This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2003-07-24 |
PER CURIAM |
||||
| As we have always held, the defense of alibi is always looked upon with suspicion and received with caution because not only is this kind of defense inherently weak and unreliable, it is also easy to fabricate.[48] In this case, we find unlikely the story of the appellant that he followed his live-in partner to Baguio to continue their exchange of words considering that he admitted that he woke up with a hang-over from drinking the night before. Also, we have repeatedly held that the defense of alibi cannot prevail over the positive testimonies of the prosecution witnesses that appellant was seen in Sison, Pangasinan in the afternoon of October 6, 1996. | |||||
|
2003-03-28 |
DAVIDE JR., C.J. |
||||
| Caraig cannot fault the prosecution witnesses' initial reluctance to testify. It is not uncommon for a witness to a crime to show some reluctance about getting involved in a criminal case. The natural reticence of most people to get involved is of judicial notice. It is understandable for a witness to fear for his safety,[38] especially in this case where PC men were involved in the commission of the crime. Such initial reticence does not affect the witnesses' credibility.[39] Besides, their delay in testifying was principally caused by the delay in the trial caused by, among other things, Caraig's success in avoiding the service of the warrant of arrest. It was only in 1991 when he was finally arrested. | |||||
|
2000-10-10 |
PUNO, J. |
||||
| True, Volante took awhile before he finally told anyone about the tragic fate of Flora Banawon. Such delay did not erode his credibility. We have held that delay in revealing the identity of the malefactors does not necessarily impair the credibility of a witness, especially where such witness gives sufficient explanation therefor.[29] Volante has satisfactorily explained that he feared for his and his family's safety. We take judicial notice of the natural reluctance of a witness to get involved in a criminal case and to provide information to the authorities.[30] More so when townmates are involved in the commission of crime. Further, we could not dismiss lightly the natural tendency of a witness of a gruesome killing, as in this case, to fear for his safety.[31] | |||||