This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2002-03-19 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| We disagree. It is a time-honored rule that the assessment of the trial court with regard to the credibility of witnesses deserves the utmost respect, if not finality, for the reason that the trial judge has the prerogative, denied to appellate judges, of observing the demeanor of the declarants in the course of their testimonies. The only exception is if there is a showing that the trial judge overlooked, misunderstood, or misapplied some fact or circumstance of weight and substance that would have affected the case.[18] In this case, we find no compelling reason to depart from this rule. Indeed, complainant proved herself to be a credible witness. Her narration of how she was sexually assaulted by her own father remained, as also noted by the trial court, plain, candid, straightforward, and unflawed by serious contradictions[19] in spite of the lengthy and tedious cross-examination by the defense counsel. It is also noteworthy that, in the course of her testimony, Arlene's eyes overflowed with tears,[20] which only revealed the depths of the shame and suffering she endured as a consequence of the violation of her virtue and personhood, and the truthfulness of her charge.[21] She was not impelled by any bad motive to testify falsely against accused-appellant, as shown by the admissions by the latter and his mother that they did not know of any reason why Arlene filed the rape charge against him.[22] The reasons offered by accused-appellant that Arlene had many boyfriends and that he would always scold her for attending dances and entertaining suitors[23] are flimsy. In fact, when the trial judge asked her if her accusation against her father was true considering that the death penalty could be imposed on him, Arlene unhesitatingly answered in the affirmative. Thus, she testified: q You filed a case of rape against your father. Do you know [that] if the court finds that your complaint is true, he will be sentenced to [the] death penalty; do you still insist that your complaint is true? | |||||
|
2001-11-20 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| Anent the damages awarded, we find that modifications are called for. In Criminal Case No. 107976-H, the case of Cecilia Osorio, aside from the award of P50,000 as moral damages, there should also be an award of P50,000 as civil indemnity in accordance with prevailing jurisprudence.[47] The award of exemplary damages is reduced to P25,000 pursuant to present case law.[48] | |||||