People of the Philippines v. Josan Poblador

Manila

SECOND DIVISION

G.R. No. L-44129 April 29, 1977

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,plaintiff-appellee,
vs.
JOSAN POBLADOR,defendant-appellant.

Jose Poblador for appellant.

Solicitor General Estelito P. Mendoza, Assistant Solicitor Reynato S. Puno and Solicitor Ramon A. Barcelona for appellee.

FERNANDO,J.:

A rather unique feature of this prosecution for rape was the fact that the accused, a young man in his early twenties, was alleged to have assaulted a woman in her middle forties, with eleven children, some of them young girls above the age of puberty, right at a room in her house likewise occupied by another man, with her husband and other members of the family in the immediate vicinity. It may be recalled that it was partly on the basis of disparity in age that inPeople v. Mirasol,1Justice Recto acquitted a youth of twenty-four prosecuted at the instance of a widow of thirty-six, her claim being that there was an attempt to have forcible intercourse with her. That distinguished jurist found it "inexplicable why he had to set his eyes precisely on the complainant and not on [the daughter] who, by reason of her youth and virginity, should excel her mother in point of exciting the lust ... . "2Appellant Josan Poblador's fate was different, having been convicted of the crime of rape. He could not quite convince the lower court that he was entitled to acquital, notwithstanding the weakness of the evidence for the prosecution, the attendant circumstances moreover militating against his culpability. He could therefore rely on the presumption of innocence.3It is understandable why that constitutional mandate would be vigorously stressed in the Brief submitted by his counsel. Thereafter, on April 19 of this month, a Manifestation in lieu of Brief was filed by Solicitor General Estelito P. Mendoza4on behalf of the People of the Philippines recommending "the reversal of the decision appealed from and the acquittal of the appellant on the ground that his guilt has not been proven beyond reasonable doubt, with costsde oficio."5He was quite emphatic about the matter too: "Much as it is to be desired that the author of the alleged abominable offense, were it committed, be penalized and given the corresponding punishment he deserves, punishing appellant herein, who may be really innocent thereof, will not serve the ends of justice but rather subvert it, which is worse than the crime itself."6A careful study of the evidence of record yields the same conclusion. We accept such recommendation. The judgment of conviction, which moreover is tainted with unorthodoxy, appellant being ordered to pay damages for defamation in the amount of P20,000.00, as well as the further sum of P10,000.00 for exemplary damages, must be reversed.

The established facts about which there can be no conflict were set forth in the Manifestation of the Solicitor General thus: "On the night of August 29, 1972, defendant [Josan Poblador] and [Jason Mateus] were riding on a jeep driven by the latter on their way to the house of the former's second cousin, Abdon Bedro to [get] fertilizer. However, the jeep went out of order about half a kilometer from their aforesaid destination and finally stalled near the house of the spouses Dominador Baylon and Angelina Baylon at the barrio of Aglosong, Concepcion, Iloilo, where at the time said spouses and their five children were asleep ... . As the jeep could not be started and it was then about 10 o'clock, Poblador and Mateus were constrained to seek shelter and pass the night in the aforestated house, where they were allowed to sleep in a room, the door of which had no shutter ..., Poblador and Mateus left the house at about 5 o'clock the next morning but could not proceed to their destination until 8 o'clock when they were able to start the jeep after pushing it to a distance of around 150 meters with the help of Dominador Baylon and three others, namely, Floro, Trinidad, Junior Balida and Eliseo Obillos ... ."7

