This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2008-10-10 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| Accused-appellant claimed that his daughter charged him with rape out of resentment and a desire to exact revenge because in a fit of anger, he threw a cooked cassava which hit her at her head in the presence of his grandchildren. As we have ruled before, this is a lame and flimsy defense which is unworthy of belief. Parental punishment is not enough reason for a daughter to falsely accuse her father of rape. It takes depravity for a young girl to concoct a story which would put her own father on death row and drag herself and the rest of her family to a lifetime of shame. Mere disciplinary chastisement is not strong enough to make daughters in a Filipino family invent a charge that would only bring shame and humiliation upon them and their own family and make them the object of gossip in the community.[25] The victim's credible testimony is unshaken by accused-appellant's claim that his daughter was motivated by ill will in accusing her own father. In People v. Cariñaga,[26] we observed that not a few persons convicted of rape had attributed the charges against them to family feuds, resentment, or revenge. And in People s. Viajedor,[27] we held that family resentment, revenge or feud has never swayed the Court from giving full credence to the testimony of a complainant for rape, especially a minor who remained steadfast in her testimony, throughout the direct and cross-examinations, that she was sexually abused. | |||||
|
2007-06-08 |
NACHURA, J. |
||||
| In point is the case of People v. Carinaga.[26] Both Informations stated that the victim was 12 years old at the time of the two rape incidents. However, it was proven during the trial that the victim was actually only 11 years old on the given dates. This Court ruled that, since the facts alleged in the Information and the facts proven in court establish the qualifying circumstances of minority and relationship, there was qualified rape. | |||||