Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
EN BANC
G.R. No. L-4005 February 3, 1908
THE UNITED STATES, plaintiff-appellee,
vs.
RUFO REYES, defendant-appellant.
E. Orense for appellant.
Attorney-General Araneta for appellee.
TORRES, J.:
At about 4:30 p.m. on a Wednesday, in the month of March, 1907, Lucila Martinez, a girl 13 years of age who lived with her parents in the barrio Quipot, town of Tiaong, Province of Tayabas, was sent by her parents to town in order to buy provisions, and on her way out, at a place called "Burol", a hilly and uninhabited spot, she met Rufo Reyes who said to her: "Comadre, wait a minute, I have something to tell you; I feel ashamed on account of your father and mother, but I can not refrain from doing what I want with you." He then seized her by the waist, and notwithstanding her opposition, and cries for her father, he took her to a forest close by, about 10 brazas distant from the road, upon reaching which he said, "I must at all events satisfy my desire," and then laid her flat on the ground, and, notwithstanding her resistance and continued cries for help, he covered her mouth with one of his hands, placed his feet over the legs of the girl, and after separating them he forcibly accomplished his purpose; after the crime was consummated he said, "You may go now; I am done with you." Thereupon, the outraged girl got up and started to run, picking up, however, the hat of her aggressor which fell off when he was conducting her to the forest, and was lying on the grass a short distance away; she returned crying to her house carrying the hat, with her camisa torn, her hair loose, and the back of her skirt daubed with mud; in this condition she appeared before her father and, sobbing, told him what had taken place. The father of the offended girl filed an information of the affair with the justice of the peace and produced as evidence the hat of the accused and the clothes of the girl.
A complaint having been filed by the injured party and the provincial fiscal on the 28th of March, 1907, charging Rufo Reyes with the crime of rape, the corresponding proceedings were instituted, and the judge on the 6th of April of the same year sentenced the accused to the penalty of seventeen years and four months of reclusion temporal, to indemnify the injured party in the sum of P200, and to maintain the offspring, if there should be any, to suffer the accessory penalties, and to pay the costs. From said judgment, the accused appealed.
From the above-stated facts, all of which have been clearly and conclusively proven in this case, it appears that the crime of rape has been committed on the person of a girl 13 years of age, in the interior of a forest, an isolated and uninhabited place, and that the sole and duly convicted author thereof is the accused, Rufo Reyes.
The accused pleaded not guilty, but notwithstanding his denial, and exculpatory allegations, which have not been justified, the case contains sufficient proof, which taken together, in view of their relationships, and considering the same according to the rules of common sense and sound criticism, impress the mind with a full conviction of the culpability of the accused as being the unquestionable author of the crime.
The testimony of the injured girl in the proceedings her statements when, weeping, she reported to her father the assault of which she was the victim, the tearing of her shirt as a result of the struggle sustained with her aggressor, the mud with which her skirt was stained when she lay on the ground, her general appearance when she returned to her home, running with her hair loose, and the fact of her having secured the hat which the accused dropped when taking her to the spot where the crime was committed, all of which are circumstantial details affirmed by the father of the injured girl, who saw the latter immediately after the occurrence; the cries heard by Guillermo Montilla, who lived not far away from the place where the rape was committed, and the alarm sounded from the garita del barrio (sentry box), the fact that the accused was seen by Petronilo Martinez after 4 p.m. in the afternoon of the affair walking fast and without a hat, and the fact that said hat was identified by the witness Fernando Gabit, who recognized the same because the sweat band was folded, a detail which was actually discovered in said hat, and other circumstances proven by the proceedings, constitute full circumstantial proof of the guilt of the accused. He was furthermore contradicted by his own witnesses, some of whom instead of supporting the alibi sought to have been proven by the culprit contradicted him in a most remarkable manner, and his alleged innocence can not be considered.
No mitigating or aggravating circumstance being present in the commission of the crime, and considering for the reasons above set forth that the judgment appealed from is in accordance with the law, it is our opinion that the same should be affirmed with the costs against the appellant. So ordered.
Arellano, C.J., Mapa, Johnson, Carson, Willard, and Tracey, JJ., concur.
The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation
