed
her short pants and underwear. XXX then inserted his penis iii.to BBB's vagina.
XXX then warned that if BBB tells her 19
. . . mother, he will kill all ofthem.
.

The following day, on March 14, 2015, CCC, the older sister.of AAA
and BBB, went to
their house to wash clothes. 20 While CCC was washing
clothes, AAA approached her and revealed what their father had done. 21 .

CCC acted upon such revelation .the next day, March 16, 2015: She asked
the assistance of Bcirangay Chairman EEE who referred the complaint to the
Municipal Social Welfare and Development Office (MSWDO) o f - ·
During the meeting, CCC disclosed her fear that her other sister, BBB could
have been a victim too. The MSWDO personnel advised AAA to undergo a
medical examination with BBB. Thus, when AAA returned to their house, she
talked to BBB. BBB then revealed that indeed, XXX also raped her. 22

Dr. Pimentel examined AAA and BBB on March 16, 2015. She reduced
her findings iri. the medical certificates23 which stated that there are two
hymenal lacerations on AAA and one hymenal laceration on BBB. 24 ·

Version ofthe Defense

The defense presented XXX who vehen_iently denied the accusation

against him.

He alleged that in the year 2015, AAA resided with CCC. However, he
brought AAA back into his custody because CCC allowed AAA to work as a
babysitter for another family. Accordiri~ to XXX, this infuriated CCC. He
suspected that this was the reason CCC filed these cases against him. He added
that he and CCC are not in good terms. There was an instance where he punched
CCC's husband because CCC's husband, without permission, planted coconut
trees on the land that XXX mortgaged to CCC. 25

XXX added that AAA and BBB resented him becau.se he once caught
them being abs~nt iri school so he scolded and b~at them. 26

19 Id. at 13.
20 Records, Crim. Case No. 3068-2015, p. 87.
21 Id.
22 Id. at 12.
23 Id. at 20 and 27.

2, Id.
25
Id.at 13.
2, Id:
 Decision -5- G.R. No. 263227

He further testified that he was in to look for money to pay

his. debt to CCC when he learned about the rape charges. Upon being informed,.
h<:: immediately surrendered to the police. 27 .

Ruling of the Regional Trial Court ·

· The RTC found XXX guilty beyorid reasonabl~ doubt of three counts of
incestuous rape. Ittuled that the straightforward testimonies of AAA and BBB
against their father as the perpetrator, backed up by the medical findings of
hymenal lacerations, are credible as opposed to the bare denial of:XXX: 28 The
trial court thus ruled: · ·

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Court finds:

1. In Crimi\).al. Case No. 3068~2015, accused XXX Gl,JILTY of

INCESTUOUS RAPE OF A MINOR penalized in Art. 266-B of the
Revis.ed Penal Code as amended. by RA 8353. He is hereby ordered to
suffer the penalty of RECLUSION PERPETUA WITHOUT PARO LE and
to pay AAA, l"l00,000.00 as civil indenmity, l"l00,000.00 as moral
damages, and l"l00,000.00 as exemplary damages.

2. In Criminal Case No. 3069-2015, accused XXX GUILTY· of

INCESTUOUS RAPE OF A MINOR penalized in Art. 266~B of the
Revised Penal Code as amended by RA 8353. He is hereby sentenced to
suffer the penalty of RECLUSION l'ERPETUA WITHOUT PARO LE and
to pay the victim, AAA, l"l 00,000.00 as civil indenmity, l"l 00,000.00 as
moral damages, and l"l00,000.0b as exemplary damages: ·

3. In · Criminal Case No. 3070-2015, accused XXX GUILTY of

INCESTUOUS RAPE OF A MINOR penalized in Art_. 266-B of the
Revised Penal Code as amended by RA 8353: He is hereby ordered to
suffer the penalty of RECLUSION PERPETUA WITHOUT PAROLE and
to pay the victim, BBB; l"l00,000.0b .as. civil indenmity, l"l00,000.00 as
moral damages,.and l"l00,000.00.as exemplary damages., ·

