41. People v. Nardo March 1 2001 the whole afternoon since it was raining.

The victims mother: Lorielyn filed the case because the accused was very strict
Per Curiam: with her.
The defense also presented witnesses to show that the victim saw a habitual liar.
FACTS:
Feb 24 1996, Lorielyn Nardo (14 yo) was in their house in Camalig, Albay, RTC Legazpi City: ALFREDO NARDO is GUILTY of RAPE. Sentenced: DEATH ; pay
together with her father, Alfredo Nardo, 2 younger brothers and maternal the victim moral damages of P50,000. Hence this automatic review.
grandfather. Her mother was washing clothes about 5 houses away.
After the conviction, the counsel for the accused received 4 letters from
~1:30pm after lunch, the grandfather left for work. Lorielyn:
Letter of 7/13/1999: wala po talagang kasalanan ang aking ama ako na po
Alfredo then told his sons to go out. He then ordered Lorielyn to get his mismong nag-akusa ang nagsasabi na walang katotohanan ang lahat ng mga
cigarettes in his bedroom. When Lorielyn went inside the bedroom, her father sinabi ko na pinagsamantalahan niya ako. Nagawa ko lang po 'yon dahil
followed her. masyado po kasi siyang mahigpit sa aming magkakapatid.
Letter of 4/17/2000: lagi ko pong ipinagdarasal na nawa'y matapos na ang
He embraced her from behind and began mashing her breasts. She started to cry paghihirap at pagdurusa ng aking ama sa loob ng piitan, nawa'y matapos na ang
while Alfredo took off his clothes and pushed her to the bed. Then, he lay on top lahat ng problema upang manumbalik muli ang sigla ng aming pamilya.
of her and had sexual intercourse with her. Letter of 8/10/2000: Attorney, isang pabor po ang nais kong hilingin, na sana
He kissed her from the neck down. She tried to free herself but Alfredo took a bago magpasko ay muli ko ng makasama ang aking ama
knife from a nearby cabinet and pointed it at her right ear. He threatened to kill Letter of 1/17/2001: Patuloy pong nangingibabaw ang aking konsensiya dahil sa
their whole family if she told anyone what he did. Lorielyn did not tell anyone of aking ginawa, usmaasa po ako na sana ay lalo pang mapadali ang paglabas niya
the rape. sa loob ng kulungan, maniwala po kayo wala siyang kasalanan.

March 19, 1996, Lorielyn was washing clothes when her father approached her WON Nardo is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of rape.
and whispered, "We will play tonight near the river." Lorielyn understood this Held: YES
to mean that her father wanted to have sex with her again. She finished the (1)Accused-appellant relies on these letters to obtain a reversal of the trial
laundry and went to the house of her aunt. She refused to go home although she court's judgment of his conviction. However, the said letters were not
was fetched twice. She stayed there until March 22 when she finally told her subscribed and sworn to by Lorielyn.
aunt of the rape.
Courts look with disfavor upon retractions, because they can easily be obtained
Immediately, her aunt went to report to the police. from witnesses through intimidation or for monetary consideration. A
retraction does not necessarily negate an earlier declaration, especially those
The accused Nardo denied the rape. Defense: made after conviction. Even if it were sworn, the recantation could hardly
His employer Atty. Gonzales: On Feb 24, before 8am, Alfredo arrived at his farm. suffice to overturn the finding of guilt by the TC which was based on her own
It started to rain hard, so they decided not to work that day. They just drank gin clear and convincing testimony, given during a full-blown trial.
and smoked. The rain subsided at around 3:30pm. At 4pm Alfredo left.
The victims grandfather: he did left after lunch to work; he stayed in the house As a rule, SC do not disturb the findings by the TC on the credibility of witnesses,
for the TC is in a better position to pass upon the same. We find nothing in the in the imposition of the death penalty.
records which would indicate that the findings of fact of the TC are not In order to be appreciated as qualifying circumstances, however, these must be
supported by the evidence or were arrived at in manifest or palpable error. properly pleaded in the indictment and duly proved in trial. These requirements
are met in this case.
Moreover, any recantation or affidavit of desistance, by itself, even when
construed as a pardon in the so-called "private crimes," is not a ground for the DECISION: judgment of the RTC convicting Alfredo Nardo of the crime of rape
dismissal of the criminal case once the action has been instituted. The pardon to sentencing him to death and ordering him to pay the victim moral damages of
justify the dismissal of the complaint should be made prior to the institution of P50,000, is AFFIRMED with the MODIFICATION that Nardo is, further, ordered to
the criminal action. pay the victim civil indemnity in the amount of P75,000.

(2) The sole testimony of Lorielyn was sufficient to establish the guilt of Nardo.
Indeed, a daughter, especially one in her minority, would not accuse her own
father of such an unspeakable crime as incestuous rape had she really not been
aggrieved.
During the trial, the defense endeavored to portray Lorielyn as an incorrigible
liar. Occasions were cited wherein Lorielyn supposedly lied to obtain money or
her parents' permission to leave the house. However the falsehoods committed
by her, assuming them to be true, are petty and inconsequential. They are not as
serious as charging one's own father of the sordid crime of rape, with all of its
serious repercussions.

(3) As against the positive and categorical testimony of Lorielyn, Nardo can only
proffer the defense of alibi. However, he must establish not only that he was
somewhere else when the crime was committed but also that it was physically
impossible for him to have been at the scene of the crime at the time it was
committed. Here, the testimonies for the defense sought to establish that
Nardo was in the farm, 400-500 meters or 15 minutes, away from the scene of
the crime. This hardly qualifies as proof that it was physically impossible for him
to be at the scene of the crime when it was committed. The defense of alibi must
therefore fail.

(4) A335 of the RPC, as amended by RA 7659, provides that the death penalty
shall also be imposed if the crime of rape is committed with any of the following
attendant circumstances: 1. when the victim is under 18 years of age
and the offender is a parent. The concurrence of the 2 special qualifying
circumstances, namely the victim's minority and the relationship between the
victim and the culprit, increases the penalty of rape to 1 degree, thus resulting