This case has been cited 4 times or more.
|
2013-11-25 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| Moreover, Garcia failed to show any ill motive on the part of AAA which could have impelled her to falsely accuse him of committing such a reprehensible crime. Where there is no evidence to show any dubious reason or improper motive on why a prosecution witness would testify falsely against an accused or falsely implicate him in a heinous crime, the testimony is worthy of full faith and credit.[19] This failure on the part of Garcia all the more strengthens the credibility of AAA and the validity of her charge. Time and again, this Court has held that no young woman, especially one of tender age, would concoct a story of defloration, allow an examination of her private parts and thereafter testify about her ordeal in a public trial, if she had not been impelled to seek justice for the wrong done to her.[20] | |||||
|
2010-11-17 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| Sixth, Cabanilla failed to ascribe, much less prove, any ill motive on the part of AAA that could have compelled her to falsely accuse him of committing the crime. Where there is no evidence to show any dubious reason or improper motive why a prosecution witness would falsely testify against an accused or falsely implicate him in a heinous crime, the testimony is worthy of full faith and credit.[36] Such failure strengthens her credibility and the validity of the charge. | |||||
|
2006-04-05 |
|||||
| Stenographer Ma. Veronica Nequinto (Nequinto) also filed her affidavit dated September 9, 2004 claiming that as a court stenographer, she prepares, drafts or types orders, resolutions and decisions being issued by Judge Leonida; that in the course of her employment she came to know surety agent Reyes who frequently goes to their office and oftentimes enters the chambers of Judge Leonida; that she has observed the closeness of Judge Leonida and surety agent Reyes;[10] that attached to her affidavit is another affidavit allegedly executed by Reyes attesting to the latter's closeness to Judge Leonida.[11] Nequinto admitted in her affidavit that she was the one who prepared the release orders in Criminal Cases Nos. 03-1193-(SP) pertaining to accused Filipina Garcia,[12] 142290 (03) pertaining to accused Sherwin Averion,[13] and 14188-(SP) pertaining to accused Ildefonso Yap, who are all clients of Reyes.[14] However, she claims that she had no knowledge or participation in the preparation of release orders in I.S. Nos. 03-953 pertaining to Michael Silva[15] and 03-954 pertaining to Rommel Comawas,[16] and in Criminal Cases Nos. 6516-SP pertaining to Fernando Dorado[17] and 14379-(SP) pertaining to Herminigildo Hernandez.[18] She alleges that she placed the initials of Ramos on the certification pertaining to Criminal Case No. 14188-(SP) but that she did the same in good faith and only in compliance with the instructions of Judge Leonida. She asserts that her actions subject of the present administrative case were committed without malice, performed in the ordinary course of her employment as a court stenographer, and in compliance with the instructions of Judge Leonida, without favoring anyone except him and the court she is serving. | |||||
|
2004-02-13 |
DAVIDE JR., CJ. |
||||
| More importantly, Fausto's testimony on Janet's motive is not credible. During cross-examination, he admitted that he did not know how much money was in the container where Janet got the money and that his view was obstructed by Janet's back. Upon further questioning, he declared that Janet stole P40.[31] If he did not know the contents of the container and did not see the actual stealing, he could not have known the amount allegedly taken by Janet. This plainly shows that Fausto merely spun a doubtful web of a tale so as to ascribe to her ill-will. With this settled, we find no other evidence consisting of any dubious reason or improper motive why Janet would testify falsely against Fausto or falsely implicate him in a heinous crime. Janet's testimony, as we have already stated, is worthy of full faith and credit.[32] | |||||