This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2000-11-17 |
PER CURIAM |
||||
| All in all, there is no reason to entertain any doubt that complainant Jenalyn Mariano was telling the truth for, indeed, no young girl would concoct a sordid tale of such a serious crime as sexual molestation at the hands of her own father, undergo gynecological examination, subject herself to the stigma and embarrassment of criminal prosecution, if her motive was other than a fervent desire to seek justice.[49] | |||||
|
2000-04-12 |
GONZAGA-REYES, J. |
||||
| The P50,000.00 indemnity awarded by the trial court must be modified. Instead of the sum of P50,000.00 as indemnity, we award P75,000.00 as civil indemnity considering that the crime was committed with the use of a weapon as alleged in the information and proven in court. In consonance with jurisprudence, the increase of the civil indemnity to P75,000.00 is justified if the crime was committed under circumstances that justify the imposition of the death penalty.[42] In People vs. Bañago[43], the accused committed the crime of rape with the use of a gun on October 15, 1993, before the passage of RA 7659. This Court was thus precluded from meting out the death penalty, but nevertheless the accused was ordered to pay civil indemnity in the amount of P75, 000.00.[44] | |||||
|
2000-04-05 |
PER CURIAM |
||||
| Not even the failure of LOREGIN to immediately report the rape incidents would diminish her credibility nor undermine the charges of rape. The delay can very well be attributed to the fear instilled in LOREGIN by the continuing threats and intimidation by her father who exercised moral ascendancy over her. The silence of a victim of rape or her failure to disclose her misfortune without loss of time to the authorities does not prove that the charges are baseless and fabricated. The victim would rather bear the ignominy and pain in private than reveal her shame to the world or risk the rapist's making good the threat to hurt her.[21] | |||||