This case has been cited 4 times or more.
|
2004-02-05 |
PANGANIBAN, J. |
||||
| We are convinced, as the RTC was, that the narration of the victim herein could have been made only by someone who had been subjected to rape. The revelation of a young girl that she has been raped, coupled with her voluntary submission to medical examination and her willingness to undergo public trial in which she could be compelled to give out the details of an assault on her dignity, cannot be so easily dismissed as a mere concoction.[23] The present appellant's characterization of the testimony of the victim as "too perfectly delivered" has no basis. This flimsy and unfounded argument will not diminish the weight of her testimony, which was used as ground for conviction. | |||||
|
2002-09-05 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| small and fragile. She lived in a predominantly female household; at that time they were uncertain of any protection against appellant. Her fear and her helplessness had basis. Significantly, when her 25-year-old brother arrived the day following the rape, she immediately revealed the identity of her rapist. Her brother's arrival emboldened her and she lost no time in revealing appellant's identity. We have held before that the failure of a witness to volunteer information to law enforcement officers does not necessarily impair her credibility.[22] Ordinarily, delay by a witness in divulging what she knows about the commission of a crime, such as the identity of the offender, is not by itself a setback to the probative value of her testimony.[23] What is important is that where there is nothing to indicate that Maylin had any improper motive to implicate appellant, her testimony is entitled to full faith and credit. A young girl's revelation that she had been raped, coupled by her voluntary submission to medical examination and willingness to undergo public trial where she gave out the details of the assault on her dignity, cannot be easily dismissed as mere concoction.[24] All told, the Court finds no sufficient reason to disturb the findings of the trial court. Nor is there any showing of a circumstance sufficient to alter its verdict. We agree with the trial court that appellant's guilt has been proved beyond reasonable doubt. The sentence of | |||||
|
2000-02-29 |
BELLOSILLO, J. |
||||
| It is well-settled that testimonies of victims who are young and of tender age deserve full credence[24] and should not be so easily dismissed as a mere fabrication.[25] No woman, much less a child, would concoct a story of defloration, allow an examination of her private parts and subject herself to public trial or ridicule if she has not, in fact, been a victim of rape and impassioned to seek justice for the wrong done to her being.[26] What makes private complainant's testimony doubly credible was the fact that no improper reason or ill motive could be imputed to her as would impel her to falsely charge accused-appellant, her mother's godson and a former neighbor, of such a grave crime as rape. | |||||