Decision 11 G.R. No. 235662 Appellant was only charged with a single count of rape in each of the twin cases below. This is because both AAA and BBB could no longer recall the dates and the details of the so many rape incidents they experienced in the hands of their own father. AAA could only vividly recall the rape incident on March 14, 2009, and BBB, only the rape incident which happened sometime in 2009. Even then, the testimonies of AAA and BBB pertaining to the twin rape incidents are clear, categorical, and consistently convincing. They are credible witnesses. These two (2) minor girls would not have publicly accused their father of the despicable act of incestuous rape if it were not true. On this score, People v. Marmot3° enunciated: More importantly, it is highly inconceivable for a daughter like AAA to impute against her own father a crime as serious and despicable as incest rape, unless the imputation was the plain truth. In fact, it takes a certain amount of psychological depravity for a young woman to concoct a story that would put her own father to jail for the rest of his remaining life and drag the rest of the family including herself to a lifetime of shame. Filipino children have great respect and reverence for their elders. For this reason, great weight is given to an accusation a child directs against a close relative, especially the father. A rape victim's testimony against her father goes .against the grain of Filipino culture as it yields unspeakable trauma and social stigma on the child and the entire family. The absence of medical certificates indicating the extent of the injury sustained by AAA and BBB as a result of their father's wicked bestiality does not diminish their worth as witnesses. A medical certificate is merely corroborative and not indispensable to the prosecution of rape cases. 31 Where the testimony of a rape victim is credible, natural, convincing and otherwise consistent with human nature, it is sufficient to support a verdict of conviction. 32 Appellant's defense of denial is the weakest of all defenses. It easily crumbles in the face of complainant's positive identification of the accused as the perpetrator of the crime. 33 All told, the Court of Appeals correctly convicted appellant of two (2) counts of qualified rape. Under Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code, the imposable penalty is death where the victim is below eighteen ( 18) years of age and the violator is the victim's own biological father, thus: Article 266-B. Penalty. - xx x XXX 30 800 Phil. 813,827 (2016). People v. Tuboro, 792 Phil. 580, 592 (2016). 32 See People v. Pascual, 428 Phil. 1038, 1046 (2002). 33 People v. Glino, 564 Phil. 396, 419-420 (2007). 31 1