SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 840 04/09/2020, 1)54 PM

G.R. No. 211721. September 20, 2017.*

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs.

WILLINGTON RODRIGUEZ y HERMOSA, accused-
appellant.

Remedial Law; Evidence; It is a basic rule that the conviction of

the accused must rest not on the weakness of the defense but on the
strength of the prosecution.·It is a basic rule that the conviction of
the accused must rest not on the weakness of the defense but on the
strength of the prosecution. This is premised on the constitutional
presumption that the accused is innocent unless his guilt is proven
beyond reasonable doubt. This standard is demanded by the due
process clause of the Constitution which protects the accused from
conviction except upon proof beyond reasonable doubt of every fact
necessary to constitute the crime he is charged with.
Same; Same; Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt; Proof beyond
reasonable doubt does not, of course, mean such degree of proof as,
excluding the possibility of error, to produce absolute certainty. Only
moral certainty is required, or that degree of proof which produces
conviction in an unprejudiced mind. In other words, the conscience
must be satisfied that the accused is responsible for the offense
charged.·Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not, of course, mean
such degree of proof as, excluding the possibility of error, to produce
absolute certainty. Only moral certainty is required, or that degree
of proof which produces conviction in an unprejudiced mind. In
other words, the conscience must be satisfied that the accused is
responsible for the offense charged. Reasonable doubt does not refer
to any doubt or a mere possible doubt because everything in human
experience is subject to possible doubt. Rather, it is that state of the
case which, after a comparison of all the evidence, does not lead the

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017457accb3903b2bffc003600fb002c009e/p/AUH431/?username=Guest Page 1 of 20
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 840 04/09/2020, 1)54 PM

judge to have in his mind a moral certainty of the truth of the

charge. Where there is reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the
accused, there must be an acquittal.
Criminal Law; Trafficking in Persons; Elements of.·Section
3(a) provides the elements of trafficking in persons: (1) the act of

_______________

* THIRD DIVISION.

389

VOL. 840, SEPTEMBER 20, 2017 389

People vs. Rodriguez

recruitment, transportation, transfer or harboring, or receipts

of persons with or without the victimÊs consent or knowledge, within
or across national borders; (2) the means used which include threat
or use of force, or other forms of coercion, abduction, fraud,
deception, abuse of power or of position, taking advantage of the
vulnerability of the person, or the giving or receiving of payments or
benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over
another; and (3) the purpose of trafficking is exploitation which
includes „exploitation or the prostitution of others or other forms of
sexual exploitation, forced labor or services, slavery, servitude or
the removal or sale of organs.‰
Remedial Law; Evidence; Equipoise Rule; Under the equipoise
rule, if the evidence admits two (2) interpretations, one of which is
consistent with guilt, and the other with innocence, the accused must
be given the benefit of the doubt and should be acquitted.·We must
remember that suspicion, no matter how strong, must never sway
judgment. It is pivotal in criminal cases that we evaluate the
evidence for the prosecution against the required quantum of
evidence in criminal cases. When there is reasonable doubt, the
evidence must be interpreted in favor of the accused. Under the
equipoise rule, if the evidence admits two interpretations, one of
which is consistent with guilt, and the other with innocence, the
accused must be given the benefit of the doubt and should be

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017457accb3903b2bffc003600fb002c009e/p/AUH431/?username=Guest Page 2 of 20
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 840 04/09/2020, 1)54 PM

acquitted.
Same; Same; Documentary Evidence; Affidavits; The Supreme
Court (SC) is not unmindful that affidavits are usually abbreviated
and inaccurate; oftentimes, an affidavit is incomplete and results in
inconsistencies with the declarantÊs testimony in court.·The only
possible evidence that could explicitly prove the necessary elements
of the offense charged would be the joint sworn affidavit executed
by the arresting officers. Even if this document were to be
considered, we remain unconvinced that the three (3) women were
offered to PO1 Escober particularly for sexual purposes. Still, it
would fail to convince us that this piece of evidence would not help
the prosecution meet the degree of proof required in criminal cases
because a sworn statement cannot be fully relied upon. We are not
unmindful that affidavits are usually abbreviated and inaccurate;
oftentimes, an affidavit is incomplete and results in inconsistencies
with the declarantÊs testimony in court. All said, absent any direct
or circumstantial evidence to prove with moral certainty that
Rodriguez had

