This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2004-07-06 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| We disagree with the contention that the victim's failure to shout for help is fatal to the charge of rape. Furthermore, we are not persuaded by appellant's contention that the victim offered no resistance. Rape is committed when the accused has carnal knowledge of a woman by use of force or intimidation.[29] Physical resistance is not an essential element of the felony, and need not be established when intimidation is exercised upon the victim and the latter submits herself, against her will, to the rapist's embrace because of fear for her life and personal safety.[30] It is enough that the malefactor intimidated the complainant into submission. Failure to shout or offer tenacious resistance did not make voluntary the complainant's submission to the criminal acts of the accused.[31] Furthermore, not every victim of rape can be expected to act with reason or in conformity with the usual expectations of everyone.[32] The workings of a human mind placed under emotional stress are unpredictable; people react differently. Some may shout, some may faint, while others may be shocked into insensibility.[33] | |||||
|
2003-10-15 |
PER CURIAM |
||||
| Appellant contends that the demeanor of the complainant in the aftermath of the rape of 20 February 1999 was inconsistent with normal human conduct and behavior. We have repeatedly ruled that different people react differently to the same situation, and not every victim of a crime can be expected to act reasonably and conformably to the expectations of everyone.[19] It is not therefore unusual for the victim to normally carry on after half an hour of the sexual molestation, particularly since she had been cautioned by her father not to squeal to her mother to avoid trouble. Furthermore, an examination of the testimony of the victim also showed that while she may have taken her dinner with the rest of her family without displaying any peculiar reaction, she admitted she was "mad" at her father for what he had done to her earlier.[20] | |||||