This case has been cited 7 times or more.
|
2013-01-23 |
DEL CASTILLO, J. |
||||
| The Court, however, is not convinced. The doctor's finding that "AAA" was a victim of rape cannot be regarded as hearsay considering that it was not based solely on "AAA's" story but anchored mostly on the former's own examination of the latter.[19] Regarding the possibility of inserting two fingers with ease even in the absence of prior sexual intercourse, suffice it to state that "[t]he condition of the woman's hymen x x x is not conclusive on the question of whether rape has or has not been committed as the mere introduction of the male organ into the labia majora of the pudendum is sufficient to consummate rape."[20] In any event, this Court has already ruled that a medical examination of the victim as well as the medical certificate are merely corroborative in character and are not indispensable for conviction in rape cases. What is important is that the testimony of the private complainant about the incident is clear, unequivocal and credible, and this we find to be the case here. "Further, well-settled is the rule that prior sexual intercourse which could have resulted in hymenal laceration is not necessary in rape cases for virginity is not an element of rape."[21] Neither can the absence of bodily injury negate the commission of rape. | |||||
|
2012-10-17 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| The forensic evidence showing old lacerations of AAA's hymen corroborates her claim that she had been sexually assaulted. When a woman states that she had been raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to show that rape was committed.[36] When such testimony corresponds with medical findings, there is sufficient basis to conclude that the essential requisites of carnal knowledge have been established.[37] Contrary to what Delos Reyes would like the Court to believe, the bite marks on her neck, breasts and thighs are not indicative of sexual foreplay. Rather, these marks are badges of bestiality which are a testament to his depravity. | |||||
|
2011-04-12 |
DEL CASTILLO, J. |
||||
| Regarding damages, we sustain the appellate court's award of civil indemnity to "AAA" in the amount of P75,000.00 for each case. "[I]f the crime of rape is qualified by circumstances which warrant the imposition of the death penalty by applicable amendatory laws, the complainant should be awarded P75,000.00 for each count of rape as civil indemnity."[37] We also affirm the award of moral and exemplary damages. In rape cases, "[m]oral damages are awarded to rape victims without need of proof other than the fact of rape under the assumption that the victim suffered moral injuries for the experience she underwent."[38] Exemplary damages, on the other hand, are given by way of public example and to protect the young from sexual abuse. However, the moral and exemplary damages in the amount of P50,000.00 and P25,000.00, respectively, should be increased to P75,000.00 and P30,000.00 consistent with relevant jurisprudence.[39] In addition, interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum shall be imposed on all damages awarded from the date of finality of this judgment, likewise pursuant to prevailing jurisprudence.[40] | |||||
|
2010-09-22 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| We cannot give weight to the self-serving alibi and denial of the appellant over the positive and straight forward testimony of AAA and BBB. Once more, we apply the settled rule that "alibi is an inherently weak defense that is viewed with suspicion because it is easy to fabricate."[115] Alibi and denial must be strongly supported by corroborative evidence in order to merit credibility.[116] Appellant's alibi is, simply, uncorroborated. | |||||
|
2010-03-29 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| Further, as correctly pointed out by the Court of Appeals, the testimony of minor victims is normally given full weight and credit.[52] When a woman states that she has been raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to show that rape was committed.[53] Since the trial court had seen and heard the witnesses and observed their demeanor in court, it is in a better position to determine the credibility of the witnesses and their testimonies.[54] Its findings are, therefore, entitled to the highest respect and its evaluation shall be binding on the appellate court absent any showing that facts of substance and value have been plainly overlooked or misunderstood.[55] | |||||
|
2010-03-15 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| The consistent and forthright testimony of AAA detailing how she was raped, culminating with the penetration of appellant's penis into her vagina, suffices to prove that appellant had carnal knowledge of her. When a woman states that she has been raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to show that rape was committed.[77] Further, when such testimony corresponds with medical findings, there is sufficient basis to conclude that the essential requisites of carnal knowledge have been established.[78] | |||||
|
2009-02-06 |
BRION, J. |
||||
| Moral damages - awarded to rape victims without need of proof other than the fact of rape under the assumption that the victim suffered moral injuries from the experience she underwent - finds full justification in this case. This award is separate and distinct from the awarded civil indemnity.[36] In light of current jurisprudence, we affirm the award of P50,000.00 as moral damages.[37] | |||||