Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

EVIDENCE: III. C. TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE, (PRESIDENTIAL SECRETS): STATE…

- - - - EXCEPTION: MAY BE EXAMINED IF:
        
        CIVIL CASE
        a. SPOUSES PARTIES AGAINST ANOTHER
        
        CRIMINAL CASE
        a. SPOUSES AGAINST ANOTHER; OR
        b. DIRECT ASCENDANTS & DESCENDANTS
        -i. OF OFFENDED SIDE
        
        WAIVER OF INCOMPETENCY
        a. BY CALLING UPON SPOUSE AS WITNESS
        Thus, the accused waives his or her privilege by calling the other spouse as a witness for him or her, thereby making the spouse subject to cross-examination
        
        FAILURE TO OBJECT
        a. UPON FIRST OFFER AS WITNESS
        It is also true that objection to the spouse's competency must be made when he or she is first offered as a witness, and that the incompetency may be waived by the failure of the accused to make timely objection to such admission, although knowing of such incompetency, and the testimony admitted, especially if the accused has assented to the admission, either expressly or impliedly
        
        UNDERMINED CONNUBIAL RELATIONSHIP (Rape of Wife's Daughter)
        a. ARSON (OWN HOME w/ WIFE IN IT)
        b. RAPE OF WIFE'S DAUGHTER
        WHEN AN OFFENSE DIRECTLY ATTACKS, OR DIRECTLY AND VITALLY IMPAIRS, THE CONJUGAL RELATION, IT COMES WITHIN THE EXCEPTION
        Thus, in the case of Ordoño, Court held that the rape committed by the husband of the witness-wife against their daughter was a crime committed by the husband against his wife. Because although the victim was not his wife, the exception still applies because the criminal act “positively undermined the connubial relationship.”
        The act of Maximo in setting fire to the house of his sister-in-law Susan Ramirez, knowing fully well that his wife was there, and in fact with the alleged intent of injuring the latter, is an act totally alien to the harmony and confidences of marital relation which the disqualification primarily seeks to protect.
        
        SEPARATE INTERESTS
        
        NOMINAL or FORMAL PARTY ONLY
        in those jurisdictions which allow one spouse to be subjected to examination by the adverse party as a hostile witness when both spouses are parties to the action, the interests of the spouses are separate or separable, or the spouse offered as a witness is merely a formal or nominal party
        
        RATIONALE: NO MORE DOMESTIC UNION & TRANQUILITY TO DISTURB
        • XPN: backed by sound reasons which outweigh those in support of the general rule.
        o Ex.: Where the marital and domestic relations are so strained that there is no more harmony to be preserved nor peace and tranquillity which may be disturbed
        ▪ the reason based upon such harmony and tranquillity fails, the identity of interests disappears, and the consequent danger of perjury based on that identity is non-existent
        ▪ the security and confidences of private life which the law aims at protecting will be nothing but ideals which, through their absence, merely leave a void in the unhappy home
        
        EXCEPTION: MAY BE EXAMINED IF:
        
        CIVIL CASE
        a. SPOUSES PARTIES AGAINST ANOTHER
        
        CRIMINAL CASE
        a. SPOUSES AGAINST ANOTHER; OR
        b. DIRECT ASCENDANTS & DESCENDANTS
        -i. OF OFFENDED SIDE
        
        WAIVER OF INCOMPETENCY
        a. BY CALLING ON SPOUSE AS WITNESS
        
        FAILURE TO OBJECT
        a. UPON FIRST OFFER AS WITNESS
        
        UNDERMINED CONNUBIAL RELATIONSHIP
        a. ARSON (OWN HOME w/ WIFE IN IT)
        b. RAPE OF WIFE'S DAUGHTER
        
        SEPARATE INTERESTS
        
        NOMINAL or FORMAL PARTY ONLY
    - - IF ELECRONIC, STILL
        CONFIDENTIAL IN CHARACTER
        Also cf. Rule 3, Section 3 of the Rules on Electronic Evidence
        The confidential character of a privileged communication is not lost solely on the ground that it is in the form of an electronic document.
        
