CRIMINAL LAW — Contradictions in Prosecution Case — When Fatal — Minor Contradictions

The principle governs the evaluation of contradictions in the prosecution’s evidence. In criminal trials, it is common for witnesses to have minor inconsistencies in their testimonies due to human fallibility, passage of time, or other factors. Such minor contradictions do not necessarily destroy the prosecution’s case, as long as they do not affect the substance of the evidence. Contradictions become fatal only when they are substantial, material, and create a reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the accused. The court must distinguish between minor discrepancies that are natural and significant inconsistencies that undermine the credibility of the prosecution’s witnesses. The trial judge must carefully evaluate the evidence and determine whether the contradictions are real and material. The principle prevents the acquittal of accused persons on the basis of trivial discrepancies, while safeguarding the right to a fair trial where contradictions raise genuine doubts.