This case has been cited 7 times or more.
|
2014-02-12 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| 3. The conduct of the victim immediately following the alleged sexual assault is of utmost importance in establishing the truth or falsity of the charge of rape.[26] In the case at bar, the actuations of AAA after the alleged rape is totally uncharacteristic of one who has been raped. It is contrary to normal human behavior for AAA to willingly go with her abuser's mother, and worse, to live with her abuser's entire family in one roof for eight (8) days sans any attempt to escape. | |||||
|
2012-08-06 |
DEL CASTILLO, J. |
||||
| The conduct of the victim immediately following the alleged sexual assault is of utmost importance in establishing the truth or falsity of the charge of rape.[22] In the present case, the acts of AAA after the alleged rape are totally uncharacteristic of one who has been raped. Her indifference on the lingering presence of the appellant at the scene of the alleged crime after the same happened instead of immediately reporting the incident naturally makes her testimony tainted with uncertainty. On the other hand, the actuations of appellant after the alleged rape also create a doubt as to his guilt. As testified by AAA, appellant even went to mass with AAA's brother and cousin and stayed at the house until the evening of that day having a drink with his co-workers. It is to be expected that one who is guilty of a crime would want to dissociate himself from the person of his victim, the scene of the crime, and from all other things and circumstances related to the offense which could possibly implicate him or give rise to even the slightest suspicion as to his guilt.[23] However, such did not happen in this case. | |||||
|
2008-11-27 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| The information also alleged that appellant raped AAA in the latter's dwelling and such circumstance was duly proven during the trial. Under Article 14(3) of the Revised Penal Code, dwelling is an aggravating circumstance where the crime is committed in the dwelling of the offended party and the latter has not given provocation. Hence, we have steadfastly held that dwelling is an aggravating circumstance in the crime of rape.[74] Dwelling is considered as an aggravating circumstance primarily because of the sanctity of privacy the law accords to human abode.[75] | |||||
|
2003-06-18 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| In the prosecution of rape cases, the offended party is, more often than not, the only one available to prove directly the commission of rape.[25] In the present case, the defense of bare denial proffered by appellant cannot outweigh the positive and consistent testimony of complainant. The prosecution with testimonial and medical evidence effectively discharged its burden of proving appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt. By itself alone, Jennifer's testimony suffices to support appellant's conviction.[26] | |||||
|
2001-02-19 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| In reviewing rape cases, three well-known principles guide the Court. (1) An accusation for rape can be made with facility. It is difficult to prove but more difficult for the person accused, though innocent, to disprove. (2) In rape where often only two persons are usually involved, the testimony of the complainant must be scrutinized with extreme caution. (3) The evidence of the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the evidence for the defense.[23] The credibility of the complainant is, therefore, of vital importance, for in view of the peculiar nature of rape, conviction or acquittal of the accused depends almost entirely upon the word of the private complainant.[24] | |||||
|
2000-08-25 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| where two persons are usually involved, the testimony of the complainant must be scrutinized with extreme caution; and (3) the evidence of the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the evidence for the defense.[23] Likewise, when the complainant in a rape case testifies that she has been raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to show rape has been committed,[24] the offended party most often being the only one available to prove directly the commission of rape. The credibility of the complainant is, thus, of utmost importance, for the accused may be convicted solely on the basis of the complainant's testimony if the same meets the test of credibility.[25] In the case at bar, we agree with the trial court's finding that Virginia's testimony was credible. Especially, her conduct immediately after the rape was a clear indication of the veracity of her statements. It should be recalled that on the same day that the crimes of rape | |||||
|
2000-06-08 |
PARDO, J. |
||||
| "A daughter would not accuse her own father of such an unspeakable crime as incestuous rape had she really not been aggrieved."[28] It is highly improbable for a woman, especially one of tender age like Arnie, to concoct a brutal tale of ravishment, allow a gynecologic examination, and undergo the humiliation of a public trial if she is not motivated solely by a desire to have the culprit apprehended and punished.[29] | |||||