sample test in evidence

1.In a murder case, the testimony of the witnesses was discredited since they made an inconsistent description of the stab wound. It may be noted that while Danilo Julia and Loreto Palad testified that Roman Castro had been stabbed on the right side of his back, the autopsy report stated that the stab wound was located at the left lumbar area of the victim. Question: If you were the judge, what principle of evidence will you use on said kind of discrediting an inconsistent testimony? Would you acquit the accused by reason of said inconsistent description? Explain.

2. In another murder case, the defense tried to impeach a material witness since she read facts as written on her hand. It is asserted that the testimony of Francisca Espina should not be given worth since, while testifying, she would at times be seen reading some notes written on her left palm. Thus-

Q. May I see your left hand, may I see what is written there?

A. Witness showing to the court her left palm and the following words have been written in her palm in ball pen handwritten words and number of the pumpboat No. 56 and there is another word "petsa" and there are words which cannot be deciphered and all found in the palm of the left hand.

ATTY. MONTECLAR:

That is all.

ATTY. GONZALES: RE-CROSS

Q Mrs. witness, you cannot deny of what these physical evidences or writings on the palm of your left hand. I want you to be honest, the law will not allow you to lie, you are subject to punishment and penalty. My question is, who wrote this on the palm of your left hand?

A I was the one who wrote this.

Q Why did you write that down?

A I was the one who wrote this.

Q Why, what was your purpose of writing that in your palm?

A I wrote this in my palm because I wanted to be sure of what time the incident happened, was the same as that I wrote in my palm.

Q And who furnished you the data in which you wrote in the palm of your hand?

A I was the one who made that.

ATTY. GONZALES:

Q You don't understand my question. You wrote that writing but where did you get that data?

A. This is just of what I know.

Q Since you claim to have all this knowledge of your mind, why did you find it necessary to write that in the palm of your hand and I notice during the trial that you used to look in your palm, why, is that necessary in your believe to testify here to what you knew about the incident.

A Because of the fact that I have an headache.

Q When did this headache occur?

A After I left my house because my sick child.

Q Now, knowing that you have an headache, did you not bring this to the attention of the Fiscal?

A No, I did not tell the Fiscal.

Q Do you know of your own that doing this is unfair and is not allowable while testifying in open court, do you know that is illegal act?

A No, I did not, know.

Q And you did all of this claiming that you do not know about the incident for the purpose of giving here testimony against the accused?

A Yes, sir.

QUESTIONS: As judge, would you allow said witness to testify and look at the writing in her palm? Will the witness be liable for violating the rules of evidence? Is her testimony admissible? Explain.

3. Take this case: The validity of the Extrajudicial Settlement of the Estate of Vicente and Leonora hinges on the existence of the first marriage of Vicente and Benita.In support of the existence of the alleged first marriage, petitioners presented a copy of the Contrato Matrimonial issued by Iglesia Filipina Independiente church. Questions: (A) Is this Contrato Matrimonial considered as a public document? (B) Granting that this is a private document, what are the requirements before it can be admitted as evidence in court? (c) Would you consider said document as ancient? If so what will be its evidentiary value? Explain.

4. There is a long standing tenet that the starting point in criminal prosecution is what? If this “long standing tenet” runs in conflict with “the presumption of regularity in the performance of duty” which should prevail? Explain your answer.

5. (a) An admission of guilt is starkly different from, and is not tantamount to, a confession of guilt. Explain this principle. (b) Distinguish “burden of proof” from “burden of evidence” (c) What are the kinds of conclusive presumptions under the rules? Cite an example for each

(d) What is a disputable presumption? What is its probative value in evidence? Cite at least two examples.

(e) Affidavits sworn before a notary public is considered as a public document and hence cannot be classified as hearsay evidence. Do you agree to the said statement? Explain.