This case has been cited 6 times or more.
|
2004-06-03 |
PANGANIBAN, J. |
||||
| The factual matters now raised by appellant have been passed upon by the RTC. As a rule, its findings deserve weight and respect.[11] The same is true as regards the evaluation of the credibility of witnesses, because it is the trial judge who hears them and observes their demeanor while testifying.[12] It is only when the trial court has overlooked or misapprehended some facts or circumstances of weight and influence[13] that these matters are re-opened for independent examination and review by appellate courts. | |||||
|
2003-10-16 |
PER CURIAM |
||||
| In the case at bar, it is convincing that a girl below the age of eighteen (18), especially one in Jelyn's circumstances, would perceive the threats on her to be especially intimidating. Intimidation is addressed to the mind of the victim and, being subjective, its presence cannot be tested by any hard-and-fast rule but should instead be viewed in light of the victim's perception and judgment at the time of the commission of the crime.[30] In any event, it is worthy to note that appellant exercised moral ascendancy over her. He was her father and the man of the house. Thus, it was not hard for him to frighten her and for her to easily give in. | |||||
|
2003-06-26 |
CARPIO, J. |
||||
| This Court has repeatedly noted in rape cases that it is common for a girl of tender age to be intimidated by the mildest threat against her life.[18] Rape is committed when the accused intimidates the victim who submits to sexual intercourse out of fear for her life or personal safety.[19] Intimidation is addressed to the mind of the victim, and being subjective, its presence cannot be tested by any hard and fast rule. Instead, intimidation should be viewed in the light of the victim's perception and judgment at the time of the commission of the rape.[20] Danly described appellant's acts of intimidation on her as follows: Q Could you tell the court how you were able to go to Pasig? | |||||
|
2002-02-20 |
BELLOSILLO, J. |
||||
| Assuming that there were inconsistencies in the witnesses' testimonies, these are trivial and do not adversely affect their credibility. Minor lapses in the memory of rape victims can be expected even as it is an understandable human frailty not to be able to recount with facility all the details of a dreadful and harrowing experience.[25] In fact, minor inconsistencies strengthen rather than impair their credibility[26] as these demonstrate that the testimonies have not been contrived or rehearsed.[27] | |||||
|
2001-03-16 |
DE LEON, JR., J. |
||||
| Q Do you know where that substance came from? A Yes, sir, it came from my father.[27] That no audible noise was heard from Twinkle to awaken her mother is explained by the fact that her mouth was gagged and her hands were tied.[28] It is neither improbable for rape to be committed with Twinkle's mother sleeping just an arm's length away for this Court has long settled that rape can be committed even in a room where the members of the family are also sleeping, lust being no respecter of time or place.[29] There is no rule that rape can only be committed in seclusion. The nearby presence of people in a certain place is no guarantee that rape will not and cannot be committed.[30] | |||||
|
2001-01-24 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| On the damages awarded, the amount of P50,000.00 as civil indemnity and P50,000.00 as moral damages for each count of simple rape are in accord with present jurisprudence.[31] However, the exemplary damages should be reduced to P25,000.00 for each count of rape. The rationale behind exemplary damages is to provide an example or correction for the public good and not to enrich the victim. The award of P25,000.00 as exemplary damages provides a deterrent against sexual abuse of young women by their fathers.[32] | |||||