        PRIVILEGED MATTERS NOT IN RULE 130
        
        SOURCE OF PUBLISHED NEWS
        
        VOTERS' VOTED CANDIDATE
        
        TRADE SECRETS
        
        INFO IN TAX CENSUS RETURNS
        
        BANK DEPOSITS
        There are, however, other privileged matters that are not mentioned by Rule 130. Among them are the following: (a) editors may not be compelled to disclose the source of published news; (b) voters may not be compelled to disclose for whom they voted; (c) trade secrets; (d) information contained in tax census returns; and (d) bank deposits. 30
        (Air Philippines Corp. v. Pennswell, Inc.)
      - a. MARITAL COMMUNICATIONS
        
        SPOUSE CANNOT BE EXAMINED
        
        DURING/AFTER MARRIAGE (TESTIMONY)
        
        WITHOUT CONSENT OF OTHER
        
        CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
        a. DURING MARRIAGE
        (a) The husband or the wife, during or after the marriage, cannot be examined without the consent of the other as to any communication received in confidence by one from the other during the marriage except in a civil case by one against the other, or in a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other or the latter’s direct descendants or ascendants.
        Rule 130, Section 24(a)]
        
        SCOPE:
        
        DQ'ed TO TESTIFY AGAINST EACH OTHER
        
        PRIVILEGE NOT TO TESTIFY
        a. EVEN AGAINST SUBPOENA
        
        EXCEPTION: MAY BE EXAMINED IF:
        
        CIVIL CASE
        a. SPOUSES PARTIES AGAINST ANOTHER
        
        CRIMINAL CASE
        a. SPOUSES AGAINST ANOTHER; OR
        b. DIRECT ASCENDANTS & DESCENDANTS
        -i. OF OFFENDED SIDE
        
        COURT ORDER
        a. FOR PUBLIC SAFETY
        b. PRESCRIBED BY LAW
        (People v. Carlos)
        
        3RD PARTY'S HANDS
        a. WITHOUT COLLUSION/VOLUNTARY DISCLOSURE
        -i. BY EITHER SPOUSE
        Where a privileged communication from one spouse to the other comes into the hands of a third party, without collusion or voluntary disclosure on the part of either of the spouses, the privilege is thereby extinguished and the communication, if otherwise competent, becomes admissible in evidence.
        
        CCC3
        
        DWCD
        
        b. ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE
        
        ATTY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE:
        
        THERE IS AN:
        a. ATTORNEY
        b. PERSON REASONABLY BELIEVED TO BE LICENSED TO ENGAGE IN PRACTICE OF LAW
        
        WITHOUT CLIENT'S CONSENT
        
        CLIENT'S COMMUNICATIONS (ANY)
        Any communication made by the client
        to him/her, or
        
        ACTING IN SUCH CAPACITY:
        a. COUNSEL'S ADVICE
        b. IN THE COURSE OF or WITH THE VIEW TO PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYMENT (before/during)
        His/her advice given thereon in the course of, or with a view to, professional employment
        Rule 130, Section 24(b)
        (b) An attorney or person reasonably believed by the client to be licensed to engage in the practice of law cannot, without the consent of the client, be examined as to any communication made by the client to him or her, or his or her advice given thereon in the course of, or with a view to, professional employment,
        
        SECRETARY/STENOGRAPHER/CLERK:
        
        WITHOUT CONSENT OF CLIENT/EMPLOYER
        
        CONCERNING ANY FACT:
        a. KNOWN BECAUSE OF...
        b. SUCH CAPACITY
        nor can an attorney’s secretary, stenographer, or clerk, or other persons assisting the attorney be examined without the consent of the client and his or her employer, concerning any fact the knowledge of which has been acquired in such capacity, except in the following cases:
        
        RATIONALE: NOT INTENDED FOR 3RD PERSONS, FOR ADVISING ON RIGHTS
        The very essence of the veil of secrecy which surrounds communications made between attorney and client is that such communications are not intended for the information of third persons or to be acted upon by them, but for the purpose of advising the client as to his rights.
        