390

390 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People vs. Rodriguez

offered three (3) women to PO1 Escober, his appeal warrants an

acquittal. The gravamen of the crime of human trafficking is not so
much the offer of a woman or child; it is the act of recruiting or
using, with or without consent, a fellow human being for sexual
exploitation. In this case, the prosecution miserably failed to prove
this.
Constitutional Law; Presumption of Innocence; Where there is
reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the accused, he must be acquitted
even though his innocence may be doubted since the constitutional
right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty can only be
overthrown by proof beyond reasonable doubt.·We are reminded
that the overriding consideration in criminal cases is not whether
the court doubts the innocence of the accused but whether it
entertains a reasonable doubt as to his guilt. Where there is

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017457accb3903b2bffc003600fb002c009e/p/AUH431/?username=Guest Page 3 of 20
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 840 04/09/2020, 1)54 PM

reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the accused, he must be

acquitted even though his innocence may be doubted since the
constitutional right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty can
only be overthrown by proof beyond reasonable doubt. To conclude,
because of this doubt that lingers in our mind, Rodriguez must be
acquitted. Pursuant to RodriguezÊs guaranteed right to be presumed
innocent under the Bill of Rights, it is our constitutional duty to
free him.

APPEAL from a decision of the Court of Appeals.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.
Office of the Solicitor General for plaintiff-appellee.
Public AttorneyÊs Office for accused-appellant.

MARTIRES, J.:

We resolve Willington Rodriguez y HermosaÊs

(Rodriguez) appeal assailing the 5 December 2013
Decision1 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in C.A.-G.R. CR-
H.C. No. 05335. The CA affirmed RodriguezÊs conviction for
qualified trafficking in

_______________

1 Rollo, pp. 2-8.

391

VOL. 840, SEPTEMBER 20, 2017 391

People vs. Rodriguez

persons, in violation of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 9208,

otherwise known as the Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of
2003.

The Facts

Rodriguez was charged before the Regional Trial Court,

Branch 81 of Quezon City (RTC), in an information which

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017457accb3903b2bffc003600fb002c009e/p/AUH431/?username=Guest Page 4 of 20
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 840 04/09/2020, 1)54 PM

reads:

That on or about the 8th day of August 2006, in Quezon City,

Philippines, the above named accused, did then and there, willfully,
unlawfully and feloniously recruit, transport, harbor, provide,
introduce or match for money for the purpose of prostitution,
pornography or sexual exploitation, the following trafficked persons,
namely ELSINE (sic) DELA CRUZ y BEATRIZ, ASHLEY
MADRIGAL y RAMOS and JOSEPHINE CRUZ y ROMAN.
The offense was committed in large scale as it was committed
against three (3) or more trafficked persons, individually or as a
group.2

During his arraignment, Rodriguez pleaded not guilty.3

The evidence for the prosecution is anchored solely on
the testimony of Police Officer 1 Raymond Escober (PO1
Escober), on the joint sworn affidavit of the arresting
officers dated
9 August 2006,4 and on a photocopy of the pre-marked
P500.00 bill.5
According to his testimony, at around 11:00 p.m. on 8
August 2006, PO1 Escober was at the police station
preparing for the police operation called Oplan Bugaw for
the purpose of eliminating prostitution on Quezon Avenue
in Quezon City.6

_______________

2 Records, p. 1.
3 Id., at p. 16.
4 Id., at p. 4.
5 Id., at p. 5.
6 TSN, 20 February 2007, p. 4.

392

392 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People vs. Rodriguez

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017457accb3903b2bffc003600fb002c009e/p/AUH431/?username=Guest Page 5 of 20
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 840 04/09/2020, 1)54 PM

PO1 Escober, designated to pose as customer, was

accompanied by PO2 Reynaldo Bereber (PO2 Bereber) as
his backup, and Police Inspector Pruli James D. Lopez
(P/Insp. Lopez).7
While parking their vehicles at the target area, PO1
Escober was flagged down by Rodriguez who allegedly
offered the sexual services of three (3) pickup girls.8 PO1
Escober readily gave Rodriguez the pre-marked P500.00
bill as payment.9 This signaled his backup to enter the
scene and aid in the arrest. PO1 Escober then retrieved the
pre-marked bill.10
Thereafter, the officers brought Rodriguez and the three
(3) pickup girls to the police station.
In his defense, Rodriguez denied that he had offered a
girl for sexual purposes to PO1 Escober.11 He said that he
was only selling cigarettes on Quezon Avenue when he was
arrested by the police officers.12 He only found out that he
was being accused of human trafficking after he was
brought to the City Hall.13

