The Supreme Court (SC) has upheld the conviction of a male physician for lascivious conduct perpetrated against a 15-year-old girl who consulted him for her ear problem in 2015.
In a decision, the SC’s Third Division sustained the guilty verdict handed down by both the trial court and the Court of Appeals against Dr. Ulysses M. Trocio, an eye, ear, nose, and throat specialist, for violation of Republic Act No. 7610, the Special Protection of Children Against Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act.
“Wherefore, the petition is denied. The Decision dated Dec. 2, 2019 and Resolution dated June 25, 2020 of the Court of Appeals . . . are affirmed with modification,” the SC ruled.
“Petitioner Dr. Ulysses M. Trocio is found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Lascivious Conduct under Section 5(b), Article III of Republic Act No. 7610. He is sentenced to suffer the indeterminate penalty of imprisonment of ten (10) years and one (1) day of prison
mayor, as minimum, to seventeen (17) years, four (4) months, and one (1) day of reclusion temporal, as maximum,” it declared.
The High Court also ordered Trocio to pay the 15-year-old victim girl the amounts of P50,000 as civil indemnity, P50,000 as moral damages, and P50,000 as exemplary damages, and a fine of Pl5,000. “The monetary awards shall earn legal interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per
annum from the date of finality of this Decision until fully paid. So ordered,” said the decision penned by Associate Justice Henri Jean Paul B. Inting.
Based on the SC decision, the girl felt pain on her ear and went to the clinic of the physician on June 12, 2015. She was accompanied by her friend who was left on the ground floor of the clinic. The consultation was done on the clinic’s second floor.
While upstairs, the girl said the physician applied “agua” on her face which caused numbness. She said the physician held her face with his right hand and used his left hand to fondle her breast and touch her genitals.
She said that when she was about to leave, the physician kissed her neck, handed her a P200 bill, and told her not to report the incident to her parents. She said she threw the money out of fear. When the physician called her back, she said he tried to kiss her again on the neck but she was able to avoid it and left immediately.
During a seminar on child abuse in their barangay, the girl said she opened up her experience with the physician to those manning the desk on violence against women and children (VAWC). She said she then told the incident to her mother and other relatives.
Eventually, a case was filed in court against the physician who denied the charges. His denial was corroborated by his wife.
On Jan. 26, 2018, the trial court convicted the physican. The court found Dr.Trocio’s defense weak in contrast to the positive and candid declaration of girl about the incident. It also found the girl’s testimony “clear, unperturbed, and replete with details of the lascivious conduct committed against her.”
Trocio appealed his conviction to the CA, which, on Dec. 2, 2019, denied his appeal.
The CA also gave weight to the girl’s testimony which it found “clear, consistent, and straightforward.”
The CA also ruled that the girl’s “credibility was strengthened by the absence of evidence indicating that she harbored improper motive to falsely testify against petitioner (Dr. Trocio).
Dr. Trocio filed a petition with the SC challenging the CA’s decision.
In ruling against Trocio, the SC said: “The petition is not meritorious. All the elements of Lascivious Conduct are present in the case. Petitioner’s (Dr. Trocio) act of fondling and kissing AAA’ s breasts could not have signified any other intention but one having lewd or indecent design.”
“The law is clear that mere touching—more so, fondling and kissing—which suggests that the act was intentional, of [victim]’s private parts constitute lascivious conduct. Notably, [the victim] was only 15 years old when the incident occurred. [She] testified that on June 12, 2015, petitioner fondled her breasts, touched her genitalia, and then kissed her neck during her check-up,” the SC noted.
“To accomplish his lustful desires, petitioner even administered ‘agua’ on her ear which made her face numb and prevented her to move and escape from the former’s hands,” it said.
In several occasions, the Court has consistently given full weight and credence to a child’s testimony as youth and immaturity are badges of truth and sincerity, the decision stated.
“Here, undoubtedly, petitioner employed force and intimidation upon [the victim]. He induced, enticed, forced or coerced [the girl], who was expecting a medical treatment, as she was lying helplessly in a medical chair upon the latter’s order. Significantly, petitioner forced his hands into [victim]’s private parts while she was under medication and was experiencing numbness on her face,” the SC said.
The SC stressed that petitioner’s bare denial of the allegations against him must fail considering the detailed, consistent, and categorical testimony of the witnesses.
“[The victims]’s positive identification of petitioner, without any showing of ill motive on the part of the prosecution witnesses, should prevail over the petitioner’s alibi and denial. Being self-serving and negative, petitioner’s denial is inherently weak and is looked upon with great disfavor. It cannot be given more evidentiary weight than the testimony of [the girl,” the high court said.