Main Issue: chanrob1es virtual 1aw library Sufficiency of Prosecution Evidence Appellant contends that the testimonies of Mirasol, Loida and Teresa Nana were incredible and full of lies. He insists that there was no corn ready to be harvested in his farm in January, 1998, because the only agricultural crops he had planted at the time were palay and tobacco. He then presented several defense witnesses to corroborate this claim. Appellant’s assertions cannot prevail over the categorical testimonies of the two rape victims, Mirasol Nana and her sister Teresa. Assuming arguendo that he had planted only palay and tobacco in his farm all the time, the absence of corn is not decisive. The gravamen of the case, it should be pointed out, is the positive identification of appellant as the ravisher of the two young sisters. We also reject appellant’s contention that Mirasol and Teresa, upon the instigation of their father and their uncle, had conspired to file the rape charges, because they wanted to extort money from him. It is inconceivable that a young rural lass will cry rape, allow an examination of her private parts, undergo the trouble and the humiliation of a public and open trial, and put herself and her family under public scrutiny, if she were not motivated to bring to justice the person who had dishonored and defiled her. 17 In the present case, the testimonies of the two rape victims — young barrio girls and full-blood sisters at that — deserve full credence .They would not have invented such a lurid tale if it were not really true. They knew that their actions would — as they already did — cause them needless humiliation and suffering and destroy the good relationship existing between their family and that of Appellant. Verily, the trial court gave credence to the victims’ testimony. We find no reason to reverse this finding. Well-settled is the rule that factual findings of the trial court deserve utmost respect and will not be disturbed on appeal, unless it has overlooked certain facts or circumstances of substance and value, which if considered would change the result of the case. 18 The trial court, unlike reviewing tribunals, had a firsthand opportunity to observe the demeanor and the conduct of the witnesses and could thus better assess their capacity to speak the truth. 19 chanrob1es virtua1 1aw 1ibrary Furthermore, deemed an admission of guilt was the disclosure of appellant to Brgy. Captains Cerdeña 20 and Racadio 21 that he had a problem with two children — who turned out to be the Nana sisters with whom he wanted to settle the matter. 22 His own acts dispel from our minds any scintilla of doubt that he indeed raped the Nana sisters. Appellant’s Advanced Age Asserting that he was already 63 years old when the rape incidents occurred, appellant suggests