This case has been cited 5 times or more.
|
2014-02-12 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| The elements necessary to sustain a conviction for rape are: (1) the accused had carnal knowledge of the victim; and (2) said act was accomplished (a) through the use of force or intimidation, or (b) when the victim is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious, or (c) when the victim is under 12 years of age or is demented.[7] In the case at bar, appellant never denied having carnal knowledge of AAA. The only matter, thus, to be resolved by this Court is whether appellant had carnal knowledge of AAA against her will using threats, force or intimidation, or that AAA was deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious, or was under 12 years of age or is demented. | |||||
|
2013-01-30 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| On the basis of the foregoing consistent narratives from the victim, it is evident that carnal knowledge and force or intimidation as elements of the crime of rape were unmistakably present in this instance. This Court has held that the gravamen of the offense of rape is sexual intercourse with a woman against her will or without her consent.[23] We also previously declared that when a victim is threatened with bodily injury as when the rapist is armed with a deadly weapon, such as a knife or bolo, such constitutes intimidation sufficient to bring the victim to submission to the lustful desires of the rapist.[24] Thus, appellant's succeeding in having non- consensual sexual intercourse with ABC through intimidation using a knife plainly constitutes the crime of rape. | |||||
|
2012-02-22 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| The general rule is that findings of trial court relative to the credibility of the rape victim are normally respected and not disturbed on appeal, more so, if affirmed by the appellate court. This rule may be brushed aside in exceptional circumstances, such as when the court's evaluation was reached arbitrarily, or when the trial court overlooked, misunderstood or misapplied certain facts or circumstances of weight and substance which could affect the result of the case.[18] After an exhaustive review of the records, we find that there is no sufficient justification to apply the exception. | |||||
|
2011-11-23 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| In a prosecution for rape, the accused may be convicted solely on the basis of the testimony of the victim that is credible, convincing, and consistent with human nature and the normal course of things, as in this case.[42] There is a plethora of cases which tend to disfavor the accused in a rape case by holding that when a woman declares that she has been raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to show that rape has been committed and, where her testimony passes the test of credibility, the accused can be convicted on the basis thereof.[43] Furthermore, the Court has repeatedly declared that it takes a certain amount of psychological depravity for a young woman to concoct a story which would put her own father to jail for the rest of his remaining life and drag the rest of the family including herself to a lifetime of shame.[44] For this reason, courts are inclined to give credit to the straightforward and consistent testimony of a minor victim in criminal prosecutions for rape. | |||||
|
2011-09-14 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| The elements necessary to sustain a conviction for rape are: (1) that the accused had carnal knowledge of the victim; and (2) that said act was accomplished (a) through the use of force or intimidation, or (b) when the victim is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious, or (c) when the victim is under 12 years of age or is demented.[17] | |||||