within the third civil degree, or the common-law-spouse of the parent of the victim xxx For a conviction of qualified rape, the prosecution must allege and prove the ordinary elements of (1) sexual congress, (2) with a woman, (3) by force and without consent; and in order to warrant the imposition of the death penalty, the additional elements that (4) the victim is under eighteen years of age at the time of the rape, and (5) the offender is a parent (whether legitimate, illegitimate or adopted) of the victim.[13] In this case, We do not find any reason to depart from the findings of the courts below that the prosecution was able to establish all the elements of the crime beyond reasonable doubt. As borne by the records, the fourth and fifth elements of minority and relationship were sufficiently proven by AAA's birth certificate and EEEs own admission during the trial.[14] As for the first three elements, the Court agrees that the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses deserve full faith and credence. The trial court did not hesitate to throw out the testimonies of EEE's relatives in view of the more credible witnesses for the prosecution. Certainly, the trial judge is in the best position to assess whether the witness was telling the truth as he had the direct and singular opportunity to observe the facial expression, gesture and tone of voice of the complaining witnesses while testifying.[15] Also, the CA rightly opined that AAA withstood the cross-examination and was unequivocal on how the rape was committed by her stepfather. Time and again, the Court has held that in resolving rape cases, primordial consideration is given to the credibility of the victim's testimony.[16] A finding that the accused is guilty of rape may be based solely on the victim's testimony if such testimony meets the test of credibility.[17] This is because rape is a crime that is almost always committed in isolation, usually leaving only the victim to testify on the commission of the crime.[18] Moreover, no woman, much less a child of such tender age, would willingly submit herself to the rigors, the humiliation and the stigma attendant upon the prosecution of rape, if she were not motivated by an earnest desire to put the culprit behind bars.[19] With regard to EEE's defenses of denial and alibi, the same deserve scant consideration. Treated as the most common defenses in rape cases, alibi and denial are inherently weak and easily fabricated; thus, they are generally rejected.[20] As a rule, mere denial cannot prevail over the positive testimony of an eyewitness to the crime.[21] Here, AAA's testimony, which was bolstered by BBB, is logical, consistent, and convincing; hence, EEE may be convicted solely on the basis thereof. Notably, AAA even broke down in tears in more than one instance during the trial.[22] The display of such emotion, which indicates the pain that she had felt in recalling her traumatic experience, is evidence of the truth of the rape charges and serves to