Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

	GR No. 181475 2009-04-07	PEOPLE v. LARRY 'LAURO' DOMINGO CARPIO MORALES, J.
That one of the original complaining witnesses, Cabigao, later recanted, via an affidavit and his testimony in open court, does not necessarily cancel an earlier declaration. Like any other testimony, the same is subject to the test of credibility and should be received with caution.[8] For a testimony solemnly given in court should not be set aside lightly, least of all by a mere affidavit executed after the lapse of considerable time. In the case at bar, the Affidavit of Recantation was executed three years after the complaint was filed. It is thus not unreasonable to consider his retraction an afterthought to deny its probative value.[9]
	GR NO. 170087 2006-08-31	ANGELINA FRANCISCO v. NLRC YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
Granting arguendo, that the second affidavit validly repudiated the first one, courts do not generally look with favor on any retraction or recanted testimony, for it could have been secured by considerations other than to tell the truth and would make solemn trials a mockery and place the investigation of the truth at the mercy of unscrupulous witnesses.[32] A recantation does not necessarily cancel an earlier declaration, but like any other testimony the same is subject to the test of credibility and should be received with caution.[33]