The Ruling of the Trial Court

In its 18 October 2011 Decision,14 the RTC found

Rodriguez guilty beyond reasonable doubt of large-scale
trafficking. The dispositive portion reads:

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Court finds accused

WILLINGTON RODRIGUEZ y HERMOSA guilty beyond
reasonable doubt of the offense as charged [Violation of Republic
Act 9208 committed in a large

_______________

7 Id.
8 TSN, 28 April 2010, pp. 7-9.
9 Id., at p. 3.
10 Id.
11 TSN, 17 May 2011, p. 4.
12 Id.
13 Id., at p. 5.
14 Records, pp. 175-178.

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017457accb3903b2bffc003600fb002c009e/p/AUH431/?username=Guest Page 6 of 20
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 840 04/09/2020, 1)54 PM

393

VOL. 840, SEPTEMBER 20, 2017 393

People vs. Rodriguez

scale] and is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of life

imprisonment and to pay a fine of P2,000,000.00.15

The trial court held that RodriguezÊs acts of offering sex

to PO1 Escober, calling the three (3) pickup girls for him to
choose from, and receiving money are clearly acts of human
trafficking.16 It gave more weight to the positive testimony
of PO1 Escober over RodriguezÊs unsubstantiated denial.17
Likewise, the trial court noted that PO1 Escober had no
improper motive to falsely testify against the accused.18
Finally, it held that absent ill motive, the presumption of
regularity in the performance of duty must prevail.19
The trial court explicitly said:

The acts of the accused in offering sex to PO1 Escober, calling the
three [3] pickup girls so that he could choose from them and
receiving money therefor are clearly acts of human trafficking or
trafficking in persons defined and penalized under Sec. 10[c] of R.A.
No. 9208.
Accused denied the charge[s] by testifying that he was in front of
McDonalds Restaurant in Quezon Avenue selling cigarettes.
Where there is positive identification of the accused as the
perpetrators of the crime, their defense of denial and alibi
cannot be sustained.
Denial and alibi, unsubstantiated by clear and convincing
evidence, are self-serving and hardly deserve greater
evidentiary weight than the declaration of witnesses on
affirmative defenses. (Citations omitted)

_______________

15 Id., at p. 178.
16 Id., at p. 177.
17 Id., at p. 178.

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017457accb3903b2bffc003600fb002c009e/p/AUH431/?username=Guest Page 7 of 20
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 840 04/09/2020, 1)54 PM

18 Id.
19 Id.

394

394 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People vs. Rodriguez

Accused likewise testified that while he was selling cigarettes,

PO1 Escober grabbed him and together with his fellow police
officer[s], they brought him to Police Station 2 where he was
investigated and subsequently charged contrary to the testimony of
PO1 Escober that it was the accused who flagged the vehicle they
were riding in and offered sex.
There is no improper motive that could be imputed to PO1
Escober that he would falsely testify against the accused. The
absence of evidence as to an improper motive entitles PO1 EscoberÊs
testimony to full faith and credit.
The testimony of police officers carried with it the presumption
of regularity in the performance of official functions.
In the absence of ill motive, the presumption of regularity in the
performance of the policemanÊs official duty must prevail. (Citations
omitted)

The Arguments of the Accused

On appeal, Rodriguez anchored his defense on the

failure of the prosecution to present any evidence that
would establish that he recruited, transported, or
transferred the alleged three (3) women for the purpose of
prostitution.20 These women, in fact, were not presented in
court and neither did they execute any sworn statement.21
Rodriguez also faulted the prosecution for not presenting
the original marked money despite the fact that it was in
P/Insp. LopezÊs possession.22 In addition, the prosecution
did not present any evidence of the alleged request from
the barangay officials to get rid of prostitutes in the area.23

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017457accb3903b2bffc003600fb002c009e/p/AUH431/?username=Guest Page 8 of 20
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 840 04/09/2020, 1)54 PM

_______________

20 CA Rollo, p. 44.
21 Id.
22 Id., at p. 46.
23 Id.

395

VOL. 840, SEPTEMBER 20, 2017 395

People vs. Rodriguez

Finally, Rodriguez maintained that the testimony of PO1

Escober was not corroborated by any of his companions
who allegedly took part in the operations.24

