People v.
Mingming (Short title) PROVISION
GR # 174195 | December 10, 2008
Petitioner: People of the Philippines
Respondent: CATALINO MINGMING y DISCALSO
(Rule 131, Section 3)
FACTS
1. AAA (10 years old) is from Caloocan living in the house of the
Obispos, who were taking care of her and her brother.
2. AAA answered the call of nature in a vacant lot. While there,
Catalino, a neighbor, grabbed and pulled her to a portion with tall
grass, covered her mouth and poked a kitchen knife at her neck.
He proceeded to have sexual intercourse and threatened her,
"Huwag kang magsusumbong, papatayin ko kayo" so AAA went
home and kept what transpired to herself.
3. The incident was repeated when Catalino tricked her into going to
his house but this time, AAA reported to the Obispos and to then
the Barangay who endorsed the report to the police. After the police
investigation AAA was referred to Dr. Llamas, a PNP medico-legal
officer, for medical examination which disclosed a deep-healed
laceration of her hymen indicating that she was no longer a virgin.
4. Catalino denied the act but admitted knowing AAA. He claimed that
he seldom saw her and that at the time of the alleged first incident,
AAA had been with her father and that the cases were filed against
him because he refused to lend money to the Obispo's.
5. RTC rejected Catalino's defenses of denial and alibi and found him
guilty of three counts of rape. CA affirmed Catalino's conviction on
the basis of AAA's testimony which it found credible.
o Testimony is positive while that of the accused is negative.
Positive prevails over the negative. Being a ten-year old,
she has not yet absorbed the wiles of the world. Her
testimony was straightforward and candid.
o The spontaneity, the tears at the stand, and her
consistency dispel any insinuation of a rehearsed
testimony. The testimony coupled with the medical
findings, are enough to confirm the truth.
o CA disbelieved Catalino's defense taking note that it was
AAA herself who caused the filing of the cases.
ISSUE/S
1. W/N CA erred giving credence to the speculative, incredible, and
inconsistent testimony of the private complainant; and finding him guilty
beyond reasonable doubt of the crime charged
Rule 131
Section 3. Disputable presumptions. — The following presumptions are
satisfactory if uncontradicted, but may be contradicted and overcome by
other evidence.
RULING & RATIO
1. No.
1. Statutory rape is committed by sexual intercourse with a woman
below 12 years of age regardless of her consent, or the lack of it.;
The absence of free consent is conclusively presumed when the
victim is below the age of 12. At that age, the law presumes that the
victim does not possess discernment and is incapable of giving
intelligent consent to the sexual act. To convict of the crime of
statutory rape, the prosecution carries the burden of proving: (1) the
age of the complainant; (2) the identity of the accused; and (3) the
sexual intercourse between the accused and the complainant.
o Prosecution presented proof of the presence of the
required elements. The age is shown by the Birth
Certificate. The prosecution established Catalino's
identification as the perpetrator through victim's positive
identification in court.
2. Catalino mainly argues that the testimony is not believable.
o Arrayed against each other, however, his version of
events do not measure up to the same level of credibility
that AAA's version has attained.
3. Catalino's second argument focuses on the incompability between
the physical evidence and testimony since she had healed
lacerations when she was medically examined.
o The absence of fresh lacerations in the victims hymen
does not negate sexual intercourse, nor does it prove that
she was not raped.
o A hymenal laceration or its absence is merely
corroborative evidence that is not indispensable to a
finding of rape. What is essential is proof of carnal
knowledge between the accused and the victim.
o Ultimately, a conviction for rape rests on the complainants
testimony on the details of the crime. If her testimony
meets the test of credibility, that alone is sufficient to
convict the accused.
4. AAA's presence in Catalinos house has to be viewed in the larger
context of Catalino's relationship with AAA..
o AAA's testimony shows that even before the first rape
incident, she was already afraid of Catalino. This fear was
 further heightened when he threatened to kill them after DISPOSITION
the first rape. WHEREFORE, premises considered, we hereby AFFIRM the decision dated
o It was under these circumstances that the succeeding July 28, 2005 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR.-H.C. No. 00149
rapes took place. The facts sufficiently explain why AAA insofar as it finds Catalino Mingming y Discalso guilty of statutory rapes in
was at Catalino's house. Plainly and simply, she was a Criminal Cases No. C-54195 and No. C-54196. We REVERSE and SET
defenseless young girl subdued into obedience and ASIDE his conviction in Criminal Case No. C-54197. SO ORDERED.
submission by a very much older man who had lust in his
heart and his loins.
5. Catalino tries to impress that AAA filed a rape case because she
was mad at him.
o Not supported by evidence on record and is in fact
contradicted by Catalino's own testimony that he had little
interaction with AAA.
o In the normal course of things, anger happens or is
aroused by a specific reason. Catalinos failure to
effectively cite an ill motive strengthens AAAs credibility
and the validity of her charges.
o Catalino also contradicts himself when he claimed that the
grudge of Obispo's bore against him is the reason for the
rape charges. He admitted that he did not know of any
person who would convince AAA to accuse him of rape.
Separately from this contradiction, it cannot be believed
that a woman in her right mind would lend her name and
concoct a story to serve the ends of another's grudge.
6. Denial and alibi are the common defenses used in rape cases.
Sexual abuse is denied on the allegation that the accused was
somewhere else and could not have committed the crime.
o These two defenses are inherently weak and must be
supported by clear and convincing evidence. Moreover,
being negative defenses, they cannot prevail over the
positive testimony of the complainant.
o For alibi to prosper it is not enough to prove that he was
somewhere else when the crime was committed. He must
likewise demonstrate that it was physically impossible for
him to have been at the scene of the crime.
o AAA's identification of Catalino as the rapist was positive,
clear and categorical.
o Judicial notice was taken that Quezon City and Caloocan
City are directly adjoining cities which does not render it
impossible for Catalino to have been at the scene. Also,
the place is within the vicinity so he could have easily
been at the scene of the crime at the time of its
commission. Little weight is also given to his claim that he
was at work for this is an uncorroborated claim as he
failed to show that he was in fact employed.