which she testified is not true.23 Youth and immaturity are generally badges of truth and sincerity.24 Considering that AAA was only four (4) years old when she was raped and was only eleven (11) years old when she took the witness stand, she could not have invented a horrible story. Besides, the testimony of AAA is corroborated by the findings of the physician who examined her indicating "swelling and tenderness of the labia majora" "swelling, redness and tenderness of the labia minora," "whitish discharge from the vaginal os," "multiple erosions at the perineum and labia minora," "broken hymen at the 4 & 5 o'clock positions."25 When asked about her findings, the physician concluded "that there was a penetration of the area causing all these erosions, all these wounds [and] lacerations and there was a penetration of something that was hard breaking into the hymen."26 Thus, the RTC and the CA are correct in concluding that both the victim's positive testimony and the findings of the medico-legal officer complemented each other in the conclusion that accused-appellant had sexual intercourse with the victim. The Court is neither persuaded by accused-appellant's argument that AAA's unexplained delay of five (5) days in reporting the rape to her mother greatly affects her credibility. This Court has repeatedly held that delay in reporting rape incidents, in the face of threats of physical violence, cannot be taken against the victim.27 AAA's delay in reporting the incidents to her mother or the proper authorities is insignificant and does not affect the veracity of her charges. It should be remembered that accusedappellant threatened to kill her if she told anyone of the incident. This Court has explained why a rape victim's deferral in reporting the crime does not equate to falsification of the accusation, to wit: The failure of complainant to disclose her defilement without loss of time to persons close to her or to report the matter to the authorities does not perforce warrant the conclusion that she was not sexually molested and that her charges against the accused are all baseless, untrue and fabricated. Delay in prosecuting the offense is not an indication of a fabricated charge. Many victims of rape never complain or file criminal charges against the rapists. They prefer to bear the ignominy and pain rather than reveal their shame to the world or risk the offenders' making good their threats to kill or hurt their victims.28 chanRoblesvirtual Lawlib rary cralawre d Further, it has been written that a rape victim's actions are oftentimes overwhelmed by fear rather than by reason.29 It is this fear, springing from the initial rape, that the perpetrator hopes to build a climate of extreme psychological terror, which would, he hopes, numb his victim into silence and submissiveness.30 Moreover, delay in reporting an incident of rape is not an indication of a fabricated charge and does not necessarily cast doubt on the credibility of the complainant.31 It is likewise settled in jurisprudence that human reactions vary and are unpredictable when facing a shocking and horrifying experience such as sexual assault, thus, not all rape victims can be expected to act conformably to the usual expectations of everyone.32 In the instant case, AAA, being only four (4) years old at the time that she was violated and threatened with death if she reports the incident, would naturally be cowed into silence because of fear for her life. Accused-appellant also contends that AAA's credibility is again put into question because she failed to clearly narrate her alleged rape during her testimony in court and