Sunday, March 8, 2015

Prosecution witnesses’ initial reluctance to testify. - People vs Caraig : 116224-27 : March 28, 2003 : C.J. Davide Jr : First Division

See - People vs Caraig : 116224-27 : March 28, 2003 : C.J. Davide Jr : First Division





"x x x.

Caraig wants to impress us that he was merely a horrified spectator of the gruesome events that unfolded before him.  We are not persuaded.  His version is incredible and must be rejected in light of his positive identification as one of the assailants, as well as the categorical and straightforward testimony of the prosecution witnesses.  His bare and uncorroborated denial amounted to nothing more than a negative and self-serving evidence unworthy of weight in law.[37]
Caraig cannot fault the prosecution witnesses’ initial reluctance to testify. It is not uncommon for a witness to a crime to show some reluctance about getting involved in a criminal case. The natural reticence of most people to get involved is of judicial notice. It is understandable for a witness to fear for his safety,[38] especially in this case where PC men were involved in the commission of the crime.  Such initial reticence does not affect the witnesses’ credibility.[39]  Besides, their delay in testifying was principally caused by the delay in the trial caused by, among other things, Caraig’s success in avoiding the service of the warrant of arrest.  It was only in 1991 when he was finally arrested.
x x x."