This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2011-04-12 |
DEL CASTILLO, J. |
||||
| Oftentimes in criminal cases, the issue presented for resolution is mostly confined to a question of credibility, a weighing of the prosecution's evidence against that of the defense. "In rape cases, if the testimony of the victim passes the test of credibility, the accused may be convicted solely on that basis"[1] for "[r]ape is generally unwitnessed and oftentimes, the victim is left to testify for herself."[2] From our thorough review of the instant case, we find that the trial court, as well as the appellate court, committed no reversible error in extending superior credit to the prosecution's evidence particularly the victim's testimony. | |||||
|
2009-09-04 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| This Court has held in the case of People v. Baligod[18] that rape is generally unwitnessed and oftentimes, the victim is left to testify for herself. Thus, in resolving rape cases, the victim's credibility becomes the primordial consideration. If a victim's testimony is straightforward, convincing and consistent with human nature and the normal course of things, unflawed by any material or significant inconsistency, it passes the test of credibility and the accused may be convicted solely on the basis thereof. To ensure that justice is meted out, extreme care and caution is required in weighing the conflicting testimonies of the complainant and the accused.[19] | |||||