This case has been cited 4 times or more.
|
2008-08-20 |
TINGA, J, |
||||
| As a final point, the Court observes that the appellate court erred in awarding exemplary damages. There is no showing that any aggravating or qualifying circumstance attended the commission of the rape; hence, the award of exemplary damages has no factual and legal basis.[32] | |||||
|
2006-12-13 |
GARCIA, J. |
||||
| To be sure, the law does not impose burden on the rape victim to prove resistance.[15] It is enough if the intercourse takes place against the victim's will.[16] Tenacious resistance against rape is not required; neither is a determined nor a persistent physical struggle on the part of the victim necessary.[17] In fact, whatever resistance XXX was able to muster was easily repulsed by appellant considering the great disparity in their physical built. Record reveals that XXX is 5'1" in height and 123 pounds in weight while appellant is 6 feet tall and weigh 220 pounds.[18] | |||||
|
2004-01-20 |
SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J. |
||||
| Q What was the expression of the accused while he was doing the push and pull movement? A His eyes were blinking and he was breathing heavily."[21] Complainant's testimony reveals every relevant detail of the rape incidents. She remained steadfast in her assertion that it was appellant who raped her through force and intimidation and with the use of a knife. In fact, he himself testified that he does not know of any ill-motive why she filed these cases against him. We have consistently ruled that where, as here, the rape victims are young and of tender age, their testimonies deserve full credence and should not be so easily dismissed as a mere fabrication, especially where they have absolutely no ill-motive to testify against the accused.[22] Clearly, far from appellant's contention that the charges are fabricated, Janice's story of defloration is undoubtedly credible and convincing. The trial court correctly accorded full weight and credence to her testimony, thus:"Contrapuntal to the issue of credibility, this Court observes the demeanor of the complainant when she hurled her emotional anguish and intense rage because of the savage acts done upon her person by the accused, that her testimony in open Court is candid, straightforward and bears the earmarks of truth though there was a sign of shyness and demure on her part during the ten (10) times that she was at the witness' stand, four (4) times for the direct examination and six (6) instances during the grueling cross-examination conducted by the accused's counsel. On the other hand, the accused equivocal answers are preposterous, fallacious and farcical."[23] | |||||
|
2003-06-20 |
CALLEJO, SR., J. |
||||
| The contention of the appellant does not persuade. It is stressed that when the credibility of the witness is in issue, the trial court's assessment is accorded great weight because it has a unique opportunity to hear the testimony of witnesses and observe their deportment and manner of testifying.[8] It has the unique advantage of monitoring and observing at close range the demeanor, deportment and conduct of the witnesses as they regale the trial court with their testimonies.[9] | |||||