        INCLUDES MATTERS RELEVANT TO LEGAL PROBLEM SOUGHT LEGAL ASSISTANCE FOR
        The content of any client communication to a lawyer lies within the privilege if it is relevant to the subject matter of the legal problem on which the client seeks legal assistance.
        
        ADMISSIBLE IF:
        
        FRAUD'S FURTHERANCE
        a. SERVICE SOUGHT TO COMMIT/PLAN CRIME/FRAUD
        b. CLIENT KNEW/SHOULD'VE KNOWN THIS
        (i) Furtherance of crime or fraud. If the services or advice of the lawyer were sought or obtained to enable or aid anyone to commit or plan to commit what the client knew or reasonably should have known to be a crime or fraud;
        
        DECEDENT COMMON CLIENT
        a. CLAIMANTS CLAIM THRU SUCH CLIENT
        (ii) Claimants through same deceased client. As to a communication relevant to an issue between parties who claim through the same deceased client, regardless of whether the claims are by testate or intestate or by inter vivos transaction;
        
        BREACH OF DUTY
        a. BY EITHER LAWYER/CLIENT
        (iii) Breach of duty by lawyer or client. As to a communication relevant to an issue of breach of duty by the lawyer to his or her client, or by the client to his or her lawyer;
        
        ATTESTED DOCUMENT
        a. LAWYER WAS ATTESTING WITNESS
        (iv) Document attested by the lawyer. As to a communication relevant to an issue concerning an attested document to which the lawyer is an attesting witness; or
        
        JOINT CLIENTS
        a. COMMON INTEREST
        b. COMMUNICATED TO
        c. COMMON LAWYER
        -i. RETAINED/CONSULTED
        (v) Joint clients. As to a communication relevant to a matter of common interest between two [(2)] or more clients if the communication was made by any of them to a lawyer retained or consulted in common, when offered in an action between any of the clients, unless they have expressly agreed otherwise.
        
        3RD-PARTY IS COMMUNICATED TO:
        a. FOR COMMUNICATION TO OTHERS
        b. AFTER COMMUNICATION
        (MAY BE PROVEN BY ATTORNEY)
        
        IDENTITY OF CLIENT
        Communications made by a client to his attorney for the purpose of being communicated to others are not privileged after they have been so communicated, and may be proved by the testimony of the attorney.
        a. Client identity is privileged where a strong probability exists that revealing the client's name would implicate that client in the very activity for which he sought the lawyer's advice.
        
        Where disclosure would open the client to civil liability; his identity is privileged. For instance, the peculiar facts and circumstances of Neugass v. Terminal Cab Corporation,37 prompted the New York Supreme Court to allow a lawyer's claim to the effect that he could not reveal the name of his client because this would expose the latter to civil litigation.
        
        Where the government's lawyers have no case against an attorney's client unless, by revealing the client's name, the said name would furnish the only link that would form the chain of testimony necessary to convict an individual of a crime, the client's name is privileged.
        
        where the nature of the attorney-client relationship has been previously disclosed and it is the identity which is intended to be confidential, the identity of the client has been held to be privileged, since such revelation would otherwise result in disclosure of the entire transaction
        
        IDENTITY OF CLIENT CAN BE DIVULGED AS A GENERAL RULE
        
        WHY IDENTITY OF CLIENT CAN BE DISCLOSED:
        
        COURT'S RIGHT TO KNOW IT'S REAL
        
        DEPENDENT ON EXTANT RELATIONSHIP
        
        GENERALLY PERTAINS TO SUBJECT MATTER OF RELATIONSHIP
        
        DUE PROCESS: TO KNOW WHO'S ADVERSARY
        First, the court has a right to know that the client whose privileged information is sought to be protected is flesh and blood.
        
