Está en la página 1de 12

G.R. No. 197384.

January 30, 2013 Facts Sampaguita Auto Transport Corporation was charged with illegal dismissal for allegedly firing Sagad when he was, as he claimed, hired as a regular employee, not as a probationary employee as the company claimed. Allegedly, sometime around September, an evaluator boarded Sagad’s bus. The evaluator described Sagad’s manner of driving as "reckless driver, nakikipaggitgitan, nakikipaghabulan, nagsasakay sa gitna ng kalsada, sumusubsob ang pasahero." Sagad he claimed that he could not have been driving as reported because his pregnant wife and one of his children were with him on the bus. He admitted though that at one time, he chased a bus to serve warning on its driver not to block his bus when he was overtaking. He also admitted that once in a while, he sped up to make up for lost time in making trips. The company further alleged it conducted a an evaluation of Sagad’s performance. It requested conductors who had worked with Sagad to comment on his work. Conductors revealed that Sagad proposed that they cheat on the company by way of an unreported early bus trip. Dispatcher E. Castillo likewise submitted a negative report and even recommended the termination of Sagad’s employment. The company also cited Sagad’s involvement in a hit-and-run accident. Allegedly, Sagad did not report the accident to the company. Upon conclusion of the evaluation, the company terminated Sagad’s employment for his failure to qualify as a regular employee. Issue The issues are (1) whether Sampaguita Auto Transport Corp. dismissed Sagad illegally; and (2) whether he is entitled to backwages and separation pay, totaling P604,050.00, after working with the company for barely five months. Held/Ratio (1) No. The SC ruled that Sagad was not dismissed without basis. During his brief employment with the company, he exhibited the tendency to speed up when he finds the need for it, very obviously in violation of traffic rules, regulations and company policy. Instead of negating the evaluator’s observations, his admissions make them credible. Also, the SC find no evidence that Hemoroz and Lucero had an ax to grind against Sagad so that they would lie about their impression of him as a bus driver. Significantly, their statements validate Castillo’s own observation that he heard talks of Sagad’s orders to the conductors for them to cheat on the company. The scheme, contrary to Sagad’s explanation, can only be committed with the cooperation, or even at the behest, of the driver, as the proposed scheme is for the bus to make unscheduled, but unreported, early trips.

without doubt. more so when we consider that he attempted to cheat on the company or could have. Termination by employer.50 All told. The Traffic Accident Investigation Report45 is evidence to such incident. in fact. an observation which is validated by the company’s Daily Operation Reports from June to October 2006. Article 282 of the Code provides: Art. – An employer may terminate an employment for any of the following causes: (a) Serious misconduct or willful disobedience by the employee of the lawful orders of his employer or representative in connection with his work. Under the circumstances. (b) Gross and habitual neglect by the employee of his duties. This calls to mind Castillo’s report on the low revenue of Sagad’s bus. his tendency to speed up during his trips. . the second party in the incident. defrauded the company during his brief tenure as a bus driver. the first party in the vehicular accident. which. his reckless driving. (c) Fraud or willful breach by the employee of the trust reposed in him by his employer or duly authorized representative. conduct analogous to serious misconduct. UFF-597. the CA misappreciated the law when it declared that the grounds relied upon by the company in terminating Sagad’s employment are not among those enumerated under Article 282 of the Labor Code as just causes for employee dismissals. at the very least.The company cites Sagad’s involvement in a hit-and-run incident. The irregularities or infractions committed by Sagad in connection with his work as a bus driver constitute a serious misconduct or. 282. Sagad has become a liability rather than an asset to his employer. under the above-cited Article 282 of the Labor Code. The report was corroborated by the sworn statements of driver of the Elf truck. Also. and (e) Other causes analogous to the foregoing. Through his reckless driving and his schemes to defraud the company. Sagad committed serious misconduct and breach of the trust and confidence of his employer. his racing with other buses and his jostling for vantage positions do not speak well of him as a bus driver. (d) Commission of a crime or offense by the employee against the person of his employer or any immediate member of his family or his duly authorized representative. are just causes for his separation from the service. To be sure. we find substantial evidence supporting Sagad’s removal as a bus driver. his picking up passengers in the middle of the road. and the driver of the White Honda City.

