Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 961 views

    Antonio Lejano Vs People of The Philippines G

    Uploaded by

    Didz
    The Supreme Court ruled that Jessica Alfaro was not a credible witness and her testimony alone was not sufficient to convict the accused. While Alfaro identified Webb as participating in the crime, her testimony was uncorroborated and inconsistent. As a former NBI informant, Alfaro had access to official records that called into question whether she actually witnessed the crime or fabricated her testimony. The Court found Alfaro's story unbelievable and ruled in favor of the accused.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Antonio Lejano Vs People of The Philippines G

    Uploaded by

    Didz
    961 views2 pages
    The Supreme Court ruled that Jessica Alfaro was not a credible witness and her testimony alone was not sufficient to convict the accused. While Alfaro identified Webb as participating in the crime, her testimony was uncorroborated and inconsistent. As a former NBI informant, Alfaro had access to official records that called into question whether she actually witnessed the crime or fabricated her testimony. The Court found Alfaro's story unbelievable and ruled in favor of the accused.

    Original Description:

    Case

    Original Title

    Antonio Lejano vs People of the Philippines G

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court ruled that Jessica Alfaro was not a credible witness and her testimony alone was not sufficient to convict the accused. While Alfaro identified Webb as participating in the crime, her testimony was uncorroborated and inconsistent. As a former NBI informant, Alfaro had access to official records that called into question whether she actually witnessed the crime or fabricated her testimony. The Court found Alfaro's story unbelievable and ruled in favor of the accused.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    961 views2 pages

    Antonio Lejano Vs People of The Philippines G

    Uploaded by

    Didz
    The Supreme Court ruled that Jessica Alfaro was not a credible witness and her testimony alone was not sufficient to convict the accused. While Alfaro identified Webb as participating in the crime, her testimony was uncorroborated and inconsistent. As a former NBI informant, Alfaro had access to official records that called into question whether she actually witnessed the crime or fabricated her testimony. The Court found Alfaro's story unbelievable and ruled in favor of the accused.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    Antonio Lejano vs People of the Philippines G.R. No.

    176389/People of the
    Philippines vs Webb, et. al. G.R. No. 176864
    Posted by bestre on Friday, January 21, 2011
    A case digest on Evidence decided by the Supreme Court December 14, 2010.
    FACTS:
    Jessica Alfaro was the state witness of the popular case of Vizconde massacre. She
    was an asset of the NBI prior to being a witness in the Vizconde massacre. Jessica
    Alfaro positively identified Hubert Jeffrey P. Webb along with the other accused as
    among those who participated in the commission of the crime charged against
    them. The trial court and the Court of Appeals gave credence to the testimony of
    Jessica Alfaro and convicted the accused. However, the accused questioned the
    credibility of the witness as having concocted said testimony using her skill as an
    NBI informer. According to Atty. Artemio Sacaguing, former head of the NBI AntiKidnapping, Hijacking, and Armed Robbery Task Force (AKHAR) Section, Jessica
    Alfaro mentioned a possible witness to the Vizconde massacre. When forced to bring
    out her witness, Jessica Alfaro could not provide one and said that she can assume
    to be the witness of the case. This testimony of Atty. Artemio Sacaguing was not
    rebutted by the prosecution.

    ISSUE:
    Whether or not Jessica Alfaro is a credible witness and that her testimony is
    sufficient to convict the accused of the crime committed.

    RULING:
    The Supreme Court ruled on the contrary. Jessica Alfaro's testimony was
    uncorroborated. There exist inconsistencies which the Highest tribunal could not
    ignore. According to the Supreme Court, "Rather, to be acceptable, the positive
    identification must meet at least two criteria: First, the positive identification of the
    offender must come from a credible witness. She is credible who can be trusted to
    tell the truth, usually based on past experiences with her. Her word has, to one who
    knows her, its weight in gold. And second, the witness story of what she personally
    saw must be believable, not inherently contrived. A witness who testifies about
    something she never saw runs into inconsistencies and makes bewildering claims.
    Ultimately, Alfaros quality as a witness and her inconsistent, if not inherently
    unbelievable, testimony cannot be the positive identification that jurisprudence
    acknowledges as sufficient to jettison a denial and an alibi."

    Jessica Alfaro's story was not supplanted with evidence and did not corroborate to
    testimonies of other prosecution witnesses. In toto, Jessica Alfaro's testimony was
    made by an experienced NBI asset who has access to official records and made her
    testimony based on the official records made available to her.

    at Permalink | 0 comments | Email this post | Links to this post


    Labels: digested case/case digest (remedial law)

    You might also like