This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2004-06-08 |
DAVIDE JR., CJ. |
||||
| The force employed in rape cases may be physical and actual or psychological and addressed to the mind of the complainant. Both have the same effect on the rape victim. In the latter case, however, we have consistently held that the force or intimidation must be of such character as to create real apprehension of dangerous consequences or serious bodily harm that would overpower the mind of the victim and prevent her from offering resistance.[11] The test is whether the threat or intimidation produces a reasonable fear in the mind of the victim that if she resists or does not yield to the desires of the accused, the threat would be carried out. It is not necessary, therefore, that the force or intimidation employed be so great or be of such character that it can not be resisted. It is only necessary that the force or intimidation be sufficient to consummate the purpose of the accused.[12] Hence, the victim need not resist unto death or sustain physical injuries in the hands of the rapist.[13] | |||||
|
2003-01-16 |
PER CURIAM |
||||
| Q Will you kindly point to him? A (Note: Witness is pointing to a man wearing yellow t-shirt who answered by the name of Lucilo Untalan when he was asked by the Court.)"[11] Marivic's testimony clearly established that appellant used force and intimidation in satiating his bestial lust. He would surpise Marivic at midnight while the latter was sleeping alone in her bedroom. During the trial, Marivic demonstrated that appellant would put his right hand over her mouth, effectively silencing whatever protestations she would have made. With his left arm, appellant would hold her right arm. As Marivic's left arm was free, she would try to box appellant, to no avail. He would then forcibly undress and penetrate her. Marivic was left gripped with intense fear every single time she was abused by appellant.[12] Appellant then repeatedly warned her against confiding the abuses she suffered to any one.[13] Clearly, the force and intimidation utilized by appellant produced fear in the mind of his victim.[14] Incestuous rape was sufficiently proved. | |||||
|
2002-11-15 |
PER CURIAM |
||||
| Accordingly, its findings are entitled to the highest degree of respect and will not be disturbed on appeal in the absence of any showing that the trial court overlooked, misunderstood, or misapplied some facts or circumstances of weight or substance which would otherwise affect the result of the case.[25] None of the exceptions exists in the case at bar. Through the testimony of GINA, which the trial court found to be clear and worth believing, the prosecution has adequately proved the commission of the rapes by her father JOSE. For the three rape incidents that occurred in 1995, when GINA was just 10 years of age, no proof | |||||