Q: It could have happen[ed] more than ten years before the examination? A: It could be possible, sir.[27](emphasis supplied) Thus, based on the medico-legal report, AAA suffered from repeated sexual intercourse and these incidents could have happened more than ten years before the examination on February 27, 2004. Consequently, the medical findings corroborate the conclusion that AAA was raped sometime in March 1993. To summarize, there are several circumstantial evidence that establish that YYY raped his own daughter AAA: 1. YYY hit her on the head to make her lose consciousness; 2. While unconscious, YYY raped her; thus, AAA's vagina was in pain when she woke up; 3. YYY threatened AAA not to report the incident; otherwise, he would kill her and her family; 4. When she woke up, AAA positively identified YYY as the perpetrator because of his height and voice; and 5. The medico-legal report corroborate that AAA had healed hymenal lacerations at the 4 & 7 o'clock positions and her vagina admits a tip of a finger easily, which indicate repeated sexual intercourse. It was also established that AAA could have been raped more than ten (10) years before the examination, which covers the March 1993 incident. The combination of all these pieces of circumstantial evidence prove beyond reasonable doubt the crime of qualified rape. The Court is convinced that the testimony of AAA, who was merely fifteen (15) years old at the time of the rape incident, should be given full force and credence. Despite the taxing cross-examination, AAA's testimony regarding the incident of rape in March 1993 was consistent and definite. It is a well-settled rule that the testimonies of rape victims who are young and of tender age are credible. The revelation of an innocent child whose chastity was abused deserves full credence.[28] Delay in reporting the rape incident does not affect AAA 's credibility The Court finds that the delay in reporting the incident does not weaken AAA's testimony since YYY threatened to kill her, and because YYY had moral ascendancy over AAA as he was her father. Delay in revealing the commission of a crime such as rape does not necessarily render such charge unworthy of belief. [29] This is because the victim may choose to keep quiet rather than expose her defilement to the harsh glare of public scrutiny.[30] Only when the delay is unreasonable or unexplained may it work to discredit the complainant. [31] A rape victim -especially one of tender age - would not normally concoct a story of defloration, allow an examination of her private parts and thereafter permit herself to be subjected to a public trial, if she is not motivated solely by the desire to have the culprit apprehended and punished. [32] Thus, when a woman - more so if she is a minor - say s that she has been raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to show that rape was committed.[33] And as long as the testimony meets the test of credibility, the accused may be convicted on that basis alone. [34] In this case, even though the rape incident in March 1993 was only reported in 2004, the Court gives full credence to the testimony of AAA. As stated earlier, it is understandable that AAA was frightened in reporting the incident due to the death threats of her father. It was only when her sister confronted her that AAA had the courage to speak up regarding the abuses she suffered at the hands of her father. More importantly, as AAA's testimony was credible and consistent in its material parts, then it must stand and prevail. Defenses of denial and alibi are weak On the other hand, YYY merely presented the defense of denial and alibi. He testified that during the entire month of March 1993, he was living in XXX, Cagayan and never left the place. However, his testimony was not substantiated by any other credible evidence. Mere denial, without any strong evidence to support it, can scarcely overcome the positive declaration by the child-victim of the identity of the appellant and his involvement in the crime attributed to