The Assailed CAÊs Decision

Unmoved, the CA affirmed the trial courtÊs decision and

gave great weight to its factual findings. It likewise found
no merit in the arguments raised by Rodriguez, to wit:
The nonpresentation of the three women is not fatal to
the prosecution. Unlike in illegal recruitment cases, where
the victim will part money against the recruiter, [w]e
cannot expect the three women to give something to herein
accused-appellant. On the contrary, it may be accused-
appellant who would have to give them their proportionate
share for every successful transaction. Thus, they cannot
be expected to take an active part in the case, since they
are relatively not adversely affected. In other words,
testifying or executing an affidavit against accused-
appellant would be of no value to them. Accused-appellant
himself admitted the presence of three women when he was
being cross-examined, viz.:

Q: [PROS. TORRALBA]: Did he also grab the three (3) women

whom you introduced to him?
A: No, sir.
With respect to the nonpresentation of the request of the
barangay officials, the same is not a material element of the offense.

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017457accb3903b2bffc003600fb002c009e/p/AUH431/?username=Guest Page 9 of 20
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 840 04/09/2020, 1)54 PM

Neither should the police operation depend on it. To think otherwise

would open the floodgates of abuse as law enforcers will only move
if there are requests from the people. They will become passive
instead of becoming pro​active.
The nonpresentation of the original of the marked money does
not weaken the case, nor destroy the pre-

_______________

24 Id.

396

396 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People vs. Rodriguez

sumption of regularity of performance of duty. For one, it is also

impossible that the crime of human trafficking be committed even
without the money being paid, as when the potential customer did
not proceed with the transaction or was not able to choose from
among the girls presented to him. Secondly, PO1 Escober is
categorical in his testimony that he prepared the same and had it
initialed with „R‰ and „E‰ at the forehead of Ninoy Aquino [on the
P500 peso bill], the letters being the initials of his name.
PO1 Escober positively identified accused-appellant. Neither
could accused-appellant impute ill motive against him. All that he
could offer is his denial which is not corroborated by any other
testimonial evidence. Following our „unbending‰ jurisprudence,
such positive identification prevails over denial and is in fact
sufficient for conviction.25 (Citations omitted)

Our Ruling

The appeal is meritorious.

It is a basic rule that the conviction of the accused must
rest not on the weakness of the defense but on the strength
of the prosecution. This is premised on the constitutional
presumption that the accused is innocent unless his guilt is

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017457accb3903b2bffc003600fb002c009e/p/AUH431/?username=Guest Page 10 of 20
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 840 04/09/2020, 1)54 PM

proven beyond reasonable doubt. This standard is

demanded by the due process clause of the Constitution
which protects the accused from conviction except upon
proof beyond reasonable doubt of every fact necessary to
constitute the crime he is charged with.26
Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not, of course, mean
such degree of proof as, excluding the possibility of error, to
produce absolute certainty. Only moral certainty is
required, or that degree of proof which produces conviction
in an un-

_______________

25 Id., at pp. 100-101.

26 Boac v. People, 591 Phil. 508, 521-522; 570 SCRA 533, 547-548
(2008), citing People v. Ganguso, 330 Phil. 324, 335; 250 SCRA 268, 274-
275 (1995).

397

VOL. 840, SEPTEMBER 20, 2017 397

People vs. Rodriguez

prejudiced mind. In other words, the conscience must be

satisfied that the accused is responsible for the offense
charged.27
Reasonable doubt does not refer to any doubt or a mere
possible doubt because everything in human experience is
subject to possible doubt. Rather, it is that state of the case
which, after a comparison of all the evidence, does not lead
the judge to have in his mind a moral certainty of the truth
of the charge. Where there is reasonable doubt as to the
guilt of the accused, there must be an acquittal.28
Rodriguez was charged and convicted for qualified
trafficking in persons under Section 4(a), in relation to
Section 6(c), of R.A. No. 9208, which read:

Section 4. Acts of Trafficking in Persons.·It shall be unlawful for

any person, natural or juridical, to commit any of the following acts:

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017457accb3903b2bffc003600fb002c009e/p/AUH431/?username=Guest Page 11 of 20
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 840 04/09/2020, 1)54 PM

