house where there are other occupants or even in places which to many might appear unlikely and high-risk venues for its commission. 14 Also, the failure of Jessica to cry out for help during the incidents in question, inspite of the physical proximity of her relatives, or to report to them what happened, did not at all make her testimony improbable inasmuch as it is not uncommon for a young girl of tender age to be easily intimidated into silence and conceal for sometime the violation of her honor, even by the mildest threat to her life. 15 Besides, Girlie, Jessica’s mother, had a rift with her siblings who lived in the same house and forbade Jessica to socialize with them. It was likewise highly probable that the strained relations between Jessica’s mother, uncle and aunt prevented Jessica from confiding it them. In a number of cases, this Court has likewise ruled that delay, even of three years, in reporting the crime does not necessarily detract from the witness’ credibility as long as it is satisfactorily explained. 16 Jessica was threatened by appellant that he would kill her mother and relatives if she reported the rape. A young girl like Jessica can easily be mesmerized by fear of bodily harm and, unlike a mature woman, cannot be expected to have the courage or confidence to immediately report a sexual assault on her, specially when a death threat hangs over her head. 17 In view of the credible testimony of Jessica, appellant’s defenses of denial and alibi deserve no consideration. These weak defenses cannot stand against the positive identification and categorical testimony of a rape victim. 18 The court a quo convicted appellant of one count of frustrated rape in Criminal Case No. 97-151987, the dispositive portion of which read: chanrob1es vi rtua l 1aw lib ra ry x x x. In Criminal Case No. 97-159187, the accused is convicted of frustrated rape under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code and sentenced to suffer the indeterminate penalty of 8 years of prision mayor as minimum, and to pay the costs. x x x. SO ORDERED. 19 However, we agree with the observation of the Solicitor General that the court a quo was referring to Criminal Case No. 97-159185, and not Criminal Case No. 97-159187, in convicting appellant of frustrated rape: chanrob1e s virtual 1aw l ibra ry The trial court convicted appellant of simple rape in Criminal Case No. 97-159185. However, the factual basis thereof in the body of the decision reads: chanrob 1es vi rtua l 1aw lib rary With regard to Criminal Case No. 97-159185, the Court has gathered that sometime in April, 1994, at around 11:00 p.m., Jessica and her two siblings together with the accused were in their house, while their mother, Girlie, was in Navotas buying fish. Jessica was watching TV in a lying position beside her two sleeping siblings, when the accused held Jessica’s right hand and jabbed her palm with his finger. Then he told her to remove her short pants, panty and T-shirt, after which the accused removed his