This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2006-07-21 |
GARCIA, J. |
||||
| For sure, the defense of alibi, especially when corroborated , as here, mainly by relatives and friends of the accused, ought to be taken with extreme suspicion, precisely because alibi is easy to fabricate and concoct.[10] It cannot prevail over clear, direct and positive identification of the accused. The settled rule is that alibi is the weakest of all defenses, for it is easy to contrive and difficult to disprove.[11] | |||||
|
2003-06-23 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| The fact that, as appellant says, he did not take flight from the scene of the crime when he had the means and the opportunity to do so, does not indicate innocence per se. Different people react differently to a given type of situation, and there is no standard form of behavioral response when one is confronted with a strange, startling or frightful experience.[54] We said in People v. Ocampo[55] that flight from the scene of the crime shows guilt, but it is equally true that culprits have become bolder by returning to the scene of the crime to feign innocence. | |||||