5 The complainant denied that she and Laurentino were paid the P200. 162632 (property) was already the subject of expropriation proceedings filed by the City Government of Puerto Princesa against its former registered owner. Puerto Princesa City. Glenn Carlos Gacott who allegedly deceived the complainant and her late husband. The respondent denied all the allegations in the complaint. 2001. 2001 even though Reynold and Sylvia (his mother’s sister) are his uncle and his aunt. Prior to the acquisition of these properties. and contrary to their understanding – converted the "preparatory deed of sale" into a Deed of Absolute Sale dated June 4. 2013 .00 as just compensation. The complainant also claimed that the respondent notarized the Deed of Absolute Sale dated June 4.000. Ylaya. an earlier pronouncement of the Court "that justice is in every case for the deserving." (2) No. respectively. It failed to serve notice of: (1) the particular acts for which Sagad was being dismissed on November 5. The respondent specifically denied asking the complainant and her late husband to execute any "preparatory deed of sale" in favor of the City Government.000. into signing a "preparatory" Deed of Sale that the respondent converted into a Deed of Absolute Sale in favor of his relatives. we agree with the CA that the company failed to comply with the two-notice rule. The respondent argued that the complainant’s greed to get the just compensation caused her to file this "baseless.000. we deem it appropriate to award Sagad P30.00. Case No.000. unfounded and malicious" disbarment case. TCT No. at this point. Alleged that she and her late husband are the registered owners of two (2) parcels of land located at Barangay Sta. NLRC. Considering the circumstances in the present case.It is well to stress. That he January 30.000. 52 we hold that the violation of Sagad's right to procedural due process entitles him to an indemnity in the form of nominal damages. 2006 and (2) his actual dismissal. 6475 Facts The disbarment complain filed by Ylaya against Atty.00. Lourdes.4 selling the subject property to Reynold So and Sylvia Carlos So for P200. He also denied that the Deed of Absolute Sale contained blanks when they signed it. The respondent further alleged that the deed would be used in the sale to the City Government when the RTC issues the order to transfer the titles. Consistent with our ruling in Agabon v.00 purchase price or that they would sell the property "for such a measly sum" when they stood to get at least P6. Laurentino L. The respondent then fraudulently – without their knowledge and consent. The complainant alleged that the respondent convinced them to sign a "preparatory deed of sale" for the sale of the property. Even as we find a just cause for Sagad’s dismissal. but he left blank the space for the name of the buyer and for the amount of consideration. to be dispensed in the light of the established facts and applicable law and doctrine. Adm.

34 They however hold the respondent liable for violating Canon 16 of the Code of Professional Responsibility for being remiss in his obligation to hold in trust his client’s properties. and (2) Canon 18.01 and Section 3(c). These pleadings. and Section 3(c). and were the bases for the IBP Board’s Resolution. No. No. We likewise find him liable for violation of (1) Canon 15. and citizenship. Denial of due process means the total lack of opportunity to be heard or to have one’s day in court. 02-8-13-SC. marital status.M. and (2) whether the evidence presented supports a finding that the respondent is administratively liable for violating Canon 1.03 for neglecting a legal matter entrusted to him. evidence and testimony were received and considered by the IBP Commissioner when she arrived at her findings and recommendation. he denied violating the Rules on Notarial Practice. the respondent’s failure to cross-examine the complainant is not a sufficient ground to support the claim that he had not been afforded due process.01 and Canon 16 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. Rule IV of A. The respondent was heard through his pleadings. 02-8-13-SC. Lastly. Rule 18. (2) No. and his oral testimony during the October 6.filed for the spouses Ylaya and Reynold an opposition to the just compensation the RTC fixed proved that there was no agreement to use the document for the expropriation case. The most basic tenet of due process is the right to be heard. not a juridical person. his submission of alleged controverting evidence. The SC set aside the findings and recommendations of the IBP Commissioner and those of the IBP Board of Governors finding the respondent liable for violating Canon 1. no denial of due process takes place where a party has been given an opportunity to be heard and to present his case. Held/Ratio (1) No. Rules 1. violating the rule on conflict of interests. and he was even constrained to file a subsequent Motion to Intervene on behalf of Reynold because the complainant "maliciously retained" the TCTs to the subject properties after borrowing them from his office. Issue The issues are (1) whether the IBP violated the respondent’s right to due process.M. Rule 1. . As a rule.35 what is prohibited is the absolute lack of opportunity to be heard. He also argued that it was clear from the document that the intended buyer was a natural person. Rule IV of A. thus. 2005 mandatory conference. because there were spaces for the buyer’s legal age. Rule 15.03 for representing conflicting interests without the written consent of the represented parties.

