2. Authentication and Proof of Documents

DEMONSTRATIVE EVIDENCE

Demonstrative evidence is not the actual thing but represents or demonstrates the real thing. It is not strictly “real” evidence because it is not the very thing involved in the case. Diagrams, maps, models and the like fall under this category (Riano, p. 120)

The admissibility of this type of evidence largely depends on the laying of the proper foundation for evidence: Does the evidence sufficiently and accurately represent the object it seeks to demonstrate and represent? If it does, the evidence would be admissible (Riano, p. 121)

Under the Rules on Electronic Evidence, photographic evidence of events, acts, or transactions shall be admissible in evidence, provided that it shall be presented, displayed, and shown to the court, and it shall be identified, explained or authenticated by either: the person who made the recording; or some other person competent to testify on the accuracy thereof (Rule 11, Sec. 1, Rules on Electronic Evidence)

Some courts insist on requiring the photographer to testify but this view has been eroded by the tendency of modern courts to admit as a witness one who has familiarity with the scene portrayed. (Sison v. People, G.R. No. 108280-83, 1995)

The correctness of a photograph as a faithful representation of the object portrayed can be proved prima facie, either by the testimony of the person who made it or by other competent witnesses, after which the court can admit it subject to impeachment as to its accuracy. (Sison v. People, G.R. Nos. 108280-83, 1995)

The rule is well-settled that a photograph may be put in evidence if relevant to the issue and if verified by the taker. Its verification depends on the competency of the verifying witness and the trial judge must in the first instance decide, subject to reversal for substantial error. (Adamczuk v. Halloway, 13 A.2d 2, 1940)

Trial court ruled that the photographs are inadmissible. The Court held that the photographs are inadmissible because the map or photograph, to be admissible, must first be made a part of some qualified person's testimony. Someone must stand forth as its testimonial sponsor; in other words, it must be verified. (Adamczuk v. Halloway, 13 A.2d 2, 1940)

On appeal, Tatum questioned the film’s admission into evidence. The Court held that for a photograph to be admissible in evidence, the authentication required by courts is that some witness (not necessarily the photographer) be able to give some indication as to when, where, and under what circumstances the photograph was taken, and that the photograph accurately portray the subject or subjects illustrated. (State v. Tatum, 360 P.2d 754, 1961)

Note: Photographs may also fall under the category of documentary evidence for documentary evidence now covers “photographs” as long as offered as proof of their contents.

Burden of proving authenticity

The person seeking to introduce an electronic document in any legal proceeding has the burden of proving its authenticity in the manner provided in this Rule. (REE, Rule 5, Sec. 1)

DUE EXECUTION

This means that the document was:

• Signed voluntarily and knowingly by the party whose signature appears thereon;
• If signed by somebody else, such representative had the authority to do so;
• It was duly delivered, and that the formalities were complied.

(2) WHEN A SPECIFIC DENIAL REQUIRES AN OATH

• Denial of an actionable document

Ancient Document

Where a private document is:

• More than thirty years old;
• Is produced from a custody in which it would naturally be found if genuine; and
• Is unblemished by any alterations or circumstances of suspicion;

no other evidence of its authenticity need be given (Rule 132, Sec. 21).

The last requirement of the “ancient document rule” that a document must be unblemished by any alteration or circumstances of suspicion refers to the extrinsic quality of the document itself. The lack of signatures on the first pages, therefore, absent any alterations or circumstances of suspicion cannot be held to detract from the fact that the documents in question, which were certified as copies of the originals on file with the Register of Deeds of Pampanga, are genuine and free from any blemish or circumstances of suspicion (Heirs of Lacsa v. CA, G.R. No. 79597-98, 1994).

Alterations in a document

The party producing a document as genuine which has been altered and appears to have been altered after its execution, in a part material to the question in dispute, must account for the alteration.