· 4. The civil damages shall earn the. legal interest of 6% per annum from the
finality of this judgment until fully paid. ·

SO ORDERED. 29

XXX appealed. 30

27 TSN, February 27, 2020, p. 11.

28
Rollo, p. J4.
29 Records, Crim. Case No. 3068-2015, pp. 98-99.
30
Rollo, p. 4.
Decision -6- G.R. No. 263227

Ruling of the Court of Appeals

XXX argued that AAA and BBB lacked credibility given that their testimonies
are inconsistent. · · ·

· The appellate court, in its Decision dated February 23, 2022, denied XXX's ·
appeal. It noted that minor inconsistencies may be expected of girls of such tender
years, who are unaccustomed to a public- trial, particularly one where she would
recount such a harrowing experience. It further held that inconsistencies and _
contradictions in their declarations are quite expected. Nonetheless, inconsistencies
-and discrepancies on minor details and collateral matters do not affect the substance '
.

truth, or weight of the victim's clear, convincing; and straightforward testimonies. 31

The dispositive portion of the CA Decision reads:

- WHERE:FORE, the_ appeal is DENIED. · The 25 ~

Ccinsoliclated Jud ent of the Re ·onal Trial _Court (RTC), -
, in Criminal Case No.
3068-2015, Criminal Case No. 3069-2015 and Criminal Case No. 3070-2015,
finding accused-appellant XXX, guilty_ beyond reasonable doubt of three (3)
· counts of Incestuous Rape, is AFFIRMED
. . in toto.

SO ORDERED. 32

Aggrieved, XXX comes before this Court raising the same arguments he
raised before the CA in assailing his conviction. 33 He claims that AAA and BBB
lacked credibility as they made inconsistent statements. XXX argues that AAA, .
should have shouted or made some noise as she claimed that XXX supposedly
raped her while her siblings were sleeping in the same roo_m. For the second
incident, AAA should have avoided being left alone with XXX instead of
34
following him inside the house where _she was allegedly raped again.

XXX also avers that BBB' s normal human reaction would have prompted
her to be wary of being alone with XXX considering her testimony that the rape
on Maich 13, 2015 was already the second incident. She allegedly should have
known that XXX had ill intentions when she was told by XXX, who was then
only in his underwear, to enter the house. She should have run away instead of
following him. 35 · · -

31
Id. at 28.
32
· CA rolio, pp. 21-22.
33
Rollo,. pp. 5-6.
34
-CA rollo, pp. 39-40.
35 Id. at 40.
 Decision. · G:R. No. 263227

Issue

Whether the prosecution proved XXX's guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Our Ruling

We rule in the affirmative. ·

·. Article 266-A paragraph (1) and Art. 266~B of the RPC state how
. Qualified Rape is committed. It reads,.·

Article 266-A. Rape: When and How Committed. -.Rape is committed:

1) By a man who shaH have carnal knowledge of a woman under any of

the following circumstances: ._· · . , . ·.

a) Through force, threat, or intimidation;

b) Wheri the offended party · is deprived of reason or 1s
otherwise unconscious; · .
c) By means. of. fraudulent machination or grave abuse of
authority; and
d) When the offended party is under twelve (12) years of
age or is demented, even though none of the circumstances
mentioned above be present.3.6

Article 266-B. Penalties.- Rape ~der p·aragraph 1 of the next preceding

article shall be punished by reclusion perpetua.

Whenever· the rape is committed.- with the use of a deadly weapon or by

· two or more persons, the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua to death.
xxxx

The death penalty shall also be imposed if the crime of rape is committed
with_ any of the following aggravating/qualifying circumstances:

1) When the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age and

the offender is a parent, ascendant, stsip-parent, guardian, ·relative by
consanguinity or affinity within_· the third civil· degree, or the
common-law spouse of the parent of the victim.
. . . . .
The crime of rape becomes qualified when the victim is under 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. 37 Thus, the elements of Qualified Rape are:
(1) sexual congres~; (2) with a woman; (3) done by force and without consent;

36 REVISED PENAL CODE, Article 266-A, as amended. by Republic Act No .. 8353 (1997).
37
. REVISED PENAL CODE, Article 266-B; as amended by Republic Act No. 8353 (I 997).
Decision G.R. No. 263227 .

