This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2003-04-30 |
PANGANIBAN, J. |
||||
| The trial court found the testimony of private complainant to be both credible and convincing. It is settled that the determination of the competence and the credibility of a witness rests primarily with the trial court,[15] because it has the unique position of observing the witness's deportment on the stand while testifying. Absent any substantial reason to justify the reversal of the assessments and conclusions of the trial court, the reviewing court is generally bound by the former's findings.[16] Moreover, in the case at bar, the victim's testimony is corroborated by the medical findings. | |||||
|
2002-04-18 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| Guided by the foregoing principles, we have carefully examined the testimony of Princess Olimpo and found no error on the trial court's giving credence to her declarations. Complainant, who was only 10 years old when she testified, was candid and straightforward in her version of the facts. She was not shown to have the shrewdness and callousness of a woman who would concoct such a story and endure physical examination and public trial if her story were untrue. The Court has consistently held that when a woman, more so if she is a minor, says that she has been raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to show that rape was committed.[12] Moreover, the records show that the complainant was crying when she testified. In a number of cases, this has been held to be evidence of truthfulness of the rape charge with the verity born out of human nature and experience.[13] | |||||