While other victims immediately seek medical attention, some others

choose to be silent and will take time to muster the strength and courage
to complaint against the perpetrator. In fact, rape victims are, most of the
time, advised to avail of psychiatric treatments only to forget about their
experiences. This is attributable to the fact that, “there is no uniform
behavior expected of victims after being raped. Different people
react differently to a given situation, and there is no standard form
of behavioral response when one is confronted with a strange or
starling or frightful experience.”1

In People vs. Freta 2 the Supreme Court ruled that “absence of

external signs or physical injuries does not negate the commission
of rape since proof of injuries is not an essential element of the
crime.” In this case, private complainant lost consciousness when being
raped by the accused. It was impossible for her to resist or fight back,
which would explain the absence of such injuries. 3

Further, in People vs. Mendoza 4 the Supreme Court ruled that, “no
decent and sensible woman will publicly admit being a rape victim
and thus run the risk of public contempt – the dire consequence of a
rape charge – unless, she is, in fact, a rape victim.” This doctrine has
been repeated all over in recent cases decided upon by the Supreme Court
in the cases of People vs. Batiancila,5 People vs. Tamayo, 6 People vs. Ubia,7
People vs. Fontillas.8

This is because “when a woman says she was raped, she says in
effect that all is necessary to show that rape had been committed,
and if her testimony meets the test of credibility, the accused may
be convicted on the basis thereof.

The peculiar nature of rape is that conviction or acquittal dependents

almost entirely upon the word of the private complainant because it is
essentially committed in relative isolation or even in secrecy, and it is
usually only the victim who can testify of the unconsented coitus. 9

Here, the private complaint filed by the private complainant consists

of extremely detailed narrations of how she was raped, which was stated
above, and of how she was psychically and emotionally tortured and
abused by the accused, which make the same very reliable. The private
complainant’s Complaint-Affidavit (Exhibits “A” and “A-1”) and the defense
given the opportunity to cross-examine here.

1
People vs. Arraz, G.R. No. 183696, October 24, 2008
2
People vs. Freta, 406 Phil. 853, 862 (2001)
3
See Complainant-Affidavit, Page 22, Par. 34
4
People vs. Mendoza, 490 Phil. 737 (2005)
5
People vs. Batiancila, G.R. No. 174280, January 30, 2007
6
People vs. Tamayo, G.R. No. 137586, July 30, 2002
7
People vs. Ubia, G.R. No. 176349, July 10, 2007
8
People vs. Fontillas, G.R. No. 184177, December 15, 2010
9
People vs. Patentes, G.R. No. 190178, February 12, 2014