7/25/2019 Evidence Court Visit

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/evidence-court-visit 1/2

Colasito, Vernon Craig M.

A Court Visit

I was able to watch the initial trial for violation of R.A.

7610 or the Anti-Chil Abuse !aw. "he chil was allegel# sla$$eb# his neighbor.

"he $rivate $rosecutor initiall# allege that he was

substituting the original law#er who was hanling the case. "he

$roble% was, he i not #et have a written authori&ation fro% the

'rosecutor(s )ffice. *e i allege however that he ha an

agree%ent with the Cit# 'rosecutor that he woul hanle the case.

*e was allowe to go on with his first evience.

As first evience, the $rivate $rosecutor $resente the

%other of the victi%. "he %other testifie that on the a# her

chil was sla$$e, she was attening a worshi$ service. +he

receive a $hone call fro% another neighbor who tol her that her

chil was sla$$e b# the accuse. ro% this state%ent, I thought

it was hearsa# because she i not $ersonall# witness the

sla$$ing. *owever, the efense counsel i not obect.

)n another uestion, the sa%e witness testifie that her

sister brought the victi% to the hos$ital for a $h#sical

e/a%ination. Again, I foun it irregular that the sister was not

brought in to testif# on this e/act %atter. I thought it washearsa#. An again, the efense counsel i not obect. !ater,

the $rivate $rosecutor $resente a 'h#sician(s Re$ort. "he %other

testifie that it was the sa%e re$ort that was issue when her

son was e/a%ine b# a $h#sician in the hos$ital. "he efense

counsel i not obect. Again, I thought this was hearsa# because

it was not the %other who e/ecute the re$ort. I i learn though

that the signature an the ocu%ent itself are se$aratel# %are.

I wonere wh# the neighbor, the sister, an the $h#sician

were not brought in first to establish these facts. At thisuncture, the uge rightfull# infor%e the $rivate $rosecutor

that the testi%on# of his witness was entirel# hearsa#. If it was

to be a%itte, it woul have no $robative value. "he uge also

ase wh# the relevant witnesses were not $resente. "he $rivate

$rosecutor e/$laine that the above witnesses were unavailable

an that the# woul later be $resente to $rove the state%ents of

the %other. "he uge reiterate that the testi%on# was hearsa#.

7/25/2019 Evidence Court Visit

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/evidence-court-visit 2/2

At that $oint, the %other(s testi%on# i not establish an#thing.

"he $rivate $rosecutor was however allowe to continue.

I was also able to watch the initial trial of a %urer case.

oteworth# in the testi%on# of the witness is that on irect-

e/a%ination, the witness testifie that the accuse was behinthe victi%. *e also e%onstrate to the court that the accuse,

staning behin the victi%, $ointe the gun below the victi%(s

na$e. "he gun was 2 or 6 inches fro% the victi% b# %# esti%ation

base on the e%onstration. Also, he testifie that he saw the

accuse $oint the gun at the victi%. After he hear a gun burst,

he saw the victi% on the floor. !astl#, he testifie that after

he saw the victi% on the floor, the accuse ran awa# b# sa#ing

3niagan.4

)n cross, the sa%e witness testifie that he an the victi%

were staning four ar%s-length awa# fro% each other, facing a

counter. Also, that the accuse was behin hi%. If this was true,

his testi%on# is inconsistent an i%$ossible since the accuse

coul not be irectl# behin the victi% if the accuse was behin

the witness when the witness was four ar%s-length awa# fro% the

victi%. Also on cross, the witness testifie that after he hear

a gun burst, he turne aroun an saw the victi% l#ing own on

the floor face u$. "his, again, is another inconsistenc#. !astl#,

on cross he testifie that, after the witness saw the victi%

l#ing on the floor, the accuse was escribe as 3nilaaw si#a.4

5ven uner the conte/t, the state%ent coul be inter$rete to%ean either the accuse wale awa# or the accuse left. Although

of %inor conseuence in this case, I %ae note to clarif# such

a%biguities when the state%ent involves an i%$ortant fact. "o %#

%in, the uge %ight inter$ret such state%ents against %# case.

In closing, it is not eas# to be trial law#er, but the

challenge invigorates those who wish to beco%e one. "he finer

$oints in $rosecuting a case coul %ae or brea it. "o be a

trial law#er reuires a great egree of %etho, scrutin#, an

$recision. M# res$ect for co%$etent an unco%$ro%ising triallaw#ers is bolstere.