This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2005-06-08 |
CALLEJO, SR., J. |
||||
| Q Let us go to Item No. 1 which I read: "Stabbed wound 6 cms. in length and 13 cms. in depth penetrating towards the heart over the 5th intercostal space, with associated fracture of the rib bone on the right middle back." Will you explain in layman's term, what this means? A In layman's term, the stabbed wound was located at the back of the victim at the level of the fifth intercostal space of the right middle back, penetrating towards the heart. Q What do you mean here with associated fracture of the rib bone? A There is a broken rib bone. Q What could have caused this stab wound? A That stab wound may be (sic) caused by a sharp and pointed instrument, Sir. Q So that it could be caused by the same instrument you saw at the place of the incident? A Maybe, Sir. Q Showing to you a bladed instrument with wooden handle still stained with blood, to your recollection, is this the bladed weapon which you saw at the scene of the incident? A More or less the same, Sir.[39] The Court is not impervious of the fact that while Perlita testified that she saw her brother being stabbed only once, the medico-legal certificate issued by Dr. Lareza shows that the victim sustained another stab wound at the back, less severe than the first. This seeming inconsistency, however, does not detract from the verisimilitude of Perlita's testimony that she saw Estemson stab her brother. As Perlita recounted, she was so shocked and horrified by the sudden appearance of Estemson and the subsequent stabbing of her brother that she frantically shouted for help. It is possible that it was at that precise moment when Estemson stabbed her brother anew at the back, hence, Perlita failed to witness it. Indeed, this Court declared in People v. Bihison[40] | |||||