Presenters summarized the later stages of the 2020 homicide case: one defendant cooperated and took a plea, testified for the prosecution; the other defendants were convicted and received multi-decade sentences — examples used to show how evidence and cooperation affect outcomes.

The prosecutor told the court that live testimony from two witnesses plus surveillance footage contradicted the defendant's grand-jury testimony and, together with limited unimmunized evidence, met the corroboration required for a perjury conviction under Silva.

The Common Legal Representatives of Victims (CLRV) has formally requested the International Criminal Court (ICC) Trial Chamber III to approve the admission of previously recorded testimonies from three witnesses in the ongoing crimes against humanity case involving former President Rodrigo Duterte. In an eight-page document dated October 27, 2026, the CLRV argued that the testimonies, which pertain to alleged extrajudicial killings in Central Luzon, are relevant to the case and would support the contextual elements of the crimes against humanity charges. The document emphasized that the testimonies were voluntarily recorded during the Prosecution's investigation in the Philippines and possess sufficient reliability. The CLRV further stated that introducing these testimonies would align with victims' rights to a fair and expeditious trial, while also conserving court resources and expediting proceedings. The legal team, comprising lawyers Gilbert Andres, Joel Butuyan, and Paolina Massida, highlighted that the testimonies fall under Count 3 of the charges, which relates to the alleged extrajudicial killings during Duterte's presidency and his tenure as mayor of Davao City. Duterte, who was arrested in March 2025 at Ninoy Aquino International Airport, is currently detained at the ICC Detention Center in The Hague. His trial is scheduled to begin on November 30, 2026, following the ICC Trial Chamber III's determination that he is fit to stand trial. The ICC has been handling the case concerning the alleged war on drugs that resulted in numerous extrajudicial killings during Duterte's administration. The CLRV's submission comes as part of the ongoing legal proceedings to ensure a comprehensive and timely trial process for the victims of the alleged crimes.

The Commonwealth argued the conviction is supported by an interconnected set of evidence — eyewitness accounts, coconspirator statements, and a text message noted as consciousness-of-guilt — and disputed that impeachment alone requires reversal.

Name:                                      Ali* Interviewing Organization:   Iran Human Rights Documentation Center (IHRDC) Date of Interview:                        March 6, 2024 Interviewer:        ...

Aaron Rios testified that Israel Cortez called him after Robert Navez was found dead and told Rios he "didn't mean to" and that the stabbing was an accident. Defense counsel emphasized the call was brief and lacked detail; prosecutors said the testimony informed charging decisions.

Name:                                      Borna* Interviewing Organization:   Iran Human Rights Documentation Center (IHRDC) Date of Interview:                      March 9, 2024 Interviewer:        ...

Name:                                      Hamid* Interviewing Organization:   Iran Human Rights Documentation Center (IHRDC) Date of Interview:                        April 9, 2024 Interviewer:      ...

Name:                                      Hossein* Interviewing Organization:   Iran Human Rights Documentation Center (IHRDC) Date of Interview:                        March 12, 2024 Interviewer:   ...

Name:                                      Reza* Interviewing Organization:   Iran Human Rights Documentation Center (IHRDC) Date of Interview:                        April 4, 2024 Interviewer:       ...

Name:                                      Maryam* Interviewing Organization:   Iran Human Rights Documentation Center (IHRDC) Date of Interview:                        May 8, 2026 Interviewer:       ...

Can one person's word really send you to prison in Australia... with no CCTV, no DNA, and no other witnesses? Short answer: yes. But there's a massive catch. I'm James and I've worked all three sides of the law as a cop, a police prosecutor, and now a criminal defence lawyer. In this one, I break down how a single witness CAN convict you, why Australian law doesn't require corroboration, and why "beyond reasonable doubt" still has to be met, even when it's one word against another. We’ll cover credibility vs reliability (they're not the same), why an honest witness can still be wrong, what judges and juries are actually looking for, and why a not guilty verdict doesn't mean anyone lied. It's not a channel for advice, but it is a channel for clarity. In this video: What counts as evidence, when one witness is enough, how courts test that evidence, and the warning juries get in single-witness cases. Got a question you want answered? Drop it in the comments or the community tab! I read them every week. General information only. Not legal advice. If you need advice on your situation, speak to a lawyer in your state/territory. 🔗 More breakdowns: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLY91cx99OcCw 📩 Questions answered weekly. Subscribe and comment below!

Can one person's word really send you to prison in Australia... with no CCTV, no DNA, and no other witnesses? Short answer: yes. But there's a massive catch. I'm James and I've worked all three sides of the law as a cop, a police prosecutor, and now a criminal defence lawyer. In this one, I break down how a single witness CAN convict you, why Australian law doesn't require corroboration, and why "beyond reasonable doubt" still has to be met, even when it's one word against another. We’ll cover credibility vs reliability (they're not the same), why an honest witness can still be wrong, what judges and juries are actually looking for, and why a not guilty verdict doesn't mean anyone lied. It's not a channel for advice, but it is a channel for clarity. In this video: What counts as evidence, when one witness is enough, how courts test that evidence, and the warning juries get in single-witness cases. Got a question you want answered? Drop it in the comments or the community tab! I read them every week. General information only. Not legal advice. If you need advice on your situation, speak to a lawyer in your state/territory. 🔗 More breakdowns: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLY91cx99OcCw 📩 Questions answered weekly. Subscribe and comment below!

Can one person's word really send you to prison in Australia... with no CCTV, no DNA, and no other witnesses? Short answer: yes. But there's a massive catch. I'm James and I've worked all three sides of the law as a cop, a police prosecutor, and now a criminal defence lawyer. In this one, I break down how a single witness CAN convict you, why Australian law doesn't require corroboration, and why "beyond reasonable doubt" still has to be met, even when it's one word against another. We’ll cover credibility vs reliability (they're not the same), why an honest witness can still be wrong, what judges and juries are actually looking for, and why a not guilty verdict doesn't mean anyone lied. It's not a channel for advice, but it is a channel for clarity. In this video: What counts as evidence, when one witness is enough, how courts test that evidence, and the warning juries get in single-witness cases. Got a question you want answered? Drop it in the comments or the community tab! I read them every week. General information only. Not legal advice. If you need advice on your situation, speak to a lawyer in your state/territory. 🔗 More breakdowns: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLY91cx99OcCw 📩 Questions answered weekly. Subscribe and comment below!

Name:                                      Rana* Interviewing Organization:   Iran Human Rights Documentation Center (IHRDC) Date of Interview:                        July 13, 2026 Interviewer:       ...

Despite new indictment, internal memos, depleted support and political pressure suggest case could collapse under own weight

Connecticut plans to implement witness subpoena regulations to protect reproductive health cases.