        Second, the privilege begins to exist only after the attorney-client relationship has been established. The attorney-client privilege does not attach until there is a client.
        Third, the privilege generally pertains to the subject matter of the relationship.
        Finally, due process considerations require that the opposing party should, as a general rule, know his adversary. - "A party suing or sued is entitled to know who his opponent is." He cannot be obliged to grope in the dark against unknown forces
        
        IDENTITY OF CLIENT HAS
        INDEPENDENT SIGNIFICANCE
        a. IMPLICATE (STRONG PROBABILITY)
        b. OPENED TO CIVIL LIABILITY
        c. ONLY LINK TESTIMONY TO CONVICT
        d. PRE-ESTABLISHED A-C RELATIONSHIP
        
        FDBAJ-3I
        
        c. PHYSICIAN-PATIENT PRIVILEGE
        
        PRIVILEGED IF: (PACWC)
        
        PHSYICIAN/PSYCHOTHERAPIST
        a. or PERSON REASONABLY BELIEVED AUTHORIZED TO PRACTICE
        
        ACTING IN SUCH CPACITY
        A physician, psychotherapist or person reasonably believed by the patient to be authorized to practice medicine or psychotherapy
        
        CIVIL CASES
        In a civil case
        
        WITHOUT CONSENT
        Without the consent of the patient
        
        CC CONCERNING FOR
        a. DIAGNOSIS/TREATMENT OF
        -i. PHYSICAL/MENTAL/EMOTIONAL CONDITION OF PATIENT
        -ii. DRUGS/ALCOHOL ADDICTION
        Cannot be examined as to
        a. Any confidential communication made between the patient and his/her physician or psychotherapist
        b. For the purpose of diagnosis or treatment
        i. Of the patient’s physical, mental, or emotional condition
        ii. Including drug or alcohol addiction
        A physician, psychotherapist or person reasonably believed by the patient to be authorized to practice medicine or psychotherapy cannot in a civil case, without the consent of the patient, be examined as to any confidential communication made for the purpose of diagnosis or treatment of the patient’s physical, mental or emotional condition, including alcohol or drug addiction, between the patient and his or her physician or psychotherapist.
        Rule 130, Section 24(c); See Rule 28, Section 4
        
        EXCEPTION
        
        WAIVER
        a. REQUESTING/OBTAINING REPORT OF EXAMINATION SO ORDERED
        Rule 28, Section 4. Waiver of privilege. – By requesting and obtaining a report of the examination so ordered or by taking the deposition of the examiner, the party examined waives any privilege he or she may have in that action or any other involving the same controversy, regarding the testimony of every other person who has examined or may thereafter examine him or her in respect of the same mental or physical examination. (4a)
        i. BY TAKING DEPOSITION OF EXAMINER
        
        CRIMINAL CASE
        
        CONSULTATIONS NOT PROVEN
        a. CURATIVE, PREVENTIVE, PALLIATIVE
        The mere fact of making a communication, as well as the date of a consultation and the number of consultations, are therefore not privileged from disclosure, so long as the subject communicated is not stated
        
        SCOPE OF WAIVER
        
        ACTIONS WITH
        a. SAME CONTROVERSY
        
        ALL EXAMINERS PRIOR AND FURTURE
        a. SAME MENTAL/PHYSICAL EXAM
        (Rule 28, Sec. 4)
        
        MERE DATES OF CONSULTATIONS & NUMBER OF CONSULTATIONS
        The mere fact of making a communication, as well as the date of a consultation and the number of consultations, are therefore not privileged from disclosure, so long as the subject communicated is not stated o BURDEN OF PROOF: One who claims this privilege must prove the presence of the requisites
        
        PSYCHOTHERAPIST REQUIREMENTS
        a. Psychotherapist:
        
        LICENSED TO PRACTICE ENGAGED IN
        a. DIAGNOSIS/TREATMENT OF SAME CONDITION;
        OR
        
        LICENSED AS PSYCHOLOGIST
        a. BY GOVERNMENT
        b. WHILE SIMILARLY ENGAGED
        i. Person licensed to practice medicine engaged in the diagnosis or treatment of a mental or emotional condition;
        OR
        ii. A person licensed as a psychologist by the government while similarly engaged
        
        RATIONALE:
        "SAFELY & EFFICACIOUSLY TREAT"
        SAFE FULL & CONFIDENTIAL DISCLOSURE OF ALL FACTS WITHOUT APPREHENSION OF PUBLICATION
        RATIONALE: This rule on the physician-patient privilege is intended to facilitate and make safe full and confidential disclosure by the patient to the physician of all facts, circumstances and symptoms, untrammeled by apprehension of their subsequent and enforced disclosure and publication on the witness stand, to the end that the physician may form a correct opinion, and be enabled safely and efficaciously to treat his patient.
         Thus, only disclosures which would have been made to the physician to enable him "safely and efficaciously to treat his patient" are covered by the privilege.
        
