This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2013-01-08 |
BERSAMIN, J. |
||||
| Ultimately and frequently, the resolution of the charge of rape hinges on the credibility of the victim's testimony. The Court has consistently relied on the assessment of such credibility by the trial court, because the factual findings of the trial court, particularly those bearing on such assessment, are the product of the trial judge's peculiar opportunity to observe the deportment and demeanor of the witnesses while they personally appear and testify during the trial, as contrasted with the dependence by the appellate courts on the mute pages of the records of the trial.[35] This consistent reliance proceeds from the reality that the trial judge is in the best position to detect that frequently thin line between truth and prevarication that determines the guilt or innocence of the accused.[36] Thus, an appellate court will not disturb the credence the trial court accorded to the testimonies of the witnesses unless the trial court is shown to have overlooked or arbitrarily disregarded facts and circumstances of significance in the correct resolution of the case.[37] | |||||