This case has been cited 8 times or more.
|
2014-06-04 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| We further underscore that AAA was merely 14 years old at the time she testified.[21] We have repeatedly held that testimonies of child-victims are normally given full weight and credit, since when a girl, particularly if she is a minor, says that she has been raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to show that rape has in fact been committed. When the offended party is of tender age and immature, courts are inclined to give credit to her account of what transpired, considering not only her relative vulnerability but also the shame to which she would be exposed if the matter to which she testified is not true. Youth and immaturity are generally badges of truth and sincerity.[22] | |||||
|
2013-06-05 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| Testimonies of child-victims are normally given full weight and credit, since when a girl, particularly if she is a minor, says that she has been raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to show that rape has in fact been committed. When the offended party is of tender age and immature, courts are inclined to give credit to her account of what transpired, considering not only her relative vulnerability but also the shame to which she would be exposed if the matter to which she testified is not true. Youth and immaturity are generally badges of truth and sincerity.[19] Considering her tender age, AAA could not have invented a horrible story. As aptly found by the RTC and we quote: The offended party testified in a straightforward manner and positively identified the accused in open court as the very person who inserted his penis into her vagina. Her candid narration of the dastardly act done upon her by the accused has the earmark of truth and sincerity. Her testimony was taken on three (3) different dates but not once did she waiver in pointing to the accused as the person who inserted his penis into her vagina. She even clarified that CCC only pretended to put his penis into her vagina when he was ordered by the accused to do so. x x x. | |||||
|
2012-09-19 |
REYES, J. |
||||
| Testimonies of child-victims are normally given full weight and credit, since when a girl, particularly if she is a minor, says that she has been raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to show that rape has in fact been committed. When the offended party is of tender age and immature, courts are inclined to give credit to her account of what transpired, considering not only her relative vulnerability but also the shame to which she would be exposed if the matter to which she testified is not true. Youth and immaturity are generally badges of truth and sincerity.[18] A young girl's revelation that she had been raped, coupled with her voluntary submission to medical examination and willingness to undergo public trial where she could be compelled to give out the details of an assault on her dignity, cannot be so easily dismissed as mere concoction.[19] | |||||
|
2011-02-23 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| When offended parties are young and immature girls from 12 to 16 years of age, courts are inclined to lend credence to their version of what transpired, considering not only their relative vulnerability, but also the public humiliation to which they would be exposed by a court trial, if their accusation were not true.[22] Youth and immaturity are generally badges of truth and sincerity.[23] It bears stressing that not an iota of evidence was presented by the defense showing that AAA's account of her defilement was not true. | |||||
|
2010-07-06 |
ABAD, J. |
||||
| With regard to the damages, in line with recent jurisprudence the civil indemnity must be increased from P50,000.00 to P75,000.00 and the moral damages from P50,000.00 to P75,000.00.[23] | |||||
|
2010-07-05 |
VELASCO JR., J. |
||||
| Exemplary damages are also in order. As we held in People v. Pascual,[40] this is not the first time that a child has been snatched from the cradle of innocence by some beast to sate its deviant sexual appetite. Ogan should thus also be made to pay exemplary damages to somehow abate this distressing trend. Current jurisprudence pegs this award at PhP 30,000.[41] | |||||
|
2010-03-09 |
NACHURA, J. |
||||
| In line with prevailing jurisprudence, the civil indemnity to be awarded should be P75,000.00, not P50,000.00, since the crime committed is qualified by a circumstances that warrants the imposition of the death penalty.[22] Likewise, consistent with jurisprudence, the amount of moral damages is increased from P50,000.00 to P75,000.00, without any further need of proof. And while the award of exemplary damages is also called for to deter other individuals with aberrant sexual tendencies, the amount fixed therefor by the RTC, as affirmed by the CA, is reduced from P50,000.00 to P30,000.00.[23] | |||||
|
2010-01-06 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| This Court, however, modifies the award of civil indemnity and damages in favor of AAA. In line with recent case laws, the compensation to be awarded in favor of the private offended party in cases of statutory rape or simple rape committed with the use of a deadly weapon should be in the amounts of P75,000.00 as civil indemnity and another P75,000.00 as moral damages.[29] Exemplary or corrective damages are imposed by way of example or correction for the public good and when the crime was committed with one or more aggravating circumstances.[30] According to current jurisprudence, exemplary damages should be awarded in favor of the private offended party in the amount of P30,000.00 in statutory or simple rape cases.[31] In the present case, the award of P75,000.00 as civil indemnity and another P75,000.00 as moral damages in favor of AAA is appropriate. The award of P30,000.00 as exemplary damages should also be imposed as a public example in order "to protect hapless individuals from [sexual] molestation"[32] and because of the presence of the aggravating circumstance of the commission of the crime in the dwelling[33] of AAA. | |||||