After which the Manifestation discussed the conflicting versions as to what transpired. First came the summary of the evidence for the prosecution.ℒαwρhi৷The facts testified to were set forth in a detailed and objective manner. It was narrated that "Poblador and Mateus, both armed with guns, called on the house of the Baylons and on entering it, Poblador asked where the latter's daughter Nenet was because he would marry her: that Angelina Baylon replied that Nenet was in Iloilo City and that in any event he could not marry her as he was already "married" or had a concubine, one Trining Piosca; that on hearing this remark of Angelina, Poblador [was engaged], ordered the spouses Baylons to put out the light in the house and said, "Now that you sent Nenet to Iloilo City, you sleep with me till morning" and, poking a gun on her chest, told her, Angelina, to come inside the room, where Poblador and Mateus were to sleep, which she did out of fear ... ; that once Angelina was inside the room, Poblador, without as much as kissing her or touching her breasts or any part of her body, pushed her to the edge of a bed therein; that he ordered her to take off her shorts and panties, which she also did; that thereafter Poblador ordered her to lie down on the bed, which she likewise complied with; that he then raised her duster, placed himself on top of her and ravished her without any struggle on her part to defend her honor, much less make any outcry for help, not only to her husband but also to the neighbors whose houses surrounded the Baylons' house, because of fear as he had a gun ...; that having felt the urge to urinate, she stood up and urinated; that thereafter, she turned to the bed and Poblador again [had intercourse with her]; that she stayed the whole night with [him], save the time when her eight-month old still breast-fed baby cried, and [he] told her to attend to the child ...; that Angelina's husband, who was in the sala near the door of the room which had no shutter, did not do anything during the time his wife was being raped, which he was witnessing, because Mateus was pointing his gun at him ...; that when his wife came out of the room to attend to the child, he asked her if Poblador succeeded in having sexual intercourse with her ...; that although she replied in the affirmative, he did not as much try to avenge the outrage to his wife's honor when Poblador and Mateus finally fell asleep, because of fear that they might be just pretending ...; that Poblador, before leaving the house, warned the spouses Baylons not to report the incident to the authorities, otherwise he would kill all of them; that although Dominador Baylon, did not believe said threat, he did not report on the following day, the nefarious crime to the barrio captain of Aglosong ...; that they reported the incident to Mayor Nerio Salcedo of Concepcion, Iloilo, but he merely advised them to relax as it would not happen again ...; that Angelina Baylon's complaint was not filed with the Courta quoby the Provincial Fiscal until August 26, 1974, or almost two (2) years after, the commission of the offense."8

Solicitor General Mendoza in his manifestation recommending acquittal stated that the evidence for the defense is substantially "a denial of the charge of rape by defendant Poblador, a 24-year old bachelor, who testified that he could not have embarrassed himself by having sexual intercourse with Angelina Baylon, an old woman of about 45 years of age whom he respected, much less do it in the presence of her husband, Dominador Baylon ...; that he could not have forced her to have coition with him at the point of a gun, because he did not own a gun; that he was taken aback by the instant charge, which he later learned from Angelina herself that did so at the instigation and pressure made to bear on her by the CIS and one Conte Baldoza who suspected him of having been the one who killed the latter's son, so that he, Poblador, could be jailed; that had he desired to have sexual intercourse, he would have gone to Iloilo City for the said purpose: and that Teodorico Piosca, the father of his common-law wife, Ofelia, likewise urged her, Angelina, to prosecute this unfounded charged for spite, because Teodorico was mad at him as he did not approve of his cohabiting with his daughter Ofelia Piosca. ...."9

It is thus easily understandable why counsel for appellant in the able brief10he submitted was quite vehement in his denunciation of the decision rendered by the lower court. It is a fair appraisal that the guilt of his client was not shown beyond reasonable doubt. The constitutional presumption of innocence was thus not overcome. The Solicitor General, after a thorough study of the record, reached the same conclusion. It could not be otherwise. He had to recommend the acquittal of appellant. As mentioned at the outset, we are in agreement.

WHEREFORE,the decision of January 24, 1976 finding the accused Josan Poblador guilty of the crime of rape is reversed and he is acquitted of such a charge.ℒαwρhi৷This decision is immediately executory. Costsde oficio.

Concepcion Jr., J., is on leave.

Footnotes