|
THE Supreme Court meted out a double-life sentence to a pedophile
who raped his eight-year-old niece 10 years ago.
In a 15-page decision penned by Associate
Justice Conchita Carpio Morales, the High Court’s Second Division
affirmed with modification an earlier decision by the Regional Trial
Court of Malolos, Bulacan and the Court of Appeals that found
Diosdado Codilan guilty beyond reasonable doubt of two counts or
rape and two counts of lasciviousness.
“Appellant, Diosdado Codilan y Palajurin, is
found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of rape in Criminal Case Nos.
1488-M-99 and 1490-M-99 and is accordingly sentenced to suffer in
each case the penalty of reclusion perpetua and to pay also in each
case the private complainant, P50,000 as civil indemnity, P50,000 as
moral damages, and P25,000 as exemplary damages,” the High Court
said.
“Appellant is likewise found guilty
beyond reasonable doubt of acts of lasciviousness in Criminal Case
Nos. 1487-M-99 and 1489-M-99 and is accordingly sentenced in each
case to suffer a prison term ranging from four months and one day of
arresto mayor as minimum, to six years of prison correctional as
maximum, and to pay the private complainant, the amount of P20,000
as moral damages.”
Court records show that Codilan is an uncle by
affinity of the victim, he being married to her father’s sister.
Through the victim’s testimony, it was
established that on the dates of the commission of the offense,
September, October, November and December 1998, the victim was
playing near the house of Codilan in Gumaok West, San Jose del
Monte, Bulacan when her uncle pulled her towards a room of his
house, and once inside, he forced the victim to have sex with him.
Fearing Codilan’s threats that he would kill
her if she divulged what he had done to her, the victim kept her
silence. She was later prompted to narrate appellant’s dastardly
acts when she was confronted by Codilan’s daughter, her
first-degree cousin.
It turned out that her first-degree cousin’s
then 12-year-old daughter, who was the granddaughter of the accused,
witnessed the December 1998 incident and divulged it to her mother
in February 1999.
The victim thereafter executed on February 25,
1999 a sworn statement detailing the assaults made upon her by
Codilan.
Codilan’s daughter also executed on February
26, 1999 a sworn statement in which she corroborated the victim’s
narration of the incident that occurred in December 1998.
In defense, Codilan claimed that the charges
against him were fabricated by his own daughter, who did not want
him to return home after serving his eight-year prison sentence for
illegal possession of firearms. His daughter, he said, also held a
grudge against him.
Before the appellate court, Codilan faulted the
trial court in giving weight and credence to the testimonies of the
prosecution witnesses and in convicting him of two counts of rape.
The High Court, however, found Codilan’s
appeal to be bereft of merit.
“Indeed, the trial court, which had the
opportunity to observe the witnesses and their demeanor during the
trial, can best assess the credibility of the witnesses and their
testimonies. Its findings are accorded great respect,” the High
Court said.
-- William B. Depasupil
|
