This case has been cited 6 times or more.
|
2010-01-06 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| It must be remembered that among the witnesses for the prosecution was AAA's mother. A mother would not sacrifice the honor of her daughter to give vent to a grudge that would tarnish the latter's reputation forever. It is a natural fact that mothers are protective of their children and they are willing to give up their lives to spare them from any threat or from any embarrassment, ridicule and any taint on their reputation.[28] Moreover, courts usually give greater weight to the testimony of a girl who is a victim of sexual assault, especially a minor, as in this case, because no woman would be willing to undergo a public trial and put up with the shame, humiliation and dishonor of exposing her own degradation were it not to condemn an injustice and have the offender apprehended and punished.[29] | |||||
|
2009-02-18 |
BRION, J. |
||||
| Both the RTC and CA found the above testimony straightforward, truthful and convincing.[67] AAA's identification of Canares as the culprit was positive, categorical and consistent and devoid of any showing of ill-motive on her part.[68] We find no reason to disturb these findings. Courts usually give greater weight to the testimony of a female victim of sexual assault, especially a minor, because no woman would willingly undergo a public trial and put up with the shame, humiliation and dishonor of exposing her own degradation except to condemn the injustice done and to secure the offender's apprehension and punishment.[69] Testimonies of youthful rape victims are, as a general rule, given full faith and credit, considering that when a girl says she has been raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to show that rape was indeed committed.[70] In this case, she could not have come up with a detailed narration of what she suffered if the rape, in fact, did not really happen. | |||||
|
2008-12-17 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| Q. When you said not all somehow a part of his organ was inserted, would that be correct, Madam Witness? A. Yes, Sir.[19] Courts usually give greater weight to the testimony of a girl who is a victim of sexual assault, especially a minor, as in this case, because no woman would be willing to undergo a public trial and put up with the shame, humiliation and dishonor of exposing her own degradation were it not to condemn an injustice and have the offender apprehended and punished.[20] | |||||
|
2008-12-10 |
BRION, J. |
||||
| The prosecution likewise adduced sufficient evidence showing the sexual intercourse between Catalino and AAA on the first and second rapes (i.e., one in May 1998 and another on June 29, 1998). We see no reason to doubt the sincerity of AAA's testimony regarding Catalino's sexual attacks. As we have ruled in not a few cases, when a woman, more so if she is a minor, says she has been raped, she says, in effect, all that is necessary to prove that rape was committed.[63] Courts usually give greater weight to the testimony of a girl who is a victim of sexual assault, especially a minor, because no woman would be willing to undergo a public trial and put up with the shame, humiliation and dishonor of exposing her own degradation; she does so only in her desire to rectify an injustice and to punish the offender.[64] | |||||
|
2002-07-23 |
PER CURIAM |
||||
| view of the intrinsic nature of the crime of rape where only two persons are usually involved, the testimony of the complainant must be scrutinized with extreme caution; and (3) the evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the evidence of the defense.[22] In a prosecution for rape, the complainant's credibility is the single most important issue.[23] The trial court's evaluation of the credibility of the victim's statements is accorded great weight because it has the unique opportunity of hearing the | |||||
|
2002-06-21 |
KAPUNAN, J. |
||||
| In reviewing the cases at bar, the Court observed the following guidelines it had previously formulated for the review of rape cases: (1) an accusation of rape can be made with facility, but it is difficult to prove, and even more difficult for the accused to disprove; (2) in view of the intrinsic nature of the crime of rape where only two persons are usually involved, the testimony of the complainant must be scrutinized with extreme caution; and (3) the evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the evidence of the defense.[54] | |||||