        "ACTING IN SUCH CAPACITY" COVERS ATTENDING TO:
        
        CURE
        
        PREVENT
        
        PALLIATE
        The physician may be considered to be acting in his professional capacity when he attends to the patient for curative, preventive, or palliative treatment
        
        FAMILY OF PATIENT INCLUDED
        
        PARTICIPATED IN DIAGNOSIS
        
        UNDER DIRECTION OF PHYSICIAN
        This privilege also applies to persons, including members of the patient’s family, who have participated in the diagnosis or treatment of the patient under the direction of the physician or psychotherapist.
        
        SCOPE OF PRIVILEGE:
        TENOR OF COMMUNICATION
        Only the tenor of the communication is privileged.
        
        1 more item...
        
        d. PRIEST/MINISTER - PENITENT PRIVILEGE
        
        PENTIENT PRIVILEGE
        
        MINISTER/PRIEST or PERSON REASONABLY BELIEVED TO BE SO
        A minister or priest or person reasonably believed to be so
        
        WITHOUT CONSENT OF AFFECTED PERSON
        Without the consent of the affected person
        
        COMMUNICATION IS CONFIDENTIAL
        a. CONFESSION
        b. ADVICE
        
        IN PROFESSIONAL CHARACTER
        In his/her professional character
        
        IN THE COURSE OF DISCIPLINE:
        a. ENJOINED BY CHURCH OF PRIEST
        In the course of discipline enjoined by the church to which the minister or priest belongs
        
        A minister, priest or person reasonably believed to be so cannot, without the consent of the affected person, be examined as to any communication or confession made to or any advice given by him or her, in his or her professional character, in the course of discipline enjoined by the church to which the minister or priest belongs.
        Rule 130, Section 24(d)
        
        (PUBLIC OFFICER)
        
        PUBLIC OFFICER
        
        PUBLIC OFFICER
        A public officer
        
        DURING TENURE
        During or after his/her tenure
        
        CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION
        Cannot be examined as to communications made to him/her in official confidence
        
        PUBLIC INTEREST WOULD SUFFER
        When the court finds that the public interest would suffer by the disclosure
        
        A public officer cannot be examined during or after his or her tenure as to communications made to him or her in official confidence, when the court finds that the public interest would suffer by the disclosure
        Rule 130, Section 24(e)]
        
        (PRESIDENTIAL COMMUNICATIONS)
        e. STATE SECRETS
        
        3 more items...
        
        P
        D
        C
        P
        
        M
        W
        C
        I
        I
        
        BURDEN OF PROOF ON CLAIMANT OF PRIVILEGE
        
        INAPPLICABLE IN CRIMINAL CASES
        
        FAMILY OF PATIENT INCLUDED
        a. PARTICPATED IN DIAGNOSIS/TREATMENT
        b. UNDER DIRECTION OF PHYSICIAN
        
        DQ v. PRIVILEGE
        
        DQ TO TESTIFY IN EACH OTHER'S BEHALF = RELATIONSHIP
        
        PRIVILEGE NOT TO TESTIFY AGAINST EACH OTHER = REPUGNANCE OF COMPELLING OTHER TO BE CONDEMNED BY INTIMATE LIFE PARTNER
        Rule 130, Sec. 20 (now Sec. 23) deals with two different matters which rest on different grounds of policy:
        
        disqualification of husband and wife to testify in each other's behalf
        
        privilege not to testify against each other Explanation for disqualification: The fundamental theory of common law is that relationship of the spouses, not their pecuniary interest, is the basis of the disqualification
        
