This case has been cited 4 times or more.
|
2014-02-26 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| considering the intrinsic nature of the crime, only two persons being usually involved, the testimony of the complainant should be scrutinized with great caution; and (3) the evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merit, and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the evidence for the defense.[24] Rape is a serious transgression with grave consequences both for the accused and the complainant. Following the above principles, this Court is duty-bound to conduct a thorough and exhaustive evaluation of a judgment of conviction for rape.[25] | |||||
|
2012-12-05 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| Estoya has failed to allege and prove any improper motive on AAA's part for AAA to falsely accuse Estoya of rape. Since there was no showing of any improper motive on the part of the victim to testify falsely against the accused or to falsely implicate him in the commission of the crime, the logical conclusion is that no such improper motive exists and that the testimony is worthy of full faith and credence.[20] We have in many cases held that no young Filipina would publicly admit that she had been criminally abused and ravished, unless it is the truth, for it is her natural instinct to protect her honor.[21] We simply cannot believe that a 14-year old girl would concoct a tale of defloration, allow the examination of her private parts and undergo the expense, trouble and inconvenience, not to mention the trauma and scandal of a public trial, unless she was, in fact, raped.[22] | |||||
|
2011-05-30 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| Rape is a serious transgression with severe consequences for both the accused and the complainant. Using the above guiding principles in the review of rape cases, this Court is thus obligated to conduct a comprehensive and extensive assessment of a judgment of conviction for rape.[48] | |||||
|
2011-03-16 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| In a long line of cases, this Court has consistently ruled that the determination by the trial court of the credibility of the witnesses deserves full weight and respect considering that it has "the opportunity to observe the witnesses' manner of testifying, their furtive glances, calmness, sighs and the scant or full realization of their oath,"[113] unless it is shown that material facts and circumstances have been "ignored, overlooked, misconstrued, or misinterpreted."[114] | |||||