This case has been cited 5 times or more.
|
2007-09-25 |
CARPIO, J. |
||||
| d) When the offended party is under twelve (12) years of age or is demented, even though none of the circumstances mentioned above be present. First, carnal knowledge took place between the victim and appellant. AAA testified that appellant had sexual intercourse with her.[6] The victim's testimony was buttressed by the medico-legal certificate, which indicated that AAA was pregnant. Pregnancy is a natural possibility after sexual intercourse. When the victim's testimony is corroborated by the physician's findings of penetration, then there is sufficient foundation to conclude the existence of the essential requisite of carnal knowledge.[7] | |||||
|
2007-07-06 |
TINGA, J. |
||||
| Appellant's arguments warrant scant consideration. The lapses that he highlights are but mere trivial details which do not overthrow the weight of evidence against him. The position of the parties during sexual intercourse is not material in the crime of rape.[50] For rape to be consummated, the hymen of the victim need not be penetrated or ruptured. It is enough that the penis reaches the pudendum, or, at the very least, the labia. The briefest of contacts under circumstances of force, intimidation or unconsciousness, even without laceration of the hymen, is deemed to be rape in our jurisprudence.[51] The mere introduction of the penis into the aperture of the female organ, thereby touching the labia of the pudendum, already consummates the crime of rape.[52] | |||||
|
2007-03-28 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| A rape victim, who testifies in a categorical, straightforward, spontaneous and frank manner, and remains consistent, is a credible witness.[23] When the testimony of a rape victim is simple and straightforward, unshaken by rigorous cross-examination and unflawed by any serious inconsistency or contradiction, the same must be given full faith and credit.[24] The Court Appeals found her narration candid, straightforward, and credible.[25] It likewise found it incredible that an innocent girl like the private complainant, who practically grew up in a religious institution would concoct a tale of defloration, publicly admit having been ravished, allow the examination of her private parts, and endure the pain and trauma of public trial had she not in fact been truly violated. [26] | |||||
|
2004-01-14 |
VITUG, J. |
||||
| On 27 September 2001, Elgie, after consulting with her mother, executed and filed with this Court an affidavit of desistance. An affidavit of desistance is not looked upon with favor on appeal following a conviction, let alone as being the sole consideration for the reversal of that conviction. There must be other circumstances which, when coupled with retraction or desistance, create doubts on the veracity of the testimony given by witnesses during the trial.[19] The records do not here cast such doubts. A rape victim, who testifies in a categorical, straightforward, spontaneous and frank manner, and remains consistent, is a credible witness.[20] The victim in this case has remained steadfast in her testimony despite a rigid cross-examination made by the defense. The spontaneous emotional breakdowns suffered by the victim occasioned by the forced recollection of the sexual violation she has experienced from the hands of appellant somehow would add to her credibility.[21] | |||||
|
2002-01-29 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| Needless to say, this is a matter best assigned to the trial court which had the first-hand opportunity to hear the testimonies of the witnesses and observe their demeanor, conduct, and attitude during cross-examination. Such matters cannot be gathered from a mere reading of the transcripts of stenographic notes. Hence, the trial court's findings carry great weight and substance.[28] | |||||