Title

People vs. Basquez y Manzano

Case

G.R. No. 144035

Before the Court is an appeal by Vicente Basquez, challenging the April 10, 2000 Judgment 2 of the
Regional Trial Court of Davao City (Branch 17), in Criminal Case No. 42148-98. The dispositive portion of
the said Decision, which found him guilty of rape.

FACTS:

The case involves the appeal of Vicente Basquez, who was charged with the rape of a seven-year-old girl
named Jiggle Jilt R. dela Cerna. Jiggle testified that on November 4, 1998, while she was on her way home
from school, Basquez waylaid her (means to ambush or attack unexpectedly, often while someone is
traveling or on their way to a destination.), dragged her to an unoccupied house, tied her up, undressed
himself, started groping all over her young and fragile body and forced himself on top of her, penetrating
her vagina with his penis. After the appellant had consummated his vile and lewd act of raping the
innocent child, Basquez left her tied up, but she managed to free herself using a pair of scissors from her
school bag.

The following day, Jiggle, traumatized by the assault and rape committed by the appellant, refused to go
to school for fear of seeing the appellant again. She later narrated her horrifying experience to her
grandmother Segundina dela Cerna with whom she was living. Segundina then reported the incident to
the Buhangin Police and submitted her granddaughter to a medical examination.

A Medical Examination was conducted on Jiggle and it disclosed that the hymen was intact and its orifice
small as to preclude complete penetration by an average sized male organ in erection without causing
hymenal injury. However, the patient was positive for spermatozoa in the opening of the vagina including
the parts surrounding the urethra.

On November 9, 1998 at about 9:00 p.m., at Guerrero Street, Davao City, there were policemen who
arrived looking for Vicente, informing him that a case of rape was filed against him

Upon arrival at Buhangin Police Station, he was required to sit down without any counsel and he was
confronted with a little girl who was asked, whether he was the one who raped her. The girl answered,
no.

He was only about three (3) meters away from the girl, who was confronted with him.

Later after the grandmother of the girl asked the girl, whether accused was the one who raped her,
complainant answered, no.

Basquez denied all the allegations and claimed alibi as his defense. He also had a witness, Jose Despe, to
prove his alibi. Basquez claims that the day the rape happened, he was with Jose Despe butchering a pig
for his birthday.

The trial court ruled that the prosecution was able to prove the guilt of appellant beyond reasonable
doubt. It gave superior weight to the positive identification given by the victim who had pointed to him
as the person who had raped her. Appellant contends that the trial judge showed manifest bias and
partiality against him by acting as a virtual prosecutor.

ISSUE:

1. Was the trial judge biased?

2. Was the prosecution witness partial?

3. Did the discrepancies in the victim's description affect credibility?

4. Is complete penetration necessary for the crime of rape?

RULING:

First Issue: Bias and Partiality of the Trial Judge

The participation of judges in the conduct of trials cannot be condemned outrightly. They cannot be
expected to remain always passive and stoic during the proceedings. After all, they are not prohibited
from asking questions when proper and necessary.

It's widely known and common sense that during a trial, the judge has the authority to ask witnesses
questions to understand important points. This doesn't need much explanation because it's so well-
known.

• Judges must be accorded a reasonable leeway in asking questions to witnesses to elicit relevant
facts and bring out the truth.

• Questions designed to clarify points and elicit additional relevant evidence are not improper.

• The trial judge's inquisitiveness did not unduly harm appellant's substantial rights.

• The trial judge's questions showed his intention to elicit the truth and were expected of judges
who are conscious of their responsibilities as magistrates.

• The trial judge's conduct did not show bias or unfairness.

Second Issue: Partiality of Prosecution Witness

Appellant argues that the trial court made a mistake in declaring as biased Prosecution Witness Jose
Despe's testimony which favored the defense.

The trial court's assessment of the witness's testimony was not arbitrary or baseless. The trial court
observed that the witness was evasive and partial to appellant.

The trial court's findings are given the highest degree of respect as they had firsthand impressions of the
witnesses' demeanor and conduct.
Third Issue: Error in the Description of the Accused

The appearance of appellant differs from the description given by the victim, but it does not necessarily
affect her credibility as a witness.

The victim positively identified appellant during the investigation and trial. The trial court noted that
appellant had a bulging stomach when he testified in court.

Minor discrepancies in the description do not take away from the fact that the victim identified appellant
as her assailant and vividly narrated the sexual assault.

An error-free testimony cannot be expected from children of tender years, most especially when they are
recounting details of harrowing experiences, those that even adults would rather bury in oblivion. To be
sure, complainant's testimony may not be... described as flawless, but its substance, thruthfulness and
weight were hardly affected by the triviality of her alleged inconsistencies.

Fourth Issue: Absence of Penetration

Although there was no complete penetration of the victim's vagina by appellant's penis, contact between
them was not ruled out by the doctor who testified, especially since the victim's vagina was positive for
spermatozoa.

Existing rulings on rape do not require complete or full penetration of the victim's private organ.

The mere introduction of the penis into the labia majora of the victim's genitalia engenders the crime of
rape.

Penile invasion necessarily entails contact with the labia, and even the briefest of contacts, without
laceration of the hymen, is deemed to be rape.

WHEREFORE, the appeal is DENIED. We AFFIRM the assailed Decision finding VICENTE M. BASQUEZ guilty
beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape and sentencing him to reclusion perpetua and to pay the
victim P50,000.00 as indemnity ex delicto and another P50,000 as moral damages. Costs against appellant.