(a) To recruit, transport, transfer, harbor, provide, or receive a

person by any means, including those done under the pretext of
domestic or overseas employment or training or apprenticeship,
for the purpose of prostitution, pornography, sexual exploitation,
forced labor, slavery, involuntary servitude or debt bondage.
xxxx
Section 6. Qualified Trafficking in Persons.·The following are
considered qualified trafficking:
xxxx
(c) When the crime is committed by a syndicate, or in large scale.
Trafficking is deemed committed by a syndicate if carried out by a
group of three (3) or more persons conspiring or confederating with
one another. It is deemed

_______________

27 Id., at p. 522; pp. 547-548.

28 People v. Calma, 356 Phil. 945, 974-975; 295 SCRA 629, 656-657
(1998).

398

398 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People vs. Rodriguez

committed in large scale if committed against three (3) or more

persons, individually or as a group.
xxxx

Section 3(a)29 provides the elements of trafficking in

persons: (1) the act of recruitment, transportation, transfer
or harboring, or receipts of persons with or without the
victimÊs consent or knowledge, within or across national
borders; (2) the means used which include threat or use of
force, or other forms of coercion, abduction, fraud,
deception, abuse of power or of position, taking advantage
of the vulnerability of the person, or the giving or receiving
of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017457accb3903b2bffc003600fb002c009e/p/AUH431/?username=Guest Page 12 of 20
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 840 04/09/2020, 1)54 PM

having control over another; and (3) the purpose of

trafficking is exploitation which includes „exploitation or
the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual
exploitation, forced labor or services, slavery, servitude or
the removal or sale of organs.‰30
A careful review of the records shows that the
prosecution failed to prove the presence of these elements
beyond reasonable doubt, nor did we find the second and
third elements proven by the prosecution.

_______________

29 Definition of Terms.·As used in this Act: (a) Trafficking in

Persons refers to the recruitment, transportation, transfer or harboring,
or receipt of persons with or without the victimÊs consent or knowledge,
within or across national borders by means of threat or use of force, or
other forms of coercion, abduction, fraud, deception, abuse of power or of
position, taking advantage of the vulnerability of the person, or, the
giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a
person having control over another person for the purpose of exploitation
or the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced
labor or services, slavery, servitude or the removal or sale of organs.
NOTE: This definition is the original definition, considering that the
crime was committed prior to the enactment of R.A. No. 10364.
30 People v. Casio, 749 Phil. 458, 472-473; 744 SCRA 113, 129-130
(2014).

399

VOL. 840, SEPTEMBER 20, 2017 399

People vs. Rodriguez

A review of emerging jurisprudence on human

trafficking readily shows that a successful prosecution, to a
certain extent, relies greatly on entrapment operations.31
Thus, just like in any operation that involves capturing the
perpetrator in flagrante delicto, the testimonies of the
apprehending officers on what transpired are crucial for a
conviction.

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017457accb3903b2bffc003600fb002c009e/p/AUH431/?username=Guest Page 13 of 20
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 840 04/09/2020, 1)54 PM

In People v. Casio,32 having similar factual

circumstances with the case at hand, the Court upheld the
conviction of the accused for qualified human trafficking. In
that case, the accused came up to the police officers and
asked if they were interested in young girls. After receiving
a positive response, the accused picked up two (2) minor
girls and presented them to the police officers. Thereafter,
they all proceeded to the motel room where the accused
was arrested.
The case before us differs from the Casio case where
more than one (1) credible witness, the minor victims, were
presented in court by the prosecution, and allowed to
testify on the circumstances on how they were recruited by
the accused and later offered for sex in exchange for money.
Significantly, the testimony of PO1 Escober in the case
before us lacks the material details to convince us that
Rodriguez had committed human trafficking.
In the instant case, only PO1 Escober testified as to the
actual unfolding of circumstances which led him to believe
that Rodriguez was committing human trafficking. On
cross-examination, PO1 Escober testified that:

Q: And what was the accused doing at that time when you first saw
[him]?
A: He stopped us and he offered us the services of prostitutes.

_______________

31 See People v. Hirang, G.R. No. 223528, 11 January 2017, 814

SCRA 315; Young v. People, G.R. No. 213910, 3 February 2016, 783 SCRA
286; People v. Casio, id.
32 Id.

400

400 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People vs. Rodriguez

Q: To whom was this offered?

