This case has been cited 5 times or more.
|
2014-06-30 |
REYES, J. |
||||
| Furthermore, contrary to Alhambra's insinuation, AAA's delay in filing a complaint against him, for the alleged rape incident, which happened during the summer of 1999, cannot be taken against AAA's claim. "[D]elay in reporting an incident of rape does not create any doubt over the credibility of the complainant nor can it be taken against her."[17] That it took several years before AAA was able to divulge what Alhambra did to her during the summer of 1999 does not tarnish her credibility and the veracity of her allegations. The threat made by Alhambra against her is sufficient reason to cow AAA into silence, especially considering that she was just 12 years old then. | |||||
|
2013-09-18 |
REYES, J. |
||||
| Furthermore, contrary to the accused-appellant's insinuation, AAA's delay in filing a complaint against the accused-appellant is not an indicia of consent to the latter's sexual design. Delay in reporting an incident of rape does not create any doubt over the credibility of the complainant nor can it be taken against her.[25] That it took several months before AAA was able to file a complaint against the accused-appellant does not tarnish her credibility and the veracity of her allegations. The threat made by the accused-appellant against her life and that of her siblings is sufficient reason to cow AAA into silence, especially considering that she was just a minor then. | |||||
|
2002-01-31 |
PARDO, J. |
||||
| Accused-appellant imputes ill motive on complainant, claiming that the delay in filing the charges against him casts doubt on the veracity of the complaint. However, this Court has held that a delay in reporting an incident of rape does not create any doubt over the credibility of the complainant nor can it be taken against her.[27] Accused-appellant is the stepfather and uncle of the victim. He exercised moral ascendancy over her. He also threatened her with a knife every time he molested her and told her not to tell anyone otherwise, he would kill her and her mother.[28] It is not inconceivable that it took some time before she had the courage to expose his bestial acts. | |||||
|
2002-01-31 |
PARDO, J. |
||||
| The penalty of reclusion perpetua shall be served by accused-appellant successively, subject to the three-fold rule and the 40-year limit under Article 70, Revised Penal Code.[45] | |||||
|
2000-03-01 |
PER CURIAM |
||||
| Private complainants testified that the accused-appellant threatened to kill them if they divulged to anybody what he had been doing to them. Scared, frightened, and confused, they kept their horrible ordeal to themselves until they mustered enough courage to reveal the unfortunate happening to their mother. In such a scenario, the victims' reluctance to disclose what accused-appellant did to them did not render their testimonies unworthy of belief. It bears stressing that delay in reporting a rape incident due to death threats are not to be taken against the victim. [17] This doctrine applies with greater force to the present case, where the hesitation of the victims to reveal what happened is due not only to a genuine fear which their father instilled in their mind but also to their young age and the moral ascendancy of accused-appellant. | |||||