Case Digest: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. EMETERIO RICAMORA y SUELLO 510 SCRA 514, (2006)

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. EMETERIO RICAMORA y SUELLO 510 SCRA 514, (2006)

In a rape case, the conviction or acquittal more often than not depends entirely on the credibility of the victim’s testimony, given that it is usually she who can testify as to its occurrence. Emeterio Ricamora y Suello (Suello) is the common law spouse of BBB who left for Singapore to work as a domestic helper. She left the custody of her children to Suello and was considered as the stepfather of the children. AAA, the eldest of four children, was repeatedly abused by Suello at nighttime when her younger siblings were sleeping in the same room. She was twelve years old then, when the first rape incident happened. She resisted but Suello threatened to kill hers younger siblings if she shouted or resisted. On January 21, 1998, Suello again had sexual intercourse with her after the slapping incident by Suello to AAA and her younger sister. The following day, AAA finally filed a complaint together with her godmother and a barangay kagawad. As she could no longer remember the exact dates of the previous incidents of rape, only the last which occurred on January 21, 2008 was made basis for her complaint. A physical examination was made by Dr. Martinita Leobrera to the victim who was then 20 years old. There is a presence of old healed hymenal lacerations, indicating positive signs of penetration. The trial court convicted Suello of rape. The Court of Appeals (CA) subsequently, affirmed the decision of the trial court. Hence, this petition for reversal of the CA decision.

ISSUE:

Whether or not Suello is guilty of rape

HELD:

In a rape case, the conviction or acquittal more often than not depends entirely on the credibility of the victim‘s testimony, given that it is usually she who can testify as to its occurrence. Here, the court finds the testimony of AAA with simplicity, consistency, and candor to merit full faith and credit. Suello‘s contention that AAA did not resist to the sexual intercourse is without merit because, the court said that because of Suello‘s moral ascendancy over the victim takes the place of violence and intimidation. On Suello‘s contention that they were sweethearts and the witnesses for Suello said that they were seen naked and lying together is too improbable to merit belief. According to the court, it would be in the height of incredulity for live-in partners between a young lady and a middle age man to display for others to see their intimate moments and will normally find a place where they can be alone together. Hence, the alibi of Suello cannot be given merit.