Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 320 views

    Cross Examination of The Prosecution Witness

    Uploaded by

    Chin Martinz
    The prosecution witness is being cross examined about failing to strictly follow section 21 of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 (RA 9165) when arresting and handling evidence against two accused individuals. The witness admits to bringing the accused and seized drugs to his office instead of turning them over to PDEA as required by law, violating section 21. He acknowledges this meant non-compliance with required procedures and casts doubt on the integrity of the evidence, though he maintains the substances were still tested as positive for illegal drugs.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    Cross Examination of The Prosecution Witness

    Uploaded by

    Chin Martinz
    320 views3 pages
    The prosecution witness is being cross examined about failing to strictly follow section 21 of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 (RA 9165) when arresting and handling evidence against two accused individuals. The witness admits to bringing the accused and seized drugs to his office instead of turning them over to PDEA as required by law, violating section 21. He acknowledges this meant non-compliance with required procedures and casts doubt on the integrity of the evidence, though he maintains the substances were still tested as positive for illegal drugs.

    Original Description:

    prac court

    Original Title

    Cross Examination of the Prosecution witness.doc

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The prosecution witness is being cross examined about failing to strictly follow section 21 of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 (RA 9165) when arresting and handling evidence against two accused individuals. The witness admits to bringing the accused and seized drugs to his office instead of turning them over to PDEA as required by law, violating section 21. He acknowledges this meant non-compliance with required procedures and casts doubt on the integrity of the evidence, though he maintains the substances were still tested as positive for illegal drugs.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    320 views3 pages

    Cross Examination of The Prosecution Witness

    Uploaded by

    Chin Martinz
    The prosecution witness is being cross examined about failing to strictly follow section 21 of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 (RA 9165) when arresting and handling evidence against two accused individuals. The witness admits to bringing the accused and seized drugs to his office instead of turning them over to PDEA as required by law, violating section 21. He acknowledges this meant non-compliance with required procedures and casts doubt on the integrity of the evidence, though he maintains the substances were still tested as positive for illegal drugs.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    of 3

    Cross Examination of the Prosecution witness.

    DDA violation

    Atty. Martinez: Your honor, may I proceed with the cross examination of the witness,
    please?
    JUDGE PIMENTEL: Proceed.
    Atty. Martinez: Mr. witness, is it a fact that you stipulated in this honorable court
    that you brought Maria Cecilia Pasana and Jadelyn Pulido (a.k.a. Lilay) to your
    office SAID-SOTG right after you arrested them?
    Witness Sucgang: Yes because manykibitzersandhostilepeoplewerepresentinthearea,but
    wereabouttobringthemtoBrgy.201PasayCity.
    Atty. Martinez: Is it a fact that as a PO3, you are aware of the existence of RA 9165
    or otherwise known as the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002?
    Witness Sucgang: Yes attorney.
    Atty. Martinez: Are you familiar with the provisions of R.A. 9165?
    Witness Sucgang: Yes
    Atty.Martinez: How about Sec.21 of RA 9165? Are you familiar with that?
    Witness Sucgang: Yes attorney.
    Atty. Martinez: Am I correct to say that you have to comply with the provisions of RA
    9165?
    Witness Sucgang: Yes attorney.
    Atty. Martinez: and that would include Sec.21 of the said law, am I right?
    Witness Sucgang: Yes
    Atty.Martinez: is it a fact that PDEA should have been the one to take charge and
    custody for the making of the inventory and the photographing of the drugs
    confiscated and/or seized?
    Witness: Yes
    Atty. Martinez: But instead of turning over the accused and the evidences seized,
    you brought them to your office. Am I right?
    Witness: Yes

    Atty.Martinez: Am I correct to say that because of such failure, you violated Sec. 21
    of R.A. 9165?
    Witness Sucgang: Yes, in a way. But we broughtthemtoourofficeSAIDSOTG.
    Atty. Martinez: But still, you failed to strictly comply with Sec. 21 of R.A. 9165, am I
    right?
    Witness: Yes
    Atty. Martinez: Is it a fact that there was non-compliance with the required
    procedure when it comes to the custody of the confiscated items ?
    Witness: yes
    Atty. Martinez: Is it also a fact that the control of the confiscated items did not
    likewise follow that which is provided for in Sec.21 of R.A.9165?
    Witness: yes
    Atty. Martinez: Is it true to say that non-compliance with a protocol would usually
    result into an irregularity of an act?
    Witness: Yes
    Atty. Martinez: And an irregularity would cast doubt as to the integrity of the
    resulting product?
    Witness: Yes
    Atty. Martinez: Again, did you not strictly follow Sec. 21 of R.A. 9165?
    Witness: Yes
    Atty. Martinez: So, because you did not strictly comply with the said provision, the
    integrity of the seized evidence is questionable, am I right?
    Witness: No
    Atty. Martinez: But you said that there was no strict compliance on your part, right?
    Witness: Yes, but we brought themtoourofficeSAIDSOTG.Theevidencesrecoveredandthe
    personsarrestedwereturnedovertoSPO1CzarinaMartinez,theassignedinvestigatoronthecasefor
    documentationoftheevidencesandlaterondeliveredtoPNPCrimeLaboratoryforexamination,which
    yieldedapositiveresultforMethamphetamineHydrochloride,aDangerousdrug.
    Atty.Martinez:But,isthatwhatisrequiredinSec.21ofRA9165?
    Witness:No

    Atty. Martinez: No further questions, your honor.

    You might also like