This case has been cited 7 times or more.
|
2011-04-06 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| It should be remembered that the declarations on the witness stand of rape victims who are young and immature deserve full credence. Succinctly, when the offended parties are young and immature girls from the ages of twelve to sixteen, courts are inclined to lend credence to their version of what transpired, considering not only their relative vulnerability but also the shame and embarrassment to which they would be exposed by court trial if the matter about which they testified were not true.[26] | |||||
|
2009-10-09 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| Verily, accused-appellant's theory that he and AAA were sweethearts is weak and self-serving since he failed to prove the same. His story is a mere concoction in order to exculpate himself from criminal liability. His wife's and sister's testimonies failed to corroborate his claim. Both of them admitted that they never saw accused-appellant and AAA together nor caught them in a compromising situation. In People v. Turco, [39] we held: In People v. Venerable (290 SCRA 15 [1998]), we held that the sweetheart theory of the accused was unavailing and self-serving where he failed to introduce love letters, gifts, and the like to attest to his alleged amorous affair with the victim. Hence, the defense cannot just present testimonial evidence in support of the theory that he and the victim were sweethearts. Independent proof is necessary, such as tokens, mementos, and photographs. | |||||
|
2007-01-30 |
|||||
| Aside from Batiancila's claim and Magallanes' unreliable testimony, no other convincing evidence substantiated the alleged romantic relationship between the former and XYZ. In People v. Venerable,[29] we held that the sweetheart theory of the accused was unavailing and self-serving where he failed to introduce love letters, gifts, and the like to attest to his alleged amorous affair with the victim.[30] The defense cannot just present testimonial evidence in support of the theory that the accused and the victim were sweethearts; independent proof is necessary, such as tokens, mementos, and photographs.[31] | |||||
|
2001-11-27 |
KAPUNAN, J. |
||||
| The trial court's evaluation of the victims' testimonies in the cases at bar is entitled to the highest respect because it had the opportunity to observe the demeanor of the witnesses on the stand. Furthermore, as previously held by this Court in People vs. Rodegelio Turco, Jr.,[78] | |||||