(4) the victim is under 18 years of age at the time of the rape; and (5) the
· offender is a parent (whether legitimate, illegitimate or adopt~d) of the victim. 38

The prosecution sufficiently established and proved all the elements of

Qualified Rape'. We give deference to the .factual findings of the trial court,
especially when it is affirmed by the CA, because when the trial court looks
through the case; it observes in actuality the conduct of each witness. It studies
every a:i-ea that is in question through the utmost assessment of all evidence. As
a result, appellate courts will uphold these factual fmdings when there are no
errors in appreciation of material facts or circumstances. 39 Thus, there is no
reason to deviate from the ruling of the RTC and CA which found XXX guilty
of three counts of Qualified Rape. AAA and BBB testified that their father,
XXX, inserted his. penis in their private parts to satisfy his lust, on three
different occasions. However, the offense· should be more accurately termed as ·
Qualified Statutory .
Rape.
.
Their Certificates of Live Birth40 proved their
.

minority at the time of the commission of rape.

AAA and BBB narrated the traumatic experiences they suffered because
·of their father. AAA categorically testified on the first and second incidents of
rape which happened onivlarch 7, 2015 and March 9, 2015, and the subject of
Criminal C. ase. Nos.
. 3068-2015, 3069-2015,
. in this manner, resp. ectively:

The March 7, 2015 incident:

Q:· xx x can you tell what happened that evening '?f March 7, 2017 at 10:00 in
the evening? ·
A: x x x we were sleeping together with. my siblings when my father entered
where we were sleeping.

Q: And xx x what happened next?

A: Then he moved my siblings in [sic] my feet.

. xxxx

Q: After he moved your siblings what happened?

A: He touched m~ by removing.my shorts, ma'am.

Q:.What was your reaction xx x?

· A: I told him to. leave x x x.

Q: And what ,vas his. response \lvhen you told him to leave?
A::He told me don't tell anyone if you wiUtell I will kill you.

38 People V. Sa/aver, 8J9 Phil. 90, ro2 (2018), citing People V. Colentava, 753 .Phil. 361, 372-373 (2015). .
39 People v. Tulagan, 849 Phil. 197, 21,6 (2019), citing People v. Gahi, 727 Phil. 642,658 (2014).
40 Records, Crim. Case No. 3068-2015, pp. ,19 and 26.. . ·
 Decision -9- G.R. No. 263227. ·

xxxx

. Q: xx x you said that your father also removed your underwear?

A: Yes, your Honor. · ·

Q: ·What happened after that?

xxxx

A: He laid me sideways? [sic]

xxxx

Q:. Okay, what happened after your.father turned you sideways?

A: That time he used in touching his.

Q: Please clarify what is his? ·

A: His penis.

Q: What part of your body did he place his penis?

A: ln my vagina, your Honor. 41

The March 9, 2015 incident:

Q: And what happened next when you were left xx x in your house?
A: He called me and told me to go inside.

xxxx

. Q: What happened when you were inside? ·

A: He undressed me by remo_ving my shorts and panty [sic].

xxxx

Q: What was your reaction when your father removed your shorts and panty
[sic]? · ·
A: I told him don't.

Q: And what happened when he was able to undress you?

A: He ordered me to bend down.

xxxx

Q: After you bent down, what happened next?

A: Then that moment he touched me ..

Q: When you said he touched you, what do :you exactly mean by that?
. A: He inserted his penis to my vagina, ma'lllll.

41 TSN,February9,2017,pp. 10-15.
Decision - 10 - G.R. No. 263227

Q: At that time what was the position ofyour father?

A: He was standing. · ·

Q: Was he in front of you or at your back?_

A: He was at the back, ma'am. 42

In the same way, BB~ positively testified on her father's commission-of

rape against her which happened ©n March i 3, _2015 and the subject of Criminal -
Case No. 3070-2015, in this wise: ·

Q: You said something happened to you on March 13, 2015, can you please tell
us what happened to you on that date? . -
A:· I was inside our hous_e and iny father· was also there.

