This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2007-03-28 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| (W)hen a woman says that she has been raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to show that rape has been committed. Her testimony is credible where she has no motive to testify against the appellants, as in the case at bar. Verily, a rape victim would not publicly disclose that she had been raped and undergo the trouble and humiliation of a trial if her motive was not to bring to justice the persons who had abused her. More specifically, no young Filipina of decent repute would publicly admit that she has been criminally abused and ravished unless it is the truth. It is her natural instinct to protect her honor.[27] (Emphasis supplied) | |||||
|
2007-03-20 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| We likewise cannot give credence to accused-appellant's contention that Pascual's testimony should prevail over that of AAA's. While it may be true that AAA did not mention anything about the rape to Pascual and Barangay Captain Gaspar when they met in the morning of 8 May 2003, it did not necessarily mean that the rape did not take place the night before. This Court has taken judicial notice of the fact that people react differently to a given situation, and there is no standard form of behavioral response when one is confronted with a strange, startling or frightful experience.[41] It must be emphasized that when AAA called for help, BBB immediately went out of her house to offer her succor. But when AAA informed her of what had just transpired, BBB instructed the former not to tell anyone about the incident because of its scandalous nature; instead, she advised AAA that they just settle the matter among themselves. It cannot therefore be denied that AAA's actuations on the day after she was raped conveyed her state of bewilderment. A part of her wanted to keep the incident to herself and in the process heed her mother's plea and still another part of her yearned for justice for the wrong inflicted upon her. That she opted for the latter with the full knowledge that it was against her mother's request solidifies her accusation against accused-appellant for she could not have sacrificed her relationship with her own mother had her version of the story not been true. Verily, a rape victim such as AAA would not publicly disclose that she was raped and undergo the trouble and humiliation of a trial if her motive was not to bring to justice the person who abused her.[42] | |||||