2013 Facts Anastacio N. In Civil Case No. however. subject matter and remedies. Gonzales admitted that he assisted Teodoro-Marcial in tiling the two cases. Gonzales disregarded the Supreme Court Circular prohibiting forum shopping and thus violated Canon 1 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. Gonzales. 6760 January 30. They asked the trial court to annul the Deed of Absolute Sale executed by Manuela. i. 00-99207 without indicating that Special Proceeding No. The tiling of the civil cases. was a deliberate act of forum shopping that warrants the disbarment of Atty. Atty. The disbarment complaint was referred to the Commission on Bar Discipline of the IBP for investigation. Thus. Jorge I. Teodoro. the heirs of Manuela claimed to be the beneficiaries of a trust held by Manuela over the same parcel of land contested in Special Proceeding No. According to the heirs. While the settlement proceeding was pending. that he did not violate the forum shopping rule as the cases were not identical in terms of parties. Gonzales committed forum shopping when he instituted Civil Case No. Jorge T. Gonzales acted as counsel of Araceli Teodoro-Marcial in two civil cases that the latter filed against him.e. according to Anastacio. Atty. 99-95587. During her lifetime.A. Manila. with a warning that a repetition of a similar offense would merit a more severe penalty. No. According to Commissioner Dulay. Manuela was the registered owner of a parcel of land located in Malate. to cancel the resulting Transfer Certificate of Title in the name of Anastacio. Thus. Gonzales be suspended for one month from the practice of law. 00-99207 hinged on the same substantial issue. 99-95587 and Civil Case No. Teodoro. Donato. and to issue a new one in their names. Gonzales administratively liable for forum shopping. without indicating the special proceeding earlier tiled. . Gonzales also opined that the complainant only filed the disbarment case to harass him. 99-95587. Reconveyance and Damages. the heirs prayed for the issuance of letters of administration so that Manuela’s properties could be inventoried and settled in accordance with law. Teodoro and Teodoro-Marcial. They alleged that during her lifetime. report and recommendation. Atty. Manuela held the lot in trust for them. In Special Proceeding No. Manuela sold a portion of this land to Anastacio. Dulay found Atty. The commissioner found that a ruling in either case would result in res judicata over the other. both Special Proceeding No. Atty. He asserted. Teodoro Ill related that Atty. In his Report and Recommendation. Commissioner Dulay recommended that Atty. The first case.C. but she sold it to Anastacio and Rogelio Ng. 99-95587 was still pending. In committing forum shopping. Carmen. Teodoro and Teodoro-Marcial claimed that they are the heirs of Manuela. Gonzales assisted Teodord-Marcial for Annulment of Document. on whether Manuela held the Malate property in trust for Carmen Teodoro-Reyes. involved the settlement of the intestate estate of Manuela Teodoro. Donato T. 00-99207. Atty. Jorge I..

the appellant grabbed her and removed her short pants and panty. and (c) identity of relief sought. 2005. or in anticipation thereof. he immediately stood up and instructed her to prepare food. January 30. Forum shopping exists when. namely: AAA. they begot five (5) children. BBB recalled that while she was in her room in December 2005. told her to file a case before the police.Issue The issue is whether Atty. She felt pain. inserted his other hand inside her underwear. and of pain in her stomach. BBB revealed to XYZ that the appellant had raped her. the appellant then put his hand on AAA’s breast. Gonzales did commit forum shopping and violated the Code of Professional Responsibility. and inserted his penis into her vagina. Jr. No. a party seeks a favorable opinion in another forum through means other than appeal or certiorari.R. XYZ recalled that when she was still pregnant with their fifth child. 2013 Facts XYZ declared on the witness stand that she and the appellant got married on March 3. she saw the appellant embracing AAA and spreading her legs. 194236. when XYZ arrived at their house after buying rice. or at least such parties that represent the same interests in both actions. and touched her vagina. 00-99207 while Special Proceeding No. YYY. and ZZZ. Under this test. She instead went to the kitchen to do her chores. One time. Atty. She stated that AAA is "mentally deficient. There is forum shopping when the elements of litis pendencia are present or where a final judgment in one case will amount to res judicata in another. XYZ felt "bad and afraid. in turn. 99-95587 was pending. Held/Ratio Yes. XXX. G. the appellant would bring AAA in a videoke bar without her knowledge. as a result of an adverse decision in one forum. 1990." but could play musical instruments." but did not confront the appellant. When the appellant noticed XYZ’s presence. we find that Atty. They are as follows: (a) identity of parties.. Gonzales committed forum shopping and thereby violated the Code of Professional Responsibility. Upon their return. AAA would complain of experiencing loose bowel movement. Gonzales committed forum shopping when he filed Civil Case No. On December 16. the appellant then removed his short pants. XYZ requested assistance from a municipal social worker who.m. but could not shout because the appellant covered her mouth with his . mounted her. (b) identity of rights or causes of action. BBB. and they would usually return home at 1:00 a.