Q: Where was your other sibling?

A: My mother and my elder sister looked for cassava while my younger siblings
:fetched water.

xxxx

Q: When you saw him wearing was on.iy his brief [sic] what happened?
A: He told me to lie down. ·

Q: Did you obey him?

A: Yes, sir.

Q: And what else did he do?

A: He went on top of me.

Q: And when he was on top of you, what did.he do?

A: He undressed me.

xxxx

Q: When he alre:idy removed your pants and your underwear, what did you do?
A: .I struggled to put it back on but he kept on pulling it down.

Q: While he' was pulling that did he say anything else to you?
A: He told me not to tell it to my mother? [sic]

Q: And was he successful in removing your undergarments?

A_: Yes, sir.

Q: xx x what happened next?

A: He had sex with me, ma'am.

Q: Vvnatdo you inean he had sex with you?

A: He forcibly entered his penis inJo·my vagina.

xxxx

42 Id. at 18,20.
 Decision - 11 - . . G.R. No .. 263227

Q: : ~u sai~ that he tried inserting his penis into your vagina, was he successful •·
· m msertmg his penis in your vagina? · • . · · . ·. . ·
A: No, ma'am. ·

Q:. What did you feel that ti~e?

A: It was painful.

Q: Where is the pain at that time?

A: In my vagina, ma'am.

Q: Did you say }mything to him when you felt pain?

A: Yes, ma'am.

· Q: What did you exactly tell him?

A: I complained that it was painful. .

Q: And then what did he do or say to you?

A: He did not continue.

Q: Did you incur any wound?

. A: There was blood.

Q: In your vagina?
A: Yes, n1a'am.

Q: And then what happened next?

A: Then he told me not to report it t6 my mother otherwise he will kill all ofus:43

There can be carnal knowledge even when the penis was not completely
inserted into the v~gina and the hymen of the victim was not ruptured. 44 Even
when the peni.s merely touched the vagina's labia or the lips of the female ·
. organ, the crime of rape is already .deemed consummated45. such as what
happened in the case of BBB. For. elucidation, We cite the recent
pronoun~ement of the Court in People v. Agao, 46 viz.:
. .
. .
This operative definition, however; as will be demonstrated, calls for a
clarificatory rephrasing, as its physical characterization below proves the
same to be either inconsistent or otherwi·se problematic and uncertain. For the
avoidance of doubt and for pedagogical purposes, the Court fmds it necessary
· to herein include a brief descriptive discu.ssion of the parts of the external
female genitalia including a clear indication of the situs of the pertinent parts,
in order to categorically delineate for the bench and the bar which 'physical
threshold, when crossed, constitutes rape _in_ the consummated stage.

43
TSN, September27, 20.18, pp. 6-10. . .
• 44 People v. Dimanawa, 628 Phil. 678, 690 (2010), citing People v. Quifianola, 366 Phil. 390, 410 (I 999).
45
Id.
46
Decision - 12 - G.R. No. 263227

The vulva, ,or pudendum, is a collective term for the external female
genital parts that' are visible in the perineal area. According to Aikaterini
De1ivellotou and George Creatsas·, in. their article "Anatomy of the Vulva[;]"·
the parts of vulva that are crucial for a clear discussion of the consummation
ofrape are as follows: ·

The vulva consists of the [mons pubis], the [labia majora], the .
[labia,minora], hymen, ihe ciitoris, the vestibule ofthe vagina,
the urethral orifice, Skene's glands, Bartholin's glands, and the
vestibular bulbs x x x.

