This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2010-10-20 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| In rebuttal of the charges, the accused interposes the defense of denial and alibi, relying on the testimonies of Valiente and Climaco to corroborate his claim that he was elsewhere at the time of the incident. A review of the said testimonies, however, reveals that they are of insufficient evidentiary value. For alibi to be accorded any weight, the accused must prove two things, (i) that he was somewhere else when the crime was committed, and (ii) that he was so far away that it was physically impossible for him to be present at the scene of the crime, or its immediate vicinity, at the time of its commission.[29] Physical impossibility refers not only to the geographical distance between the place where the accused was and the place where the crime was committed when the crime transpired; but more importantly, the facility of access between the two places.[30] The following portions of their testimonies are telling: Testimony of Bienvenido Valiente | |||||