This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2004-06-29 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| Appellant contends that the private complainant's delay in reporting the rape in Criminal Case No. G-4797 for a period of one (1) year and six (6) days, and her admission that she only divulged the rapes because she discovered she was pregnant and was ashamed to be pregnant at such a young age, destroyed her credibility. However, the OSG stresses that delay in reporting rape does not undermine the charge if such delay is satisfactorily explained. Here, the delay is explained by the death threats made by the appellant against the victim and her mother. It is not uncommon for a young girl to be intimidated and cowed into silence and conceal for some time the violation of her honor, even by the mildest threat against her life.[41] Mary Jane's testimony is not discredited simply because she failed to immediately report to her mother or the authorities the abuses she suffered in the hands of the appellant. A rape victim cannot, after all, be expected to summon the courage to report a sexual assault committed against her person, where the act was accompanied by a death threat.[42] | |||||
|
2000-01-28 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| (3) The evidence of the prosecution must stand and fall on its own merits and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the evidence for the defense.[9] Appellant claims that he did not rape private complainant. Gleaning from the victim's own testimony, he now contends vehemently that the prosecution failed to prove that there was actual penetration of the private parts of private complainant and hence, there was no rape committed. He cites the testimony of the complainant during her re-direct examination: "PROS. BELETA: | |||||