The anterior and posterior qoundaries of the vulva extend

from the [mons pubis] to the anus, respectively; its lateral
· boundaries lie at the genitocrural folds. The vulvar epithelium
exhibits regional differences·. in tissue· structure based on
·embryonic derivatiqn. The skin-bearing [mons pubis], perineum,
and [labia] are derived from the embryonic ectoderm. Vulvar
skin, like skin at other sites, has a keratinized, stratified,
squamous epithelial structure with hair follicles, sebaceous
glands, and sweat glands. The thickness degree of keratinization
of vul'var skin decreases progressively from the [lab.ia majora],
over the clitoris, to the [labia m1nora]. The vulvar vestibule,
derived from the embryonic end.oderm,. is.nonkeratinized. xx x
[Mons Pubis]

The [mons pubis] (mans Veneris) is the rounded eminence in

front of the pubic symphysis, which is formed by a collection of ·
adipose tissue beneath· the integument. During. puberty,· it
becomes covered with hair up to its junction with the abdciminal
wall. The hair. ·pattern, ·or escutcheon, of most women is
triangular. Genetic and racial differences produce a variety of
normal hair patterns, with approximately one in four women
having a modified escutcheon with a. diamond pattern.

[Labia Majora]

The [labia majqra] are a· pair of prominent longitudinal,

cutaneous folds of fibroadipose tissue that are homologous to the
scrotum in the male. The structures bear epidermal · tissue
resembling .the dartos tunic of the scrotum,. as well as adipose
tissue, areol~tissue, blood vessels,nerves, and glands. The'[labia
. majora] also include the terminalextension of the round ligament
and, occasionally, a peritoneal diverticulum, the canal ofNuck.

The size of the [labia majora] is related to fat content. Each is

approximately 7 to 8 cm in length and 2 to 3 cm in width. The. ·
[labia.majora] extend downward and backward·from the [mons
pubis], thus forming the lateral boup.daries of a fissure or cleft (the
pudenda! cleft or-rima) into which the vagina and urethra open.
 Decision - 13 - G.R. No. 263227

Guided !Jy th·e foregoing. anatomical description, the Court now ·

.reiterates, even as it clarifies, th.at· rape of a female victim by a male
person th.rough penile penetration __rc-,aches the consummated stage as
soon as the penis penetrates the cleft of the labia inajora, also known as
the vulva! or pudenda! cleft, or the fleshy outer lip of the vulva, in even
. the slightest degree. Simply put, mere introduction, however slight, .into
the cleft of the labia majora by a peniS that is capable of penetration, .
regardless of whether such penile penetration is thereafter fully achieved,
consummates the crime of rape.

Necessarily, the Court must now revisit and clarify the language of the
description in the cases of Dela Pena, .·Oliver,· Pueriollano, Campuhan,
Ombreso, Comanda, .and Francisco, which have collectively described that
the act of rape is considered consummated a_s soon as the penis touches either.
the pudendum or the labia of the victim's.vagina. ·

With careful and decisive reference to the anatomical illustration above,

the Court clarifies that when jurisprudence refers to "mere touching," it is not
sufficient that the penis grazed over the.pudendum or the fleshy surface of the.
labia majora. Instead, what jurisprudence considers as consummated
rape when it describes a penis . touching the .vagina is the peniS
penetrating the cleft of the labia· maiora, _however minimum or slight.
Similarly, a mere grazing by the penis of the fleshy portion, not the vulva!
cleft- of the labia majora, will ·also constitute only attempted rape and not
consummated rape, since the same cannot be considered to have achieved the
slightest level of penetration. Stated differently, the Court here elucidates
that "mere touch" of the penis on the. labia majora legally contemplates ·
not .mere surface touch or skin contact, but the slightest penetration of .
the vulva! or pudenda! cleft, however minimum in degree. (Emphases in
the original)

XXX argues that AAA should have shouted or made some noise as she
claimed that XXX supposedly raped.her while her siblings were sleeping in the
same room, and that AAA should have· avoided being left alone with XXX
instead of following him inside the house where she was allegedly raped
again. 47 For BBB's part, he insists that BBB'snormal human reaction woul~
have prompted her to be wary ofbeing alone with XXX considering her
. testimony that the rape .on March 13, 2015 was already the ~econd incident. She
allegedly should have known that XXX had ill intentions when ·she was told by.
XXX, who was then only in his under':l'ear, to enter the house. She should have
run away instead offollowinghim. 48 ·

