This case has been cited 11 times or more.
|
2009-04-16 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| The incident occurred in a 1½-meter x 2-meter wooden bed with a 3-month-old baby inside a 3-meter x 3-meter room, while the rest of the children were sleeping in the dining room of a small house, which barely had a floor area of 40 square meters. While private complainant was struggling to repel the attack against her honor, her 3-month-old baby was crying loudly. However, this was not impossible, as lust respects no time and place. In People v. Agbayani,[24] the Court stated that "(t)he evil in man has no conscience. The beast in him bears no respect for time and place; it drives him to commit rape anywhere -- even in places where people congregate such as in parks, along the roadside, within school premises, and inside a house where there are other occupants." The crime of rape may be committed even when the rapist and the private complainant are not alone. Rape may take only a short time to consummate, given the anxiety of its discovery, especially when committed near sleeping persons. Oblivious to the goings on, thus, the court has held that rape is not impossible even if committed in the same room while the rapist's spouse is sleeping[25] or in a small room where other family members also sleep.[26] It was not impossible or incredible for the members of the complainant's family to be in deep slumber and not to be awakened while the brutish sexual assault on her was being committed.[27] | |||||
|
2009-01-20 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| A: Yes, Ma'am.[9] Either way, this Court has observed in numerous cases that lust does not respect either time or place.[10] The evil in man has no conscience -- the beast in him bears no respect for time and place, driving him to commit rape anywhere, even in places where people congregate such as in parks, along the roadside, within school premises, and inside a house where there are other occupants.[11] | |||||
|
2008-06-18 |
REYES, R.T., J. |
||||
| It is settled that appellate courts will not interfere with the judgment of the trial court on the credibility of witnesses, unless there appears in the record some facts or circumstances of weight and influence which have been overlooked and, if considered, would affect the result.[42] Findings of facts and assessment of credibility of witnesses is a matter best left to the trial court because of its unique position and opportunity of being able to observe the witnesses' deportment on the stand while testifying. | |||||
|
2007-08-08 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| Thus, notwithstanding the absence of reference to violence or intimidation employed upon AAA, we are convinced that the assailed Decision of the Court of Appeals, insofar as it finds him guilty as charged, should be affirmed. When a father commits the odious crime of rape against his own daughter, his moral ascendancy or influence over the latter substitutes for violence and intimidation.[25] The absence of violence or offer of resistance would not be significant because there exists the overpowering and overbearing moral influence of the father over the daughter which takes the place of violence and offer of resistance required in rape cases committed by an accused who did not have blood relationship with the victim.[26] | |||||
|
2003-08-26 |
PER CURIAM |
||||
| Appellant asserts that he could not have raped Venilda in the presence of his other children. The presence of people has never deterred the commission of rape.[15] Rape is not a respecter of people, time or place.[16] Rape has been committed in places where people congregate, in parks, along roadsides, in school premises, in a house where there are other occupants, and even in places which to many would appear unlikely and high-risk venues for its commission. In any case, there is no rule that rape can be committed only in seclusion.[17] | |||||
|
2002-02-15 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| We have held that affidavits taken ex-parte are generally considered inferior to the testimony given in open court, and affidavits of recantation have been invariably regarded as exceedingly unreliable, since they can easily be secured from poor and ignorant witnesses,[35] for monetary consideration or through intimidation[36] and are most likely to be repudiated afterwards.[37] | |||||
|
2000-11-29 |
PER CURIAM |
||||
| "'We have too much experience of the great infirmity of affidavit evidence. When the witness is illiterate and ignorant, the language presented to the court is not his; it is; and must be, the language of the person who prepares the affidavit; and it may be, and too often is, the expression of that person's erroneous inference as to the meaning of the language used by the witness himself; and however carefully the affidavit may be read over to the witness, he may not understand what is said in a language so different from that which he is accustomed to use. Having expressed his meaning in his own language, and finding it translated by a person on whom he relies, into language not his own, and which he does not perfectly understand, he is too apt to acquiesce; and testimony not intended by him is brought before the court as his.' (2 Moore on Facts, sec. 952, p. 1105; People v. Timbang, 74 Phil. 295, 299)."[38] For this reason, affidavits have generally been considered inferior to testimony given in open court.[39] | |||||
|
2000-11-20 |
BELLOSILLO, J. |
||||
| Adora explained that during the first rape, she was not able to shout because the left hand of accused-appellant covered her mouth[17] and he told her to be quiet otherwise somebody would be involved.[18] While he was removing her panty, she kept on moving but her efforts proved useless because he was too big.[19] She was not able to get to her sister because he was already on top of her[20] and we must not lose sight of the presence of the two (2) children between them. We thus find Adora's explanation satisfactory. The evil in man has no conscience - he bears no respect for time and place, driving him to commit rape anywhere, even in places where people converge such as in parks, along the roadside, within school premises, inside a house where there are other occupants[21] or in the same room where other members of the family are sleeping[22] including the rapist's own spouse.[23] | |||||