This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2008-02-19 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| Significantly, at the time that the appellant was punched by the brother of AAA when he was caught naked inside the comfort room with AAA, the appellant immediately asked for forgiveness. It is well-entrenched in our jurisprudence that a plea for forgiveness by the appellant may be considered as analogous to an attempt to compromise. In criminal cases, except those involving quasi-offenses or those allowed by law to be settled through mutual concessions, an offer of compromise by the accused may be received in evidence as an implied admission of guilt.[43] No person would ask for forgiveness unless he has committed some wrong, for to forgive means to absolve; to pardon; to cease to feel resentment against on account of a wrong committed; to give up a claim to requital or retribution from an offender.[44] Thus, the trial court did not commit an error when it disregarded the appellant's defense of denial. | |||||
|
2003-06-10 |
PANGANIBAN, J. |
||||
| Furthermore, "[a] witness is not permitted to testify as to a conclusion of law."[17] Whether or not complainant was raped by appellant is the issue in this case. This question must be decided by the judge not by Leah, her mother or her sister. As it is, she cannot foist on him her own conclusion that she was "raped." | |||||
|
2001-05-23 |
PER CURIAM |
||||
| In reviewing trial court convictions for rape, this Court has generally been guided by the following principles: (1) an accusation for rape can be made with facility and while it is difficult to prove, it is more difficult for the person accused, though innocent, to disprove it; (2) in view of the intrinsic nature of the crime 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 for the defense.[7] | |||||