We find these expositions unacceptable,

First, People V. CCC49 explained that lust is no respecter of time and

place. Rape can be committed anywhere even in a bedroom where other family

47 CA rollo, pp. 39-40. · ·

" Id. at 40. .
49 852 Phil. 523,532 (20 I 9), citing People v. Traigo, 734 Phil. 726, 730 (20 I 4).
 Decision - 14 - G.R. No. 263227

members are sleeping. 50 Jurisprudence further taught us that smalland confined

spaces will not prevent rape from happening because privacy is not a _hallmark
of such crime. 51

· Thus, XXX's illogical contention .that AAA should have shouted or

made some noise when she was being raped since her siblings were sleeping in
the same room does not persuade Us. · ·

Second,' We ,cannot sustain XXX's contention _that "AAA should have

avoided being left alone with him instead of following him inside the house
where she was allegedly raped again. 52 ·

The Court held that individual differences dictate that there is no singular
response when a person .· enco:unters · a certain situation, especially when
involving an extremely traumatic experience such as rape committed by one's
own father. 53 Yet, a child victim should not be judged base·d on the course of
action taken even when it is the opposite of the normal behavior of a mature
individual. 54

Hence, XXX cannot fault AAA for keeping her silence while she was
being defiled especially so when it was brought about by fear or an otherwise
overwhelming emotion ofhelplessness. . . .

Third, XXX argues that BBB should have been wary of being alone with
· him considering her testimony that the rape on March 13, 2Q 15 was the second
incident. XXX posits that BBB should have known that he had ill intentions
when XXX, who was in his underwear, told her to enter the house. XXX points
.out that BBB should have run away instead of following him. 55

The Court explained that the rape victim's actions are· oftentimes
influe~ced by fear rather than by reason: 56 The perpetrator of the rape hopes to
build a climat~ of extreme psychological terror, which would numb the victim .
into silence and submissiveness. 57 Xn fact, incestuous rape further magnifies
this terror, for the perpetrator in these cases, such as the victim's father, is a
person · normally expected to · • give . solace and protection • to the
victim. 58 Moreover, in incest, access to the victim is guaranteed by the blood
relationship, magnifying the sense of helplessness and the degree offear. 59

50
Id.
51 Id., citing Peoplev. Nuyok, 759 Phil. 437, 454{2015).
5' CA rollo, pp. 39-40. .• · ·. · ·
· 53 Peopley. Salazar, G.R. No. 239138, February 17, 2021, citing People v. Gacusan, 809 Phil. 773, 784-785
~1n. · · ·
54
Id.
55
CA rollo, p. 40. . . . • . · ·
5.6 P.eoplev. Noel Navasero, Sr., 846 Phil. 564, 596(2019).·
57
Id.
58
Id.
59
Id.
Decision . G.R. No. 263227

to
Here, XXX is inno place question the responses of AAA and BBB to·
the traumatic stimuli he himself created: · ·

This Court is · aware of . the theory on Child ,Sexual Abuse

Accommodation Syndrome (CSAAS} which was introduced by Roland
Summit, M.D. in 1983 as a: model for understa.11ding why. the behavior of
children who have been sexually abused may seein strange to adults. 60 In the
United States, expert witnesses described this to have the following stages: ·

(1) The first stage, described as "secrecy," was explained in terms ofboth
what an abuser does and why the child keeps the matter secret - ·
because of embarrassment ·or shame, "sometimes enforced" by the
adult telling the child to keep .it secret or suggesting negative
consequences if it is revealed.
(2) The second stage is "helplessness" or the absence of power a child
has in a relationship with a parental figure or trusted adult.
(3) The third stage is "entrapment" and "accommodation" ~hich happen
when the child fails to seek protection. .
(4) The stage of ''delayed disclosure" which was opined to have the
tendency to be delayed because of the child's fear, shame, or
emotional confusion.
(5) The final stage called "retraction," which was said to involve the
child's denial that the abuse has occurred. 61

