This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2004-04-28 |
AZCUNA, J. |
||||
| As in most rape cases, appellant's conviction was chiefly due to the testimony of the complainant and the result of this appeal will naturally depend on the credibility of such testimony. The consistency on material points, or lack of it, can sustain or negate a conviction. Correspondingly, the scrutiny of the account of the complainant becomes even more stringent where a conviction could forfeit the life or the life-long liberty of an accused.[8] | |||||
|
2003-10-23 |
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J. |
||||
| In his Brief, appellant does not deny having sexual intercourse with complainant. He claims that she consented to the sexual act. As earlier found by us, the prosecution failed to adduce evidence to prove that complainant resisted the sexual advances of appellant when she was allegedly raped on November 16, 1996. The gravamen in the crime of rape is carnal knowledge of a woman against her will or without her consent.[14] We find nothing in the testimony of complainant to show that she offered any semblance of resistance when appellant allegedly raped her. While it may be said that tenacious resistance from the victim is not a requirement for the crime of rape, the lack of evidence signifying obstinate resistance to submit to the intercourse, naturally expected from an unwilling victim, could likewise indicate that no rape has occurred.[15] Nothing in private complainant's testimony indicates that she struggled against the sexual advances of appellant. There was no evidence of appellant's use of force or threat in having sex with her that evening of November 16, 1996. | |||||