This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2009-04-16 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| Q: What happened after the accused was able to grab the bracelet from the wrist of Catherine? A: He ran slowly as if he was jogging only (sic) seems as if nothing happened, sir. Q: Then what happened after that? A: I ran after him, sir. Q: Then what happened? A: He just sat down at [Greenrich] sir. Q: Is that [Greenrich] a restaurant? A: He sat down at [Greenrich] Cathy (sic) located under the LRT, sir. Q: What did you do? A: I approached him at the place there he (sic) sitted (sic) himself, sir. Q: After that what happened? A: Then I asked him to return the bracelet "Ikaw magnanakaw, ibalik mo yong bracelet." Q: Then what did you do? A: He just stared at me for a long time and nod his head and I told him to look at me you are a sinner then he looked at me and said "Hindi mo ba ako kilala" then he brought out something from his pocket and told me that he is a police commander and I told him that if you are a police commander why do (sic) you steal? Q: Then what was his answer? A: He said, a lot of people knew me, ask these people around.[15] Q: When Catherine arrived at the Greenrich Restaurant, did anything happen between her and the accused? A: None, your Honor, Catherine was shocked. Q: And did she and the accused had many (sic) exchange of words or conversation? A: There is, your Honor. Q: What did Catherine say? A: "Yan nga, siya, siya yon," your Honor. Q: How about the accused? A: There are many reactions, "how can that be, I am a police commander." x x x x Q: One last question. What made you sure that it was the accused who grabbed the bracelet of your friend? A: Simple lang, yong height nya, buhok, everything, his appearance sir.[16] It is ineluctably clear from the foregoing that Eduarte was the snatcher. The firm, candid and unmistakable declaration of the prosecution witnesses that it was he whom they saw grabbing the bracelet was unerring and rang with truth. A testimony is credible if it bears the earmarks of truth and sincerity and has been delivered in a spontaneous, natural, and straightforward manner.[17] The credible and forthright narrations of the prosecution witnesses debase the already weak denials of Eduarte. The infirmity of his denial becomes even more evident when, in his vain attempt to extricate himself, he pretended to be a police commander who had many connections. Eduarte's explanation that he was probably misheard by Navarra and Adoro is clearly an afterthought and deserves scant consideration. | |||||