People vs.

Godoy
250 SCRA 676 (1995)

FACTS:

This is an automatic review of the decision of the RTC in

view of the death sentence imposed upon Danny Godoy, who
was charged in two separate informations with rape and
another for kidnapping with serious illegal detention. Complainant
Mia Taha alleged that Godoy, her Physics Teacher and a
married man raped her first on Jan. 21, 1994 in her cousin’s
boarding house wherein upon entering the back door, Godoy
pointed a knife at her. As Godoy removed her panties and
brought out his penis to rape her, a knife was pointed at her
neck. As such, she was not able to resist. The next day,
Godoy came by their house and asked the permission of
her parents if she can join him in soliciting funds, since Mia
was a candidate for Ms. Palawan National School
(PNS). Mia’s parents allowed her to go with Godoy and she
was allegedly brought to the Sunset Garden Motel where she
was repeatedly raped again. After three days, they transferred
to Edward’s subdivision where she was kept in a lodging house and
was again raped. During this time, a police blotter had already been
placed for the missing Mia. She was later released by Godoy after
a certain Naem interceded and only after her parents agreed
to settle the case. It was after Mia’s return that her parents
accompanied her to a medico-legal which found lacerations in
her vagina concluding that “she just had sexual intercourse
.” She and her mother Helen went to the police and
executed sworn statements stating that the accused Godoy
had raped and abducted Mia. Godoy denied that he raped Mia
Taha. He admitted having had sex with her and that they
indeed stayed in Sunset Gardens and in Edward’s Subdivision,
but it was because they were lovers and that Mia had
consented to their having sex. To support his claim that they
were lovers, he presented two letters supposedly delivered to him in
the provincial jail while he was detained by Mia’s cousin
Lorna. There Mia explained that it was her parents who forced
her to testify against him. The delivery of the letter was denied
by Lorna but the defense presented
the provincial jail guard on duty on the supposed date of the
delivery and testified that indeed Lorna had visited Godoy
on said date. Several witnesses were also presented including
two former teachers of Mia who knew the handwriting on the
two said letters as belonging to Mia having been their former
student and where thus familiar with her handwriting
particularly those made in her test papers. Other witnesses
were presented by the defense attesting that they saw the two
together in a manner that was affectionate and cordial, prior
to the said “kidnapping” and even during such.

ISSUE:

Whether the prosecution was able to prove beyond

reasonable doubt the guilt of the accused

RULING:

The Supreme Court acquitted Danny Godoy .Three guiding

principles in the appellate review of the evidence of the
prosecution for the crime of rape, namely: a) while rape is a
most detestable crime, it must be borne in mind that it is an
accusation easy to be made, hard to be proved, but harder to
be defended by the party accused, though innocent; b)
the testimony of the complainant must be scrutinized with
extreme caution; and c) that the evidence for the
prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits and
cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness
of the evidence for the defense. Mia claimed that the
appellant always carried a knife but it was never explained
how she was threatened with the same in such a manner that
she was allegedly always cowed into giving in to his innumerable
sexual demands. In taking judicial notice, the Supreme Court said
that it is not unaware that in rape cases, the claim of the complainant
of having been threatened appears to be a common testimonial
expedient and face-saving subterfuge. But it had not been duly
corroborated by other evidence nor proved that the accused indeed
always carried a knife. T h e S C al s o t a ke s ju d i c i al
c o g n i z a n c e o f t h e f ac t t h at i n r u r al ar e as ( s u c h as i n
Palawan) young ladies are strictly required to act with
circumspection and prudence. Great caution is observed so
that their reputations shall remain untainted. Any breath of
scandal which brings dishonor to their character humiliates
their entire families. It could precisely be that complainant’s
mother wanted to save face in the community where
everybody knows everybody else, and in an effort to conceal
her daughter’s indiscretion and escape wagging tongues of their
small rural community, she had to weave the scenario of this rape
drama.