This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2013-02-27 |
SERENO, C.J. |
||||
| three witnesses. Petitioner argues that there was reasonable doubt as to the identity of the shooter.[54] He is wrong. As correctly held by the RTC and affirmed by the CA, the identity of the assailant was proved with moral certainty by the prosecution, which presented three witnesses the victim Mendol, Velasco, and Garcelazo who all positively identified him as the shooter.[55] We have held that a categorical and consistently positive identification of the accused, without any showing of ill motive on the part of the eyewitnesses, prevails over denial.[56] All the three witnesses were unswerving in their testimonies pointing to him as the shooter. None of them had any ulterior motive to testify against him. | |||||
|
2009-08-07 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| Well-settled is the rule that bare denials cannot prevail over the positive testimonies of the witnesses.[11] Positive and forthright declarations of witnesses are often held to be worthier of credence than the self-serving denial of an accused.[12] Denial, if unsubstantiated by clear and convincing evidence, is a self-serving assertion that deserves no weight in law.[13] | |||||