THIRD DIVISION
[ G.R. No. 219963, June 13, 2018 ]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE; VS. RICARDO TANGLAO
Y EGANA, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.
DECISION
MARTIRES, J.:
Accused-appellant Ricardo Tanglao y Egana appeals from the 15 September 2014 Decision [1] of the Court of Appeals
(CA), Special Tenth Division, in CA-G.R. CR.-HC. No. 05567 affirming, with modification as to the award of damages,
the 6 January 2012 Decision[2] of the Regional Trial Court (RTC), XXX City, finding him guilty of Rape defined and
penalized under Article (Art.) 266-A, paragraph (par.) 1(d) of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 8353.
THE FACTS
The accused-appellant was charged with violation of R.A. No. 8353,[3] in relation to R.A. No. 7610,[4] in an Information
docketed as Crim. Case No. C-63671, the accusatory portion of which reads:
That on or about the 14th day of September, 2001 in XXX, Metro Manila, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable
Court, the above-named accused, with lewd design and taking advantage of his superior strength as a father, by
means of force, threats, and intimidation employed on the person of AAA,[5] a minor of seven (7) years old, did then
and there wilfully, unlawfully, and feloniously lie with and have sexual intercourse with said minor victim, against the
latter's will and without her consent.
Contrary to law.[6]
When arraigned, the accused-appellant, with the assistance of counsel, pleaded not guilty; [7] hence, trial proceeded.
To prove its case against the accused-appellant, the prosecution called to the witness stand the following: BBB,
AAA's mother; DDD, AAA's older brother; AAA; Dr. Irene Baluyot (Dr. Baluyot), a pediatrician at the Philippine
General Hospital Child Protection Unit (PGH-CPU); and Dr. Cynthia Leynes (Dr. Leynes), chairperson of the PGH
psychology department and a consultant of the PGH-CPU.
The defense on the one hand presented the accused-appellant and Edsel Pelete (Pelete), a special investigator of
the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI). The testimony of Rosie Ponce, the NBI records and evidence custodian,
was dispensed with by the parties after it was stipulated that the records she brought were in the custody of her
office.
Version of the Prosecution
Born to the marriage of the accused-appellant and BBB were CCC, DDD, and AAA. In 1999, the accused-appellant
and BBB separated causing AAA to stay with her mother, while CCC and DDD stayed with their father. [8]
Sometime in September 2001, AAA, who was then seven years old, went to the accused-appellant's house which
doubles as a junk shop. When the accused-appellant arrived home on the night of 14 September 2001, he told AAA
and DDD to go to sleep, put out the light, and then placed himself between AAA and DDD at the upper portion of a
double-deck bed. Suddenly, the accused-appellant covered AAA's mouth, kissed her lips and neck, and forcefully
inserted his penis into her vagina causing her so much pain. She wanted to shout but was unable to do so. [9]
DDD, who was then positioned beside the wall, heard AAA whimpering as if her mouth was covered; so, he asked
her what was the matter. AAA did not give any answer and the accused-appellant admonished DDD to go back to
sleep. Because he was afraid of the accused-appellant, DDD tried to get some sleep and avoided looking at AAA's
direction as the accused-appellant might be doing something to his sister. DDD had a hard time going to sleep
because the bed was shaking. With the light coming from the lamppost outside, DDD saw that AAA's legs were
quivering and that the accused-appellant seemed to be "malikot" (restless) moving his body back and forth. After a
few minutes, AAA left the room to urinate after asking permission from the accused-appellant. The accused-appellant
turned on the light and followed AAA[10] downstairs.