        Explanation for privilege: the natural repugnance in every fair-minded person to compelling a wife or husband to be the means of the other's condemnation and to subjecting the culprit to the humiliation of being condemned by the words of his intimate life partner
        
        TESTIMONY WOULD PIT THEM AGAINST EACH OTHER
        FRAUDULENT CONSPIRACY INVOLVES INTERESTS OF HUSBAND AND WIFE
        SC ruled that a wife, who is a co-defendant in a suit charging fraud against the spouses, may NOT be examined as a hostile witness by the adverse party without infringing on her marital privilege. Since the complaint charges fraudulent conspiracy, the interests of husband and wife in this case are necessarily interrelated. Whether her testimony will turn out to be adverse or beneficial to her own interest, the inevitable result would be to pit her against her husband.
      - STILL PROTECTED EVEN IF FOUND IN 3RD PARTY'S HANDS
        IF REASONABLE PRECAUTION WAS TAKEN
        The communication shall remain privileged, even in the hands of a third person who may have obtained the information, provided that the original parties to the communication took reasonable precaution to protect its confidentiality. (24a)
        
        4 FUNDAMENTAL CONDITIONS:
        These requisites conform with the four (4) fundamental conditions necessary for the establishment of a privilege against the disclosure of certain communications.
        o CONDITIONS: 
        
        CONFIDENTIAL
        a. ESSENTIAL TO MAINTAIN RELATION
        
        COMMUNITY OUGHTS MUST BE FOSTERED
        
        GREATER INJURY THAN BENEFIT
        The communications must originate in a confidence that they will not be disclosed
        
        This element of confidentiality must be essential to the full and satisfactory maintenance of the relation between the parties.
        The relation must be one which in the opinion of the community ought to be sedulously fostered.
        The injury that would inure to the relation by the disclosure of the communications must be greater than the benefit thereby gained for the correct disposal of litigation
        
        NOT PRIVILEGED IF
        IN 3RD PARTY'S HANDS
        a. WITHOUT COLLUSION/VOLUNTARY DISCLOSURE
        -i. BY EITHER PARTY
  - - - MERE INTELLECTUAL WEAKNESS, IMMATURITY NO LONGER VALID OBJECTION
        A mental retardate or a feebleminded person is not, per se, disqualified from being a witness, her mental condition not being a vitiation of her credibility. It is now universally accepted that intellectual weakness, no matter what form it assumes, is not a valid objection to the competency of a witness so long as the latter can still give a fairly intelligent and reasonable narrative of the matter testified to o Thus, a mental retardate can be a witness, depending on their ability or elate what they know. If the testimony is coherent, then it is admissible.
- - - - COMPLAINING PARTY MUST SHOWN INJURY OF METHOD OF EXAMINATION ADOPTED
        ▪ When a deaf-mute testifies in court, "the manner in which the examination of a deaf-mute should be conducted is a matter to be regulated and controlled by the trial court in its discretion, and the method adopted will not be reviewed by the appellate court in the absence of a showing that the complaining party was in some way injured by reason of the particular method adopted."
        (People v. Aleman y Longhas)
      - DEAF-MUTES MAY COMMUNICATE SIGHT THROUGH WRITING
        ▪ A deaf-mute may not be able to hear and speak but his/her other senses, such as his/her sense of sight, remain functional and allow him/her to make observations about his/her environment and experiences.
        ▪ The inability to hear and speak may prevent a deaf-mute from communicating orally with others but he/she may still communicate with others in writing or through signs and symbols and, as in this case, sketches. Thus, a deaf-mute is competent to be a witness so long as he/she has the faculty to make observations and he/she can make those observations known to others.
      - CHILDREN ARE PRESUMED QUALIFIED TO BE A WITNESS
        ABSENT OBJECTION, THEY ARE QUALIFIED
        (BURDEN OF PROOF ON PARTY CHALLENGING)
        (Rule on Examination of a Child Witness)
        The Court affirmed the lower courts. Under the Rule on Examination of a Child Witness, every child is now presumed qualified to be a witness. To rebut this presumption, the burden of proof lies on the party challenging the child’s competency. In this case, Alvin never objected to Carl’s competency as a witness during trial nor did he attempt to adduce evidence to challenge his competency. All that the Defense did was to attempt to discredit the testimony of Carl, but not for once did the Defense challenge his capacity to distinguish right from wrong, or to perceive, or to communicate his perception to the trial court.
        
