This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2001-12-07 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| q. What did you feel when Pablito delos Reyes uttered that threatening words to you? a. Of course, sir, I got scared.[4] Threat or intimidation employed by rapists against their victims, especially when they are minors, is such as to easily force the latter to succumb to them. Physical resistance need not be established when intimidation is exercised upon the victim and the latter submits herself against her will because of fear of her life and personal safety.[5] Moreover, considering accused-appellant's moral ascendancy over the victim, it was not difficult for him to threaten the latter. | |||||
|
2001-02-06 |
PARDO, J. |
||||
| ". . . No young Filipina of decent repute would publicly admit she had been raped unless that was the truth. Even in these modern times, this principle still holds true."[11] Accused was not able to present any proof to show that he and the complainant were indeed lovers, that he had courted her and that she had accepted him. Other than his self-serving statement, "no documentary evidence of any sort, like a letter or a photograph or any piece of memento, was presented to confirm a romantic lia[i]son between accused-appellant and the complainant."[12] It is clear that the same is but a mere concoction by appellant in order to exculpate himself from any criminal liability.[13] Besides, even if indeed accused and complainant were sweethearts, this fact does not necessarily negate rape. "A sweetheart cannot be forced to have sex against her will. Definitely, a man cannot demand sexual gratification from a fiancee and, worse, employ violence upon her on the pretext of love. Love is not a license for lust."[14] | |||||