This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2007-04-13 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| In a long line of cases, this Court has held that delay in reporting rape incidents, in the face of threats of physical violence, cannot be taken against the victim.[20] A rape victim's actions are oftentimes overwhelmed by fear rather than by reason. It is this fear, springing from the initial rape that the perpetrator hopes to build a climate of extreme psychological terror, which would, he hopes, will numb his victim into silence and submissiveness. Incestuous rape magnifies this terror, because the perpetrator is a person normally expected to give solace and protection to the victim. Furthermore, in incest, access to the victim is guaranteed by the blood relationship, proximity magnifying the sense of helplessness and the degree of fear.[21] | |||||
|
2000-12-04 |
BELLOSILLO, J. |
||||
| The delay and initial reluctance of a rape victim to make public the assault on her virtue is neither unknown nor uncommon.[12] Such delay and initial reluctance do not impair her credibility when satisfactorily explained.[13] A plausible reason to incur delay is the death threat from the accused[14] and in many instances, rape victims simply suffer in silence.[15] Ellen's lips were sealed for almost two (2) months due to accused-appellant's death threats. We find such circumstance an adequate reason for her delay in revealing her misfortune. | |||||
|
2000-10-13 |
PER CURIAM |
||||
| From the foregoing, it can be gleaned uneeringly that the delay in the progress of the case under scrutiny is not entirely attributable to appellants Yambot and Verzosa. The trial court should have granted said appellants' prayer for the presentation of their witness. It is worthy to note that the trial court issued a warrant of arrest against witness Joe Villena but denied the counsel of said appellants to present Joe Villena as a witness. In cases involving death penalty, such as the case at bar, "the Court exercises the greatest circumspection"; "there can be no stake higher and no penalty more severe xxx than the termination of a human life."[46] Appellants Freddie Yambot and Marciano Sayasa must be afforded amplest opportunity to defend themselves before rendition of judgment, "lest our conscience be bothered for rendering an irrevocable and irreversible error."[47] | |||||