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017457accb3903b2bffc003600fb002c009e/p/AUH431/?username=Guest Page 14 of 20
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 840 04/09/2020, 1)54 PM

A: To me, sir.
xxxx
Q: While onboard the Toyota Revo, can you tell this [c]ourt how
[did] the transaction transpire?
A: When we were flagged down, I opened [the] window of the car
and he offered us a woman.
Q: And could you tell this Honorable Court what exactly the
accused already told you?
A: „Sir, sir, babae, sir.‰
Q: And what was your reaction, Mr. Witness?
A: I responded, „Magkano ang ibabayad ko?‰
Q: So, it would be correct to state that when the accused [said], „Sir,
sir, babae, sir,‰ she was offering to you [a] woman?
A: Yes, sir.
Q: And because of that interpretation of yours, you asked him again
the cost?
A: Yes, sir.33 (Italics supplied)

Surprisingly, the circumstances about the initial contact

between PO1 Escober and Rodriguez and their negotiations
came out only during cross-examination. PO1 EscoberÊs
direct testimony showed the fact that he had in his
possession the pre-marked P500.00 bill and that he was
able to retrieve it from Rodriguez after the arrest. There
was no mention about how Rodriguez allegedly called on
the three (3) pickup girls and offered them for sexual
purposes.
The exchanges between PO1 Escober and Rodriguez
would suggest that PO1 Escober already knew what
Rodriguez meant when he said „Sir, sir, babae, sir,‰ and
thus assumed that Rodriguez was offering women for sex.
However, his testimony is bare as to the fact that the offer
of women was

_______________

33 TSN, 28 April 2010, pp. 8-9.

401

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017457accb3903b2bffc003600fb002c009e/p/AUH431/?username=Guest Page 15 of 20
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 840 04/09/2020, 1)54 PM

VOL. 840, SEPTEMBER 20, 2017 401

People vs. Rodriguez

explicitly for sexual purposes. It also lacked the necessary

details on how Rodriguez allegedly called on the pickup
girls to display them for PO1 Escober to choose from.
We must remember that suspicion, no matter how
strong, must never sway judgment. It is pivotal in criminal
cases that we evaluate the evidence for the prosecution
against the required quantum of evidence in criminal
cases. When there is reasonable doubt, the evidence must
be interpreted in favor of the accused. Under the equipoise
rule, if the evidence admits two interpretations, one of
which is consistent with guilt, and the other with
innocence, the accused must be given the benefit of the
doubt and should be acquitted.34
Apart from the deficient testimony of PO1 Escober, the
prosecution did not bother to present the testimonies of the
alleged victims. It is grossly erroneous to say that „the
nonpresentation of the three women is not fatal to the
prosecution.‰ Their testimonies that they were sexually
exploited against their will through force, threat or other
means of coercion are material to the cause of the
prosecution. These women would be in the best position to
say that Rodriguez had recruited or used these women by
giving them payments or benefits in exchange for sexual
exploitation. To rely solely on the testimony of PO1 Escober
as basis for convicting Rodriguez would run riot against
logic and reason, and against the law. To sustain this
whimsical reasoning would encourage anyone to accuse a
person of „trafficking in persons‰ or of any other crime,
without presenting the material testimony of the alleged
victim. Given that PO1 EscoberÊs testimony is missing on
material details, the prosecution should have presented in
court at least one of the three (3) women that indeed they
were sexually exploited or recruited by the accused for
prostitution as alleged in the information. Even a neophyte
police

_______________

34 Ubales v. People, 491 Phil. 238, 257-258; 570 SCRA 251, 271

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017457accb3903b2bffc003600fb002c009e/p/AUH431/?username=Guest Page 16 of 20
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 840 04/09/2020, 1)54 PM

(2008). See also Malillin v. People, 576 Phil. 576, 593; 553 SCRA 619, 639
(2008).

402

402 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People vs. Rodriguez

officer of the lowest rank would be stupefied why PO1

Escober and the two (2) other police officers allegedly with
him failed to get the statements of the alleged victims
while they were under police custody after the entrapment
operation.
Although the finding of guilt based on the testimony of a
lone witness is not uncommon, the testimonies of P/Insp.
Lopez and PO2 Bereber would have helped the prosecution
prove the crime. Corroborative evidence is necessary when
there are reasons to warrant the suspicion that the witness
falsified the truth or that his observation had been
inaccurate.35 Again, PO1 EscoberÊs lone testimony lacked
the material details to establish all the elements of the
crime which the prosecution, unfortunately, only took
cognizance of.
The only possible evidence that could explicitly prove the
necessary elements of the offense charged would be the
joint sworn affidavit executed by the arresting officers.
Even if this document were to be considered, we remain
unconvinced that the three (3) women were offered to PO1
Escober particularly for sexual purposes. Still, it would fail
to convince us that this piece of evidence would not help
the prosecution meet the degree of proof required in
criminal cases because a sworn statement cannot be fully
relied upon. We are not unmindful that affidavits are
usually abbreviated and inaccurate; oftentimes, an
affidavit is incomplete and results in inconsistencies with
the declarantÊs testimony in court.36
All said, absent any direct or circumstantial evidence to
prove with moral certainty that Rodriguez had offered
three (3) women to PO1 Escober, his appeal warrants an

