star witnesses over Salilig investigation
The National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) recommended three Tau Gamma Phi fraternity members to become star witnesses in the hazing and death of Adamson University student John Matthew Salilig.
The three potential star witnesses helped with the investigation by identifying other persons of interest, according to the NBI.
Watch:
Take note:
In the discharge of an accused in order that he may be a state witness, the following conditions must be present, namely:
(1) Two or more accused are jointly charged with the commission of an offense;
(2) The motion for discharge is filed by the prosecution before it rests its case;
(3) The prosecution is required to present evidence and the sworn statement of each proposed state witness at a hearing in support of the discharge;
(4) The accused gives his consent to be a state witness; and
(5) The trial court is satisfied that:
a) There is an absolute necessity for the testimony of the accused whose discharge is requested;
b) There is no other direct evidence available for the proper prosecution of the offense committed, except the testimony of said accused;
c) The testimony of said accused can be substantially corroborated in its material points;
d) Said accused does not appear to be the most guilty; and,
e) Said accused has not at any time been convicted of any offense involving moral turpitude.
The Supreme Court went on to cite the following cases as examples in this case:
Ads.
 |
| Take caution when riding. A woman has piled onto the bike. |
 |
| SHOP HERE |
 |
| SHOP HERE |
• People v. Court of Appeals and Perez et al.,
- the Court ordered the discharge of the accused Roncesvalles, ruling that his testimony is absolutely necessary to prove conspiracy with his other co-accused. [...] unless accused Roncesvalles was allowed to testify for the government, there would be no other direct evidence available for the proper prosecution of the offense charged,
• People v. Court of Appeals and Tan
- the Court reinstated the ruling of the trial court which ordered the discharge of accused Ngo Sin from among the five accused. The record justified his discharge as a state witness considering the absolute necessity of his testimony to prove that the accused Luciano Tan had planned and financed the theft.
RATIONALE
To the prosecution belongs the control of its case and this Court cannot dictate its choice in the discharge of a state witness, save only when the legal requirements have not been complied with.
The prosecution’s right to prosecute gives it "a wide range of discretion — the discretion of whether, what and whom to charge, the exercise of which depends on a smorgasbord of factors which are best appreciated by prosecutors." Under Section 17, Rule 119 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, the court is given the power to discharge a state witness only after it has already acquired jurisdiction over the crime and the accused.
NOTE
By jurisprudence, "most guilty" refers to the highest degree of culpability in participation in the commission of the offense and does not necessarily mean the severity of the penalty imposed. While all the accused may be given the same penalty by reason of conspiracy, one may be considered to have lesser or the least guilt taking into account his degree of participation in the commission of the offense.
Read the full case here:
🔗 https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/sep2014/gr_209195_2014.html
FOLLOW US!
🔗 https://bit.ly/m/AttyEblogger
Comments
Post a Comment