Selected courts in the United States admit expert testimony on CSAAS ·

for a limited purpose of disabusing the mind of common misconceptions it
might have about ·how child Victims .react to sexual abuse. It is often used to.
rehabilitate the credibility of the witness when the abuser suggests that the
child's conduct is inconsistent with the testimony about molestation. 62

Interestingly, children are often told to be wary of strangers, to cry or shout

right away whenever they feel threatened. However, were children taught how
to respond when the peril comes from a person so familiar, ·including their
father? In such a situation, should their silence, accommodation, or .
.helplessness be deemed inconsistent to what is normal? ·

We may have to adjust our perspective anµ try to see.things from the eyes
of child victims. Actions whi"ch we commonly see as strange and incoi;isistent
to the norm may actually be seen by victims as the only expected recourse or
way out for them. ·· · ·

,o People v, Bowker, 203 Cal. App 3d (C.al. CL.App 1988), citing Summit, The Child Sexual Abuse
Accommodation Syntfrome (1983) 7 Int'l. J. of·Child Abuse & Neglect 177. See also Comment, The
Admissibility of "Child Sexual Abuse Accommodation Syndrome" in California Criminal Courts (I 986) 17
Pacific L.J. 1361. ·
61 Id. . , . ·
62 Peoplev. Wells (2004) 118 Cal. App. 4th 179, 188'[12 Cal. Rptr. 3d. 762].

i ----------···
Decision G.R. No. 263227

Countless incestuous rape cases come before Us and the defense often
attacks the credibility of the victims based on their "inconsistent" responses to
what is ''nonnal.;' This is not only diabolical but absurd as well. There is a need
to correct our minds that these are not actually strange nor inconsistent but the
nonnal course of action on the part of children who are victin;is of sexual abuse:

WHEREFORE, the appeal is DISMISSED and the Decision of the Court

of Appeals dated February 23, 2022 in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 02676-MIN is
AFFIRMED.

1. In Criminal Cas'e No. 3068-2015, accused-appellant XXX is found

GUTl..,TY of Qualified Statutory Rape under Article 266-A in.
relation to Article 266~B oftb.e Revised Penal Code as amended by
Republic Act No. 8353 and SENTENCED to SUFFER the penalty
of reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole. He is
- ORDERED to PAY AAA, PI00,000.00 as civil indemnity,
Pl00,000.00 as moral damages, and Pl00,000.00 as exemplary
damages.

2. In Criminal Case No. 3069-2015, accused-appellant XXX is found

GUILTY of Qualified Statutory Rape uhder..-Article 266-A in . ·
relation to Article 266-B ofthe Revised Penal Code as amended by
Republic Act No. 8353 and SENTENCED to SUFFER the penalty
of reclusion perpetua •without eligibility for parole: He is
ORDERED to PAY AAA, Pl00,000.00 as civil indemnity,
Pl 00,000.00 as moral damages, and Pl 00,000.00 as exemplary
· damages.

3. In Criminal Case No. 3070s2015, accused-appellant XXX is found·

GUILTY of Qualified Statutory Rape under· Article 266sA in
relation to Articie 266-B of the Revised Penal Code as amended by
Republic Act ~Jo. 8353 and SENTENCED to SUFFER the.penalty
· of reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole. He is
ORDERED to_ PAY BBB Pl00,000.00 as civil indemnity,
Pl00,000.00 as moral damages, and Pl00,000.00 as exemplary
damages.

4. The civil damages shall earn the legal interest of 6% per annum from
the finality of this judgment until fully pai_d;
Decision - 17-. ' No. 263227
G.R.

SO ORDERED.

0
Associate Justice.
Working Chairperson

W-:ECONCUR:

. . . .

AL G.GESMUNDO
. ·. . if Justice ·
Chairperson

.ROSARIO
· . Asso iate Justice·
Decision - 18 - G.R. No. 263227

CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to Section i3, Article V!II of the Constitution, I certifythat the

¢onclusions in the above Decision had been reached in consultation before the
case was assigne_d to the writer of the opinion of the Court's Division.

.r
. .

·A G. GESMUNDO
ifJustice . . .