This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2007-01-26 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| A witness testifying about the same nerve-wracking incident can hardly be expected to be correct in every detail and consistent with other witnesses in every respect, considering the inevitability of differences in perception, recollection, viewpoint, or impressions, as well as in their physical, mental, emotional, and psychological states at the time of the reception and recall of such impressions.[22] Thus, we have followed the rule in accord with human nature and experience that honest inconsistencies on minor and trivial matters serve to strengthen, rather than destroy the credibility of a witness, especially of witnesses to crimes shocking to conscience and numbing to senses.[23] | |||||