the appellant would also embrace AAA and touch her vagina. testified that she conducted a psychological test on AAA. a psychiatrist at the Northern Mindanao Medical Center. of the Revised Penal Code. In Criminal Case No. The CA affirmed this finding. and found her hymen to be intact. accompanied her to the police. and found her to be autistic. Marlou Bagacay Sustiguer. She. She declared that AAA lacked motor coordination. especially under crossexamination. Cagadas also testified that there could have been a penetration of BBB’s inter-labia. Dr. it had the unique opportunity to observe the witnesses and their demeanor. The RTC found XYZ’s and XXX’s testimonies credible and convincing. Agnes Cagadas. who held AAA’s breast. Medico-Legal Officer of the National Bureau of Investigation. stated that she examined AAA on December 23. and had a very low intelligence quotient. if considered. Dr. Dr.8Afterwards. Dr. 2005. in relation with Article 266-B. and inserted his penis into her vagina. in relation with Article 266-B. Held/Ratio Yes. It is settled that "the Court will not disturb the findings of the trial court on the credibility of witnesses. Its assessment is entitled to respect unless certain facts of substance and value were overlooked which. 2006-174 XYZ positively identified the appellant as the person who embraced AAA and spread her legs. narrated that every time the appellant came home from work. XXX added that the appellant allowed AAA to watch him take a bath. She also examined BBB on the same day. the sister of AAA and BBB. and who placed his hand inside the latter’s underwear sometime in 2002." . conduct. in turn.14 BBB also disclosed to her that the appellant "sodomized" her. the appellant inserted his penis into her anus. The appellant is guilty of qualified rape under Article 266-A. however. Sustiguer also found AAA to be incompetent to testify in court. Issue The issue is whether or not appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of qualified rape under Article 266-A. XYZ’s testimony was corroborated by the testimony of her daughter XXX who declared that the appellant would embrace AAA and touch her vagina whenever the appellant came home from work. and attitude. a. might affect the result of the case. XXX. as it was in the better position to observe their candor and behavior on the witness stand. of the Revised Penal Code.hands. he would instruct AAA to sit on his lap. Evaluation of the credibility of witnesses and their testimonies is a matter best undertaken by the trial court. and found a healed hymenal laceration at 7 o’clock position. explained that the hymen of 96% of sexually abused children remains intact. BBB disclosed the incident to XYZ who.

and who thereafter inserted his penis into her vagina. registered in their names under Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) Nos. Dr. Cagadas concluded that there had been penetration of BBB’s female organ. G. she nevertheless wrote in her Medico-Legal Report on BBB that "a finding of normal hymen does not prove nor disprove sexual abuse. if this crime did not happen. 2006-175 BBB positively identified the appellant as the person who grabbed her and removed her short pants and panty while she was in her room. imputing to him the grave crime of rape." She also testified that the hymen of 96% of sexually abused children remains intact. allow the examination of her private part. . The Court sees no plausible reason why AAA would testify against her own father. While Dr. 186069. possibly in the inter-labia. it is not indispensable in a prosecution for rape. spoke in a clear. A suit was filed but later dismissed when the NPC opted for settlement with the landowners by paying the easement fee of 10% value of their land. January 30. A young girl would not concoct a sordid tale of a crime as serious as rape at the hands of her very own father.R. As the lower courts did. the hymen is still intact even after the woman has given birth. Cagadas’ finding is merely corroborative. Capt. 2013 Facts The Spouses Cabahug are the owners of two parcels of land situated in Barangay Capokpok. Dr. In Criminal Case No. we find her testimony credible. They were among the defendants in Special Civil Action No. spontaneous and straightforward manner. In some cases even. Tabango. As we explained in People v. who was just nine years old when she testified. Leyte. or on the other hand. if her motive were other than a fervent desire to seek justice. a suit for expropriation earlier filed by NPC before the RTC. 0019-PN.b. Llanto: The strength and dilability of the hymen varies from one woman to another such that it may be so elastic as to stretch without laceration during intercourse. in connection with its Leyte-Cebu Interconnection Project. may be so resistant that its surgical removal is necessary before intercourse can ensue. The Court stress the lower court observation that BBB. No. Moreover. At any rate. Cagadas found BBB’s hymen to be intact. and subject herself to the stigma and embarrassment of a public trial. She never wavered in identifying the appellant despite the defense’s grueling cross-examination. T-9813 and T-1599 of the Leyte provincial registry.

