Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 559 views

    Rule 132 22 (A) People v. Bisda

    Uploaded by

    Christine Joy Prestoza
    Angela, a 6-year old girl, was kidnapped outside her school by appellants Alma and Jenny Rose. They took her to a dirty house and held her for ransom. At trial, Angela testified about the kidnapping. The appellants argued Angela was not competent to testify because she was not questioned about understanding her oath to tell the truth. However, the court found Angela was a competent witness. Any child can testify if they can perceive, make their perceptions known to others, and relate facts truthfully. The court also found Angela's testimony credible, as a 5-year-old may not react the same as an adult in a kidnapping situation. The appellants' convictions were upheld.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Rule 132 22 (A) People v. Bisda

    Uploaded by

    Christine Joy Prestoza
    559 views2 pages
    Angela, a 6-year old girl, was kidnapped outside her school by appellants Alma and Jenny Rose. They took her to a dirty house and held her for ransom. At trial, Angela testified about the kidnapping. The appellants argued Angela was not competent to testify because she was not questioned about understanding her oath to tell the truth. However, the court found Angela was a competent witness. Any child can testify if they can perceive, make their perceptions known to others, and relate facts truthfully. The court also found Angela's testimony credible, as a 5-year-old may not react the same as an adult in a kidnapping situation. The appellants' convictions were upheld.

    Original Description:

    Child Witness

    Original Title

    Rule 132 22(a) People v. Bisda

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Angela, a 6-year old girl, was kidnapped outside her school by appellants Alma and Jenny Rose. They took her to a dirty house and held her for ransom. At trial, Angela testified about the kidnapping. The appellants argued Angela was not competent to testify because she was not questioned about understanding her oath to tell the truth. However, the court found Angela was a competent witness. Any child can testify if they can perceive, make their perceptions known to others, and relate facts truthfully. The court also found Angela's testimony credible, as a 5-year-old may not react the same as an adult in a kidnapping situation. The appellants' convictions were upheld.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    559 views2 pages

    Rule 132 22 (A) People v. Bisda

    Uploaded by

    Christine Joy Prestoza
    Angela, a 6-year old girl, was kidnapped outside her school by appellants Alma and Jenny Rose. They took her to a dirty house and held her for ransom. At trial, Angela testified about the kidnapping. The appellants argued Angela was not competent to testify because she was not questioned about understanding her oath to tell the truth. However, the court found Angela was a competent witness. Any child can testify if they can perceive, make their perceptions known to others, and relate facts truthfully. The court also found Angela's testimony credible, as a 5-year-old may not react the same as an adult in a kidnapping situation. The appellants' convictions were upheld.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, appellee, vs.

    ALMA BISDA y GAUPO and


    GENEROSA JENNY ROSE BASILAN y PAYAN, appellants
    G.R. No. 140895. July 17, 2003
    Topic: Any child regardless of age, can be a competent witness if she can perceive and
    perceiving, can make known to others, and that she is capable of relating truthfully facts
    for which she is examined.
    Facts
    The victims classes had just ended and she was on her way to her school bus
    Unknown to Angela, appellants Alma and Jenny Rose were outside of the school gate
    waiting for her. They approached the young girl, and told her that her parents were
    waiting for her at the Jollibee Restaurant. Angela initially refused to go with the two
    women, but because Alma held on to her hand so tightly and poked a knife at her. With
    Angela in tow, Alma and Jenny Rose boarded a white taxi and went to a dirty house
    where they changed Angelas clothes. The girl was made to wear blouse and shorts,
    yellow t-shirt and a pair of panties. Several days have passed when the mother
    Marymae received a telephone call from a woman demanding for ransom money.
    Issue
    Whether or not the competency of the witness and the truth of testimony are impaired when a
    child witness is not examined on the nature of the oath and the need for her to tell the whole
    truth,

    Ruling
    In this case, Angela was six years old when she testified. [66] She took an oath to
    tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth before she testified on direct
    examination. There was nary a whimper of protest or objection on the part of the
    appellants to Angelas competence as a witness and the prosecutions failure to
    propound questions to determine whether Angela understood her obligation and
    responsibility of telling the truth respecting the matter of her testimony before the court.
    The appellants did not even bother requesting the trial court for leave to conduct a voir
    direexamination of Angela. After the prosecution terminated its direct examination, the
    appellants thereafter cross-examined Angela extensively and intensively on the matter
    of her testimony on direct examination. It was only in this Court that the appellants
    raised the matter for the first time, that there was failure on the part of the prosecution to
    examine Angela on the nature of her oath, and to ascertain whether she had the
    capacity to distinguish right from wrong. It is too late in the day for the appellants to
    raise the issue.
    The determination of the competence and capability of a child as a witness rests
    primarily with the trial judge. The trial court correctly found Angela a competent witness
    and her testimony entitled to full probative weight. Any child regardless of age, can be a

    competent witness if she can perceive and perceiving, can make known to others, and
    that she is capable of relating truthfully facts for which she is examined.
    The credibility of Angela and the verisimilitude of her testimony is not impaired by her
    failure to shout for help when the appellants took her, or to make any attempt to call her
    parents or to escape from her captors and to use the telephone to call her parents. At
    five years old, she could not be expected to act and react to her kidnapping and
    detention like an adult should. She did not shout and seek help from the school security
    guards because the appellants told Angela that her parents were waiting for her.
    Appellant Basilan was the niece of Angelas yaya. She then believed that nothing was
    amiss. It was only when she failed to see her parents that Angela blamed herself for
    going with the appellants in the first place.

    You might also like

    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy