CASE DIGEST
People v. Diega y
Zapico
G.R. No. 255389 (Resolution), [September 14,
2021]
FIRST, LOPEZ, M.V
Rape; Conspiracy to Commit rape; Liability of Co-conspirator
An accused is responsible not only for
the Rape he personally committed but also for the other counts of Rape that his
co-conspirators perpetrated although they were unidentified or are at large. Consistent
with the rule that where there is a conspiracy, the act of one conspirator is
the act of all.
Carlo Diega y Zapico, along with three unidentified individuals, was charged with the crime of rape under Article 266-A, Paragraph 1(a) of the Revised Penal Code. The charges stemmed from an incident on April 14, 2013, where the accused, allegedly conspiring together, forcibly had carnal knowledge with AAA, a 12-year-old minor, by means of intoxication. The prosecution presented evidence showing that AAA was invited for a drinking session, forcibly taken to a riverbank and a vacant lot, and raped successively by Carlo and his companions. Medical findings supported AAA's account.
Carlo pleaded not guilty, denying the accusations and presenting an alibi defense. He claimed he went home early during the drinking spree and later returned to inform AAA that someone was looking for her. Carlo was found guilty by the Regional Trial Court (RTC), which imposed the penalty of reclusion perpetua and ordered him to pay damages to AAA.
Whether Carlo's conviction for rape is valid considering his denial and alibi defenses, and the alleged inconsistencies in AAA's testimony.
YES.
The Court affirmed Carlo's conviction for rape. It emphasized that the
assessment of AAA's credibility was best left to the trial court, which had the
opportunity to observe her demeanor. The Court found no substantial
inconsistencies in AAA's testimony regarding the identity of her rapists. It
held that Carlo's denial and alibi were uncorroborated and insufficient to
overcome AAA's positive identification. An uncorroborated denial and alibi
defenses are self-serving and undeserving of weight in law unless supported by
clear and convincing proof. The accused's failure to provide evidence that it
was physically impossible for him to be present at the crime scene weakens
these defenses.
Likewise, the Court properly appreciated the
existence of the conspiracy. Jurisprudence consistently teaches us that
conspiracy may be deduced from the mode and manner in which the offense was
perpetrated, showing that at the time of the commission of the offense, all the
perpetrators have the same purpose and were united in its execution. The
records show that Carlo and his three (3) companions successively raped AAA and
that while one of them had carnal knowledge of the victim, the others held her
arms and kept her from struggling. Viewed in its totality, the individual
participation of each perpetrator pointed to a joint purpose and criminal
design. Carlo and his three companions, are thus responsible for all four
counts of rape. The penalty of reclusion perpetua for each count and the award
of damages were affirmed, with Carlo held solidarily liable for each count.
No comments:
Post a Comment