not in full just compensation sought by the Spouses Cabahug. However. Jesus Cabahug agreed not to construct any building or structure whatsoever. 375. Jesus Cabahug executed two documents granting NPC the Right of Way. as stated in the grant. attorney’s fees and damages for NPC’s failure to pay its demand for additional just compensation. the RTC applied the ruling handed down by this Court in Gutierrez to the effect that NPC’s easement of right of way which indefinitely deprives the owner of their proprietary rights over their property falls within the purview of the power of eminent domain. and (2) in not applying this Court’s ruling in Gutierrez case. Held/Ratio SC held in favor of the complainant (Spouses Cabahug) (1) The CA regarded the Grant of Right of Way executed by Jesus Cabahug in favor of NPC as a valid and binding contract between the parties. nor plant in any area within the Right of Way that will adversely obstruct or affect the transmission line of NPC. 3-A of RA 6395 and that the reservation in the grant referred to additional compensation for easement fee. 1996. in consideration of the easement fee in the sums of 112. Issue The issue/s are: (1) (2) (1) CA erred in disregarding paragraph 4 of the Grant of Right of Way whereby Jesus Cabahug reserved the right to seek additional compensation for easement fee. Spouses Cabahug filed for motion for reconsideration but was denied due to lack of merit. 3-A of RA 6395 only allows NPC to acquire an easement of right of way over properties tracersed by its transimission lines. which the NPC rebutted by saying that it already paid the said the full easement fee mandated under Sec. 225. Ruled in favor of the complainant. 50 and 21. Brushing aside NPC’s reliance on Section 3-A of RA 6395. RTC: Jesus Cabahug filed a complaint for just compensation. under paragraph 4 of the grant. except agricultural crops not exceeding the height of three meters high. CA: Reversed and set aside RTC’s decision saying the facts of the case are different from those obtaining in Gutierrez and that Sec. a fact affirmed by the OSG in its 8 October 2009 Comment to the petition at bench. and a continuous easement of right of way for the latter’s transmission lines and their appurtenances. Jesus Cabahug has the option to see for additional compensation for easement fee.On November 9. Given that the parties have already agreed on the easement fee for the portions of the subject parcels traversed .

for that matter. No. we find that the CA erred in holding that the payment of additional sums to the Spouses Cabahug would be violative of the parties’ contract and amount to unjust enrichment. or when the introduction of structures or objects which. or by construction. 60077. however. As correctly pointed out by the Spouses Cabahug. when couched in clear and plain language. the CA’s ruling totally disregards the fourth paragraph of the Grant executed by Jesus Cabahug which expressly states as follows: That I hereby reserve the option to seek additional compensation for Easement Fee. should be applied according to their literal tenor. Where the right of way easement. just compensation is defined as the full and fair equivalent of the property taken from its owner by the expropriator. Gutierrez” case.R. promulgated on January 18. the rule is settled that a contract constitutes the law between the parties who are bound by its stipulations which. It has been ruled that the owner should be compensated for the monetary equivalent of the land if. by their nature. Neither can they rewrite contracts because they operate harshly or inequitably as to one of the parties. Measured not by the taker’s gain but the owner’s loss. . based on the Supreme Court Decision in G. the easement is intended to perpetually or indefinitely deprive the owner of his proprietary rights through the imposition of conditions that affect the ordinary use. as in this case. read into it any other intention that would contradict its plain import. relieve one of the parties from the terms which he voluntarily consented to. the CA ruled that the Spouses Cabahug’s attempt to collect further sums by way of additional easement fee and/or just compensation is violative of said contract and tantamount to unjust enrichment at the expense of NPC. free enjoyment and disposal of the property or through restrictions and limitations that are inconsistent with the exercise of the attributes of ownership. create or increase the probability of injury. death upon or destruction of life and property found on the land is necessary. Courts cannot supply material stipulations. Even by the basic rules in the interpretation of contracts. similarly involves transmission lines which not only endangers life and limb but restricts as well the owner's use of the land traversed thereby. 1991. or alter them for the benefit of one party and to the detriment of the other. From the foregoing reservation. the application of Gutierrez to this case is not improper as NPC represents it to be. read into the contract words it does not contain or. as here. or impose on him those which he did not. the ruling in Gutierrez remains doctrinal and should be applied. which jurisprudence is designated as “NPC vs. “Indeed. Even without the reservation made by Jesus Cabahug in the Grant of Right of NPC’s transmissions lines. it is evident that the Spouses Cabahug’s receipt of the easement fee did not bar them from seeking further compensation from NPC.” (2) CA erred in finding that the ruling in said case does not apply in the case at bench.

