You are on page 1of 2

Republic of the Philippines

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF NEGROS ORIENTAL


7th Judicial Region
Branch _____
Family Court Designate
Dumaguete City

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,


Plaintiff,
- versus -

CRIMINAL CASE No. _____

FOR: Violation of Section 5(a)


Of R.A. No. 9262

RAMIL SACASAN y CATUBIG,


Accused.
x----------------------/

COMMENTS/OBJECTIONS
(To the Prosecutions Formal Offer of Evidence)

ACCUSED, by counsel, respectfully comments and/or objects to the Formal Offer


of Evidence of the Prosecution as follows:
EXHIBIT

DOCUMENT

A to
A-1

Photocopy of Medical
certificate issued by Dr.
Bevito Gonazaga, MHO,
Vallehermoso, Negros
Oriental, dated June 8,
2015

B to
B-1

Photocopy of the
Ultrasound Result/Finding
issued by Dr. Samuel S.
Martinez, M.D. dated June
8, 2015

C to
C-1

Police Report
representing Extract Copy
of the Police Blotter Entry
NO. 012, Page Nr. 8,
dated June 8, 2015,
issued and signed by PO2
Christy P. Aquino, PNP,

COMMENT/OBJECTION
Admits the existence and authenticity of said
exhibit, but objects to the purpose for which it
was offered for being irrelevant and
misleading.
The said Medical Certificate was not issued
by an authorized government examining
physician as required by law. Also, the
testimony of the witness is bereft of any
indication where she had positively identified
said document during her direct testimony.
Admits the existence and authenticity of said
exhibit, but objects to the purpose for which it
was being offered for being misleading.
The testimony of the witness is bereft of any
indication where she had positively identified
said document during her direct testimony.
Admits the existence and authenticity of said
exhibits, but objects to the purpose for which
it was offered for being irrelevant.
The Police Blotter does not prove that the
alleged mauling incident as claimed by the
complainant did exist; it is just a record at the

WCPD, PNCO

Copy of pictures showing


the injuries sustained by
the victim with PO2
Christy P. Aquino

police station based on the statements of


herein complainant.
Denies the existence of said exhibit, and
objects to the purpose for which it was
offered for being misleading.
The photographer who took the pictures was
not presented and was unable to identify the
same. In Sison v. People 250 SCRA 58, the
Supreme Court said: The rule in this
jurisdiction is that photographs, when
presented in evidence, must be identified by
the photographer as to its production and
testified as to the circumstances under which
they were produced. x x x Photographs,
however, can be identified also by any other
competent witness who can testify to its
exactness and accuracy.
No photographer or any other competent
witness, even the complainant herself,
testified to its exactness and accuracy.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the ACCUSED respectfully prays to this


Honorable Court to deny the admission of the foregoing exhibits objected to for the
reasons stated above.
Other reliefs just and equitable are likewise prayed for under the premises.
Dumaguete City, Philippines, this 11th day of January 2016.

Atty. CAMAD C. ALI, JR.


Room 6, Novotel Building, Perdices St., Dumaguete City
PTR No. 123; Mar. 31, 2016, Dumaguete City
IBP No. 123; Mar. 31, 2016, Dumaguete City
Roll NO. 123; May 2, 2012
Tel No. (035) 226-1234
MCLE No. 12345; May 10, 2013

COUNSEL FOR THE ACCUSED

Copy furnished through personal service to:


RUEL YGONA AGUILAR
Asst. Provincial Prosecutor
PPO, Dumaguete City, Negros Oriental
Received by :
Date
:

_________
_________