        SUBSTANTIAL DOUBT ON ABILITY TO
        
        PERCEIVE, REMEMBER, COMMUNICATE, DISTINGUISH TRUTH FROM FALSEHOOD
        
        APPRECIATE DUTY TO TELL THE TRUTH
        
        Only when substantial doubt exists regarding the ability of the child to perceive ,remember, communicate, distinguish truth from falsehood, or appreciate the duty to tell the truth in court will the court, motu proprio or on motion of a party, conduct a competency examination of a child.
        THEN, COMPETENCY EXAMINATION,
        a. UPON MOTION OR MOTU PROPRIO
        
        INNOCENT CHILD WHOSE CHASTITY WAS ABUSED DESERVES FULL CREDIT
        The revelation of an innocent child whose chastity has been abused deserves full credit, as her willingness to undergo the trouble and the humiliation of a public trial is an eloquent testament to the truth of her complaint.
        (People vs Santos)
    - - TOTALITY OF CIRCUMSTANCES, IDENTIFY:
        
        OPPORUNITY TO VIEW CRIMINAL
        
        DEGREE OF ATTENTION AT THE TIME
        
        ACCURACY OF ANY PRIOR DESCRIPTION
        
        CERTAINTY DEMONSTRATED UPON ID
        
        LENGTH OF TIME BETWEEN CRIME & ID
        
        SUGGESITVENESS OF ID PROCEDURE
        
        the witness' opportunity to view the criminal at the time of the crime;
        
        the witness' degree of attention at that time;
        
        the accuracy of any prior description given by the witness;
        
        the level of certainty demonstrated by the witness at the identification;
        
        the length of time between the crime and the identification; and,
        
        the suggestiveness of the identification procedure.
        
        TRIAL COURT'S FINDING OF CREDIBILITY OF WITNESS IS USUALLY NOT DISTURBED
        a. UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY OF OBSERVING WITNESS' MANNER OF TESTIFYING
        • Topic 1: Credibility of witnesses is considered as a finding of fact of the lower court → usually not disturbed o RULE: The reviewing court on appeal ordinarily gives deference to the assessments and conclusion of the trial court provided it is supported by the evidence on record ▪ Findings of facts by the trial court are usually not disturbed on appeal on the proposition that the lower court had the unique opportunity of having observed the elusive and incommunicable evidence of the witnesses' deportment on the stand while testifying
        
        CREDIBLE WITNESS + CREDIBLE TESTIMONY
        For testimonial evidence to be believed, it must not only proceed from the mouth of a credible witness but must also be credible in itself such that common experience and observation of mankind lead to the inference of its probability under the circumstances.
        In criminal prosecution, the court is always guided by evidence that is tangible, verifiable and in harmony with the usual course of human experience and not by mere conjecture or speculation. Testimonies that do not adhere to this standard are necessarily accorded little weight or credence
        
        HONEST INCONSISTENCIES IN TESTIMONY STRENGTHEN THE CREDIBILITY OF A WITNESS
        A truth-telling witness is not always expected to give an error-free testimony, considering the lapse of time and treachery of human memory. 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
        (People v. Alcantara)
        
        A-COLDS
        TOTALITY OF CIRC; ID
        
        ACCURACY OF ANY PRIOR DESCRIPTION
        
        CERTAINTY DEMONSTRATED UPON ID
        
        OPPORUNITY TO VIEW CRIMINAL
        
        LENGTH OF TIME BETWEEN CRIME & ID
        
        DEGREE OF ATTENTION AT THE TIME
        
        SUGGESITVENESS OF ID PROCEDURE