This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2007-04-27 |
TINGA, J. |
||||
| In the prosecution of rape cases, conviction or acquittal depends on the credence to be accorded to the complainant's testimony because of the fact that usually the participants are the only witnesses to the occurrences.[19] Thus, the issue boils down to credibility. Significantly, findings of fact of the trial court should not be disturbed on appeal since conclusions as to the credibility of witnesses in rape cases hinge heavily on the sound judgment of the trial court which is in a better position to decide the question, having heard the witnesses and observed their deportment and manner of testifying.[20] | |||||
|
2000-02-16 |
PARDO, J. |
||||
| Consequently, accused-appellant's alibi cannot prevail over the positive identification by Delia that he committed the rape against her person.[23] The defense of alibi is further demolished by the fact that it was not physically impossible for accused-appellant to have been at the property (which is just a stone's throw away from the "compound") where Delia was raped, considering that accused-appellant's house (near the barangay plaza) where he was then staying is just half a kilometer away from the "compound." Such a short distance can easily be negotiated in a few minutes, even by foot. And the testimonies of accused-appellant's brother (Ricardo Bato) and daughter (Lea Grace Bato) did little to fortify his alibi. Alibi becomes less plausible as a defense when it is corroborated by relatives whose motive is suspect, for it must receive credible corroboration from disinterested witnesses.[24] | |||||