This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2010-07-05 |
VILLARAMA, JR., J. |
||||
| Appellant simply raises the defense of denial, which is inherently weak and cannot prevail over the positive identification[41] made by Melody that he was the one (1) who hacked her, her mother and her sisters. Moreover, an affirmative testimony is far stronger than a negative testimony especially when it comes from the mouth of a credible witness,[42] as in this case, the child of the assailant who survived his murderous rampage. | |||||