This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2011-03-23 |
VELASCO JR., J. |
||||
| In People v. Blazo, this Court held that "[l]acerations of the hymen, while considered as the most telling and irrefutable physical evidence of the penile invasion, are not always necessary to establish the commission of rape, where other evidence is available to show its consummation."[42] Thus, a medical examination or medical certification is only corroborative and not indispensable to the prosecution of a rape case. | |||||
|
2003-09-23 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| Neither can we give credence to appellant's self-serving assertion that the victim's grandmother concocted the rape charge because she did not approve of his marriage to her daughter and that the financial assistance from Lutgarda's former common-law husband was cut off by reason of such marriage. It is too trite, and unworthy of belief. Motives such as family feuds, resentment or revenge have never swayed us from giving full credence to the testimony of a minor complainant.[20] More importantly, we cannot believe that the grandparents would expose their granddaughter, a young and innocent girl, to the humiliation and stigma of a rape trial just to stop the relationship between the father and the mother of the victim. No grandparent would expose his or her own granddaughter to the shame and scandal of having undergone such a debasing defilement of her chastity if the charge filed were not true.[21] | |||||
|
2002-04-12 |
SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J. |
||||
| What is decisive in a rape charge is the complainant's positive identification of the accused as a malefactor.[27] When the complainant in a rape case testifies credibly that she has been raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to show rape has been committed. So long as her testimony meets the test of credibility, the accused may be convicted on the sole basis thereof.[28] It is highly inconceivable that a young girl of eleven years would concoct a story of defloration, allow an examination of her private parts, and thereafter pervert herself by being subject to a public trial, if she was not motivated solely by the desire to obtain justice for the wrong committed against her.[29] Certainly the victim would not make public the offense, undergo the humiliation of a public trial if she had not in fact been raped.[30] | |||||