3 principles in review of rape cases
Behavioral psychology teaches us that people react to similar situations
dissimilarly. There is no standard form of behavior when one is confronted by
a shocking incident as the workings of the human mind when placed under
emotional stress are unpredictable.[1] Nevertheless, the Court must be
guided by established principles.
In reviewing rape cases, the
Court is guided by the following principles: (1) to accuse a man of rape is
easy, but to disprove the accusation is difficult, though the accused may be
innocent; (2) inasmuch as only two persons are usually involved in the crime
of rape, the testimony of the complainant should be scrutinized with great
caution; and (3) the evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its
own merit and should not be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the
evidence for the defense.[2] So long as the private complainant’s
testimony meets the test of credibility, the accused may be convicted on the
basis thereof.[3][4]
In reviewing rape cases, the
Court is guided by the following principles: (1) to accuse a man of rape is
easy, but to disprove the accusation is difficult, though the accused may be
innocent; (2) inasmuch as only two persons are usually involved in the crime
of rape, the testimony of the complainant should be scrutinized with great
caution; and (3) the evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its
own merit and should not be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the
evidence for the defense.[2] So long as the private complainant’s
testimony meets the test of credibility, the accused may be convicted on the
basis thereof.[3][4][1] People v. Mariano, G.R. No. 168693, 19 June 2009, 590 SCRA 74, 90.
[2] People v. Marquez, GR Nos. 137408-10, 8 December 2000, 347 SCRA 510, 517.
[3] Id.
[4] https://www.projectjurisprudence.com/2021/08/gr-no-190178-february-12-2014.html.
