Skip to main content

presumption of credibility

ID
877

People of the Philippines v. Divinagracia, G.R. No. 207765 (2017)

The Regional Trial Court of Mandaue City and the Court of Appeals found the appellant, guilty of statutory rape of his eight-year-old daughter and acts of lasciviousness against his nine-year-old daughter. He appealed, arguing that the prosecutor had not sufficiently established his guilt and that the victims were not credible witnesses because their testimonies had inconsistencies on when they told others about the abuse. The Supreme Court found that these inconsistencies did not relate to the elements of the crime, nor did they diminish the credibility of the victims.

Richard Barrett v. R (Jamaica Court of Appeal, 2009)

A 16-year-old girl was walking home from school when a man drew a gun on her, forced her into his home and raped her. At trial, the judge—acting as trier of fact—found the man guilty of illegal possession of a firearm and rape. Because the incident was not corroborated, the judge characterized the case as an issue of credibility. The defense attempted to discredit the girl’s credibility by pointing to discrepancies between her testimony in court and her original statements to the police.

Robert Rowe v. R (Jamaica Court of Appeal, 2014)

A 13 year old female complainant was raped in the home of the male defendant, where the complainant was a regular visitor. Despite rejecting the defendant’s monetary compensation to remain silent, the complainant did not disclose the incident until two weeks later when a third party noticed that she appeared to be depressed. At trial, the defendant was convicted by a jury for the offences of rape and indecent assault for which he was sentenced to 12 years and 2 years imprisonment, respectively, to be served concurrently.

Subscribe to presumption of credibility