Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. EDUARDO NAVARETTE

This case has been cited 6 times or more.

	GR No. 207774 2014-06-30	PEOPLE v. CARLOS ALHAMBRA Y MASING REYES, J.
Moreover, the "[d]elay in revealing the commission of a crime such as rape does not necessarily render such charge unworthy of belief. This is because the victim may choose to keep quiet rather than expose her defilement to the harsh glare of public scrutiny. Only when the delay is unreasonable or unexplained may it work to discredit the complainant."[18] In any case, it should be stressed that the delay in the filing of the complaint is only with respect to the charge in Criminal Case No. 219-05, where Alhambra was acquitted by the RTC. There was no considerable delay in the filing of the complaint against Alhambra in Criminal Case No. 220-05.
	GR No. 207990 2014-06-09	PEOPLE v. ELIAS BUENVINOTO Y PAGLINAWAN REYES, J.
Delay in revealing the commission of a crime such as rape does not necessarily render such charge unworthy of belief. This is because the victim may choose to keep quiet rather than expose her defilement to the harsh glare of public scrutiny. Only when the delay is unreasonable or unexplained may it work to discredit the complainant.[24]
	GR No. 202842 2013-10-09	PEOPLE v. FLORENTINO GALAGAR REYES, J.
The failure of AAA to report her ordeal is not unique in her case. Many victims of rape would choose to suffer in silence rather than put the life of their loved ones in danger. "'[I]t is well entrenched that delay in reporting rape cases does not by itself undermine the charge, where the delay is grounded in threats from the accused.' Delay in revealing the commission of a crime such as rape does not necessarily render such charge unworthy of belief. This is because the victim may choose to keep quiet rather than expose her defilement to the harsh glare of public scrutiny. Only when the delay is unreasonable or unexplained may it work to discredit the complainant."[21]
	GR No. 203068 2013-09-18	PEOPLE v. RYAN FRIAS Y GALANG REYES, J.
Moreover, the delay in revealing the commission of a crime such as rape does not necessarily render such charge unworthy of belief. This is because the victim may choose to keep quiet rather than expose her defilement to the harsh glare of public scrutiny. Only when the delay is unreasonable or unexplained may it work to discredit the complainant.[26]
	GR No. 189324 2013-03-20	PEOPLE v. GILBERT PENILLA Y FRANCIA PEREZ, J.
We disagree. Indeed, jurisprudence is replete with holdings that delay in revealing the commission of a crime such as rape does not necessarily render such charge unworthy of belief. This is because the victim may choose to keep quiet rather than expose her defilement to the cruelty of public scrutiny. Only when the delay is unreasonable or unexplained may it work to discredit the complainant.[28]
	GR No. 194608 2012-07-09	PEOPLE v. ANTONIO BARAOIL REYES, J.
This Court finds no cogent reason to disturb the trial court's appreciation of the credibility of the prosecution witnesses' testimony. Findings of trial court relative to the credibility of the rape victim are normally respected and not disturbed on appeal, more so, if affirmed by the appellate court. This rule may be brushed aside in exceptional circumstances, such as when the court's evaluation was reached arbitrarily, or when the trial court overlooked, misunderstood or misapplied certain facts or circumstances of weight and substance which could affect the result of the case.[11] The assessment of the credibility of witnesses is a domain best left to the trial court judge because of his unique opportunity to observe their deportment and demeanor on the witness stand; a vantage point denied appellate courts - and when his findings have been affirmed by the CA, these are generally binding and conclusive upon this Court.[12]