This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2014-01-27 |
DEL CASTILLO, J. |
||||
| "[R]ape is generally unwitnessed and oftentimes, the victim is left to testify for herself. Thus, in resolving rape cases, the victim's credibility becomes the primordial consideration. If a victim's testimony is straightforward, convincing and consistent with human nature and the normal course of things, unflawed by any material or significant inconsistency, it passes the test of credibility and the accused may be convicted solely on the basis thereof."[1] | |||||
|
2011-07-04 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| Due to its intimate nature, rape is usually a crime bereft of witnesses, and, more often than not, the victim is left to testify for herself. Thus, in the resolution of rape cases, the victim's credibility becomes the primordial consideration. It is settled that when the victim's testimony is straightforward, convincing, and consistent with human nature and the normal course of things, unflawed by any material or significant inconsistency, it passes the test of credibility, and the accused may be convicted solely on the basis thereof. [45] Inconsistencies in the victim's testimony do not impair her credibility, especially if the inconsistencies refer to trivial matters that do not alter the essential fact of the commission of rape. [46] The trial court's assessment of the witnesses' credibility is given great weight and is even conclusive and binding. [47] In People v. Sapigao, Jr., [48] this Court explained in detail the rationale for this practice: It is well settled that the evaluation of the credibility of witnesses and their testimonies is a matter best undertaken by the trial court because of its unique opportunity to observe the witnesses firsthand and to note their demeanor, conduct, and attitude under grilling examination. These are important in determining the truthfulness of witnesses and in unearthing the truth, especially in the face of conflicting testimonies. For, indeed, the emphasis, gesture, and inflection of the voice are potent aids in ascertaining the witness' credibility, and the trial court has the opportunity and can take advantage of these aids. These cannot be incorporated in the record so that all that the appellate court can see are the cold words of the witness contained in transcript of testimonies with the risk that some of what the witness actually said may have been lost in the process of transcribing. As correctly stated by an American court, "There is an inherent impossibility of determining with any degree of accuracy what credit is justly due to a witness from merely reading the words spoken by him, even if there were no doubt as to the identity of the words. However artful a corrupt witness may be, there is generally, under the pressure of a skillful cross-examination, something in his manner or bearing on the stand that betrays him, and thereby destroys the force of his testimony. Many of the real tests of truth by which the artful witness is exposed in the very nature of things cannot be transcribed upon the record, and hence they can never be considered by the appellate court." [49] | |||||
|
2011-02-02 |
BERSAMIN, J. |
||||
| Prevailing jurisprudence leads us to affirm the CA's ruling that AAA was entitled to P50,000.00 as civil indemnity,[17] and P50,000.00 as moral damages,[18] without need of any pleading and proof. Similarly correct was the CA's grant of P25,000.00 as exemplary damages. [19] In People v. Mira,[20] we observed that "when either one of the qualifying circumstances of relationship and minority is omitted or lacking, that which is pleaded in the information and proved by the evidence may be considered as an aggravating circumstance." In this case, the relationship between the victim and the accused is an aggravating circumstance because it was alleged in the information and duly proved during the trial. Thus, conformably with Article 2230 of the Civil Code, which provides that "in criminal offenses, exemplary damages as a part of the civil liability may be imposed when the crime was committed with one or more aggravating circumstance," we ratify the award of exemplary damages. | |||||