[Evidentiary Weight of Ex-Parte Affidavits]

People v. Sarellana,
G.R. Nos. 102056-57, June 8, 1994
The general rule has always been that discrepancies between the statements of th
e affiant in his affidavit and those made by him on the witness stand do not nec
essarily discredit him since ex-parte affidavits are generally incomplete. Affid
avits are generally subordinated in importance to open court declarations becaus
e they are oftentimes executed when an affiant's mental faculties are not in suc
h as state as to afford him a fair opportunity of narrating in full the incident
which has transpired. Further, affidavits are not complete reproductions of wha
t the declarant has in mind because they are generally prepared by the administe
ring officer and the affiant simply signs them after the same have been read to
them.
xx
[Evidentiary Weight of Sworn Affidavits]
People v. Ricardo Garcia
G.R. No. 145505 March 14, 2003
Affidavits are not complete reproductions of what the declarant has in mind beca
use they are generally prepared by the administering officer and the affiant sim
ply signs them after the same have been read to her.
xx
[Evidentiary Weight of Police Blotter]
People v. Modesto Cabuang y Flores, Nardo Matabang y Salvador, John Doe and Rich
ard Doe,
G.R. No. 103292, January 27, 1993
A police blotter, although prepared in the regular performance of official duty,
is not conclusive proof of the truth of its entries, since police blotters are
usually incomplete and inaccurate; and sometimes based on partial suggestion, in
accurate reporting and hearsay.
xx
People v. Macario Santito, Jr., Allan Caballero, Dioscoro Candia, Benjamin Capan
gpangan and William Narciso,
G.R. No. 91628, August 22, 1991
Entries in official records like a police blotter are only prima facie evidence
of the facts therein set out, since the entries in the police blotter could well
be incomplete or inaccurate. Testimony given in open court during the trial is
commonly much more lengthy and detailed than the brief entries made in the polic
e blotter and the trial court cannot base its findings on a police report merely
, but must necessarily consider all other evidence gathered in the course of the
police investigation and presented in court.
xx
[Positive Identification]
People v. Radel Gallarde,

G.R. No. 133025, February 17, 2000

Positive identification pertains essentially to proof of identity and not per se
to that of being an eyewitness to the very act of commission of the crime. Ther
e are two types of positive identification. A witness may identify a suspect or
accused in a criminal case as the perpetrator of the crime as an eyewitness to t
he very act of the commission of the crime. This constitutes direct evidence. Th
ere may, however, be instances where, although a witness may not have actually s
een the very act of commission of a crime, he may still be able to positively id
entify a suspect or accused as the perpetrator of a crime as for instance when t
he latter is the person or one of the persons last seen with the victim immediat
ely before and right after the commission of the crime. This is the second type
of positive identification, which forms part of circumstantial evidence, which,
when taken together with other pieces of evidence constituting an unbroken chain
, leads to only fair and reasonable conclusion, which is that the accused is the
author of the crime to the exclusion of all others. If the actual eyewitnesses
are the only ones allowed to possibly positively identify a suspect or accused t
o the exclusion of others, then nobody can ever be convicted unless there is an
eyewitness, because it is basic and elementary that there can be no conviction u
ntil and unless an accused is positively identified. Such a proposition is absol
utely absurd, because it is settled that direct evidence of the commission of a
crime is not the only matrix wherefrom a trial court may draw its conclusion and
finding of guilt. If resort to circumstantial evidence would not be allowed to
prove identity of the accused on the absence of direct evidence, then felons wou
ld go free and the community would be denied proper protection.
xx
People v. Gonzales,
G.R. No. 140676, July 31, 2002
A positive identification that is categorical, consistent, and devoid of any sho
wing of ill or vile motive on the part of the Prosecution witnesses always preva
ils over alibi and denial that are in the nature of negative and self-serving ev
idence.
xx
[Denials]
People v. Benjamin Hilet y Mercadejas,
G.R. Nos. 146685-86, April 30, 2003
Denials, if unsubstantiated by clear and convincing evidence, are negative, self
-serving evidence which deserve no weight in law and can not be given greater ev
identiary weight over the testimony of credible witnesses who testify on affirma
tive matters. As between the positive declarations of the prosecution witness an
d negative statements of the accused, the former deserves more credence.
xx
Honorable Ombudsman Simeon V. Marcelo v. Leopoldo F. Bungubung and Hon. Court of
Appeals,
G.R. No. 175201, April 23, 2008
In the absence of corroborative evidence, the Court would not be prepared to acc
ept the usual lame defense of denial over the straightforward and positive decla
ration of a witness since denials constitute self-serving negative evidence whic
h cannot be accorded greater evidentiary weight than the declaration of credible

witnesses who testify on affirmative matters. Thus, in the case of contradictor

y declarations and statements, greater weight is generally given to positive tes
timonies than to mere denials.