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017457accb3903b2bffc003600fb002c009e/p/AUH431/?username=Guest Page 17 of 20
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 840 04/09/2020, 1)54 PM

acquittal. The gravamen of the crime of human trafficking

is not so

_______________

35 Rabanal v. People, 518 Phil. 734, 748; 483 SCRA 601, 615 (2006),
citing Rivera v. People, 501 Phil. 37, 49; 462 SCRA 350, 362 (2005),
further citing People v. Manalad, 436 Phil. 37; 387 SCRA 263 (2002).
36 Kummer v. People, 717 Phil. 670, 679; 705 SCRA 490, 499 (2013).

403

VOL. 840, SEPTEMBER 20, 2017 403

People vs. Rodriguez

much the offer of a woman or child; it is the act of

recruiting or using, with or without consent, a fellow
human being for sexual exploitation. In this case, the
prosecution miserably failed to prove this.37
We are reminded that the overriding consideration in
criminal cases is not whether the court doubts the
innocence of the accused but whether it entertains a
reasonable doubt as to his guilt.38 Where there is
reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the accused, he must be
acquitted even though his innocence may be doubted since
the constitutional right to be presumed innocent until
proven guilty can only be overthrown by proof beyond
reasonable doubt.39 To conclude, because of this doubt that
lingers in our mind, Rodriguez must be acquitted. Pursuant
to RodriguezÊs guaranteed right to be presumed innocent
under the Bill of Rights, it is our constitutional duty to free
him.
WHEREFORE, the appeal is GRANTED. The 5
December 2013 Decision of the Court of Appeals in C.A.-
G.R. CR-H.C. No. 05335 is hereby REVERSED and SET
ASIDE. For failure of the prosecution to prove his guilt
beyond reasonable doubt, WILLINGTON RODRIGUEZ y
HERMOSA is hereby ACQUITTED of the offense charged.
His IMMEDIATE RELEASE from detention is hereby

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017457accb3903b2bffc003600fb002c009e/p/AUH431/?username=Guest Page 18 of 20
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 840 04/09/2020, 1)54 PM

ORDERED, unless he is being held for another lawful

cause.
Let a copy of this Decision be furnished to the Director of
the Bureau of Corrections in Muntinlupa City for
immediate implementation. The Director shall submit to
this Court, within five (5) days from receipt of the copy of
the Decision, the action taken thereon.
SO ORDERED.

_______________

37 See People v. Villanueva, G.R. No. 210798, 14 September 2016, 803

SCRA 228.
38 People v. Aspiras, 427 Phil. 27, 41; 376 SCRA 546, 559 (2002).
39 People v. Baulite, 419 Phil. 191, 198-199; 366 SCRA 732, 738-739
(2001).

404

404 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People vs. Rodriguez

Velasco, Jr. (Chairperson), Bersamin and Leonen, JJ.,

concur.
Gesmundo, J., On Official Leave.

Appeal granted, judgment reversed and set aside.

Willington Rodriguez y Hermosa acquitted and ordered
immediately released.

Notes.·As defined under Section 3(a) of Republic Act

(RA) No. 9208, trafficking in persons can still be committed
even if the victim gives consent. (People vs. Casio, 744
SCRA 113 [2014])
When the trafficked person is a child, a person below
eighteen (18) years of age or one who is over 18 but is
unable to fully take care of or protect himself/herself, the
offense becomes qualified. (People vs. Ybañez, 801 SCRA
501 [2016])

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017457accb3903b2bffc003600fb002c009e/p/AUH431/?username=Guest Page 19 of 20
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 840 04/09/2020, 1)54 PM

··o0o··

© Copyright 2020 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights reserved.

http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017457accb3903b2bffc003600fb002c009e/p/AUH431/?username=Guest Page 20 of 20