Upon completion of pre-trial. The identity of the accused. 182457. to wit: th . Appellant’s arraignment was deferred upon his own motion pending reinvestigation of his case. 2. thus: That on or about the 8 day of May. the trial court issued a Pre-Trial Order wherein the parties entered into the following stipulations: 1. 1999 and he entered a plea of not guilty. Held/Ratio Yes.G. the trial court ordered the archival of the case and issued an Alias Warrant of Arrest dated November 27. 1998. Province of La Union. CAR Criminal Investigation and Detection Office on August 15. Despite the issuance of a warrant of arrest on February 22. 2013 Facts In an Information dated October 25. After the dismissal of appellant’s appeal with the Department of Justice. he was finally arraigned on November 15. Subsequently. the applicable law is the previous definition of rape under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code. That during the time of [sic] the alleged act [was] committed. the victim was under the employ of the accused as his housekeeper. the abovenamed accused. 1996. 8353. RTC of Agoo. 1997 against appellant. with lewd design. 1995 filed before Branch 32. The incident of rape at issue happened prior to the enactment of Republic Act No. by means of force and intimidation and against the will and consent of the offended woman. willfully.R. accused-appellant was charged with Rape. No. La Union. Appellant remained at large until his arrest by the elements of the Philippine National Police (PNP) Criminal Investigation and Detection Group. it was returned unserved as appellant could no longer be found at his given address and he appeared to have gone into hiding purportedly in Cavite. Issues The issue is whether or not appellant’s guilt was indeed established by proof beyond reasonable doubt. The identity of the complainant. unlawfully and feloniously have carnal knowledge of the latter. more than two years after the original issuance of a warrant of arrest against him. in the Municipality of Agoo. did then and there. January 30. 1995. Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court. to her damage and prejudice. [and] 3.

According to the foregoing provision. in rape cases.” From a thorough evaluation of the records. 2. When the woman is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious. thus. – Rape is committed by having carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances: 1. or when the victim is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious. . it is in a better position than the appellate court to properly evaluate testimonial evidence. When and how rape is committed. the Court finds no fault on the part of the lower courts in relying on the trustworthiness of the victim’s testimony. the accused may be convicted solely on the basis of the testimony of the victim that is credible. the elements of rape are: (1) the offender had carnal knowledge of the victim. They agree with the assessment of the Court of Appeals that the following portion of ABC’s direct testimony was delivered in a clear and straightforward manner. or when the victim is under 12 years of age. When the woman is under twelve years of age or is demented.Art.17 In the case at bar. and consistent with human nature and the normal course of things. the Court has reiterated a long held principle that the Court gives great weight to the trial court’s assessment. and 3. 335. By using force or intimidation. The wisdom behind this rule is that the trial court had the full opportunity to observe directly the witnesses’ deportment and manner of testifying. Padigos. recently in People v. convincing. The Court has held that. On the matter of the credibility of witnesses. and (2) such act was accomplished through force or intimidation. They held that “the trial court’s finding of facts is even conclusive and binding if it is not shown to be tainted with arbitrariness or oversight of some fact or circumstance of weight and influence. the prosecution insists that the elements of carnal knowledge and force or intimidation are present.