This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2009-10-26 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| Thus, as against the positive and categorical testimonies of Palo and Caraig, appellant's denials cannot prevail.[15] Moreover, there is no reason to overturn the trial and appellate courts' findings on the credibility of the prosecution witnesses as there is no showing that any of them had ill motives against appellant or her co-accused and especially since it appears they were motivated solely by the desire to bring appellant and her co-accused to justice for the crimes they have committed.[16] | |||||
|
2004-02-05 |
TINGA, J. |
||||
| First, the testimonies of the complaining witnesses satisfactorily prove that appellant promised them employment and assured them placement overseas. Complainants were firm and categorical. All of them positively identified appellant as the person who recruited them for employment abroad. Their testimonies dovetail each other on material points. There is no adequate showing that any of them was impelled by any ill motive to testify against appellant. Their testimonies were straightforward, credible and convincing. As against the positive and categorical testimonies of the three complainants, appellant's mere denials cannot prevail.[63] | |||||