This case has been cited 6 times or more.
|
2007-05-25 |
GARCIA, J. |
||||
| To discredit his daughter, appellant claims that she had long harbored a grudge against him for being strict with her, obviously suggesting that XXX fabricated the rape story to get back at him. We are not persuaded. XXX's revelation that she had been raped, coupled with her voluntary submission to humiliating medical examination and her willingness to pass through, as she did, a public trial where she could and was compelled to dish out details of an assault against her very womanhood, dignity and honor cannot be dismissed as mere concoction. Incestuous rape is not an ordinary crime that can be easily fabricated or manufactured. The very parties involved in it, let alone the psychological toil, social scandal and humiliation it is likely to generate, are already deterrent factors against its concoction. The victim, the perpetrator, nay, the entire family must deal with a crisis that goes to the very core of familial integrity.[13] In fine, the Court has every reason to believe that in going to court, XXX is simply seeking justice for the bestial acts done to her even if the ax has to fall against her very own father. | |||||
|
2003-08-06 |
SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J. |
||||
| We are not swayed by appellant's bare claim. We find no reason to disturb the lower court's finding that Lanie's story is credible. It is inconceivable that she would falsely testify against her own father if the charge were not true. Rape is not an ordinary crime that can easily be manufactured.[32] When a victim says she was raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to show that the crime was committed. Not a few offenders in rape cases attributed the charges brought against them to family feuds, resentment or revenge, but such alleged motives cannot prevail over the positive and credible testimonies of complainants who remained steadfast throughout the trial.[33] | |||||
|
2002-09-19 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| Considering that no aggravating circumstance attended the commission of the crime in this case, accused-appellant cannot be ordered to pay exemplary damages. Finally, we affirm the order of the trial court for accused-appellant to support the offspring of complainant, pursuant to Article 345 of the Revised Penal Code and prevailing jurisprudence.[22] | |||||
|
2002-08-07 |
KAPUNAN, J. |
||||
| commission of the offense.[89] Hence, in addition to moral damages of Fifty Thousand (P50,000.00) Pesos for each count of rape, accused-appellant must be likewise be sentenced to pay an additional amount of Fifty Thousand (P50,000.00) Pesos for each count of rape as civil indemnity in accordance with prevailing jurisprudence.[90] WHEREFORE, the Court AFFIRMS with MODIFICATION the appealed decision of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 28, Manila, in Criminal Cases Nos. 94-137790 and 94-137791. Accused-appellant Leonardo Dumanlang y Enriquez is found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of two | |||||