Decision 10 G.R. No. 235662 (15) and BBB, fourteen (14). As for the element of relationship, the prosecution and the defense stipulated that AAA and BB.B were appellant's legitimate children. Regarding the elements of carnal knowledge and force or intimidation, or exertion of moral ascendancy, the trial court aptly summarized AAA's testimony on how she was sexually ravished by appellant on March 14, 2009, thus: There is adequate and satisfactory evidence that on March 14, 2009, at around 1:00 o'clock in the afternoon, AAA was resting on the sofa after washing clothes, when her father ordered her to go to the room. While inside the room, accused lied (sic) down on the bed beside her and undressed her. Accused then took off his shorts and inserted his penis into her vagina. AAA felt pain and blood came out of her private part but she could not do anything other than cry. After the sexual act, accused told AAA to put on her dress. (TSN, February 26, 2014, pp. 5-10)2 7 AAA narrated in detail that appellant ordered her to go inside a room, lay on the bed beside her, and inserted his penis in her vagina. Although appellant did not threaten or force AAA to engage in sexual congress with him, it is settled that where the rape is committed by a close kin, such as the victim's father, stepfather, uncle, or the common-law spouse of her mother, it is not necessary that actual force or intimidation be employed; moral influence or ascendancy takes the place of violence or intimidation. 28 Too, the trial court summed up BBB's vivid testimony on how appellant had carnal knowledge of her against her will sometime in 2009 and on so many more occasions she already lost count of, thus: There is likewise sufficient evidence that sometime in the year 2009, herein accused would transfer from his room to the room where BBB was sleeping. Initially, said accused would lie down beside BBB and would touch her private parts. Eventually, he will have carnal knowledge of her, even at (sic) the presence of his other daughter AAA and son CCC. BBB cannot do anything out of fear of his (sic) father-accused. (TSN, March 26, 2014, (2p. 9-10) 29 The trial court keenly noted that BBB was intenseiy crying while she narrated the sordid details of her sexual devastation in the hands of her own father. She described how appellant shamelessly satiated his lust, sexually ravishing her even in the presence of his other children, AAA and CCC. BBB also recalled that she could not do anything whenever appellant had his way with her because she was so scared of him. To repeat, although there is no showing of force, threat or intimidation, appellant's moral ascendancy over BBB took the place of violence or intimidation. 27 CA rollo, p. 51. People v. Padua, 661 Phil. 366,370 (2011). 29 CA rollo, p. 52. 28 ~