LEGAL MEDICINE AND MEDICAL JURISPRUDENCE

LEGAL MEDICINE OR FORENSIC MEDICINE is a branch of medicine which deals with the application of
medical knowledge to the purposes of law and justice.

MEDICAL JURISPRUDENCE is a branch of law which regulates the practice of the medical profession.

A physician who specializes in the science of legal medicine is a MEDICAL JURIST or MEDICO-LEGAL
EXPERT.

DIFFERENCE bet. ORDINARY PHYSICIAN and MEDICAL JURIST:

Ordinary Physician Medical Jurist Example

 SEES an injury or disease  as to CAUSE
on the point of view of
TREATMENT
 PURPOSE is to institute  examines to gather medical
TREATMENT
 MINOR BODY LESIONS  PHYSICAL
may be significant to
warrant attention for they
may not necessitate
treatment
 TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE is 
limited to his own personal
knowledge; cannot opine
or speculate like an expert
 cause of death or injury such
as an imprint abrasion from
a radiator
 fiber contents in the
evidence for the purpose of stomach may disclose
LAW and to give justice to one where a person ate in last 3
where justice is due hours prior to death
INJURIES of minor wounds in the arm
whatever nature, size and may indicate defense
location must be appreciated wounds;
and described  injection marks in heroin
over-dosage;
 dirty finger nail which may
contain tissues of the
assailant;
 conjunctival petechiae in
death by strangulation may
escape attention
possess unique knowledge, 
training and skills on the
subject of inquiry so his
OPINION IS ACCORDED
GREATER WEIGHT AND
PERSUASION

MEDICAL EVIDENCE is the means, sanctioned by law or the rules, of ascertaining in a judicial proceeding
the truth respecting a matter of fact “wherein scientific medical knowledge is necessary.” – Rule
128, Sec. 1

Some laws aside from the Rules of Court may render evidence inadmissible.

Ex. Exclusionary provision in the Bill of Rights regarding evidence illegally obtained or violation of the
privacy of communications/correspondence or violations of the right against self-incrimination;
Art. 315 of the NCC prohibits testimonial compulsion against a person’s ascendants or
descendants; statute of fraud; prohibition of parole evidence in proof of express trust (Art. 1443
NCC); Art. 821 NCC prohibits one convicted of perjury to be a witness to a will.
DIFFERENCE bet. MATERIAL, RELEVANT and COMPETENT EVIDENCE:

MATERIAL (Rule 8, Sec. 10) COMPETENT RELEVANT (Rule 128, Sec. 3)

Proves the material allegations in NOT excluded by the Rules of Has a relation to the fact in
PLEADINGS the Law issue as to INDUCE BELIEF in
its existence or non-existence
Examples: Examples:
Parole evidence rule; While ordinarily irrevelant, a
Best evidence rule; hymen laceration or
Hearsay rule; spermatozoa in the vagina
Latent v. Patent ambiguity in becomes relevant as to
a will whether or not there was
penile penetration;
bruises or contusions to prove
application of force;
evidence of flight after
commission of a crime;
motive or lack of it

FACT IN ISSUE  a point where one side/party AFFIRMS and the other side/party DENIES

COLLATERAL MATTERS are NOT ALLOWED unless it tends to establish the PROBABILITY OR
IMPROBABILITY of the fact in issue. – Rule 128, Sec. 4

Example: The sterility of an accused is “collateral” in a rape case. But when spermatozoa are
recovered from a rape victim, sterility tends to establish the improbability of the accused being
the culprit. Hence, it is admissible.

TYPES OF EVIDENCE:

1. Direct – proves the fact in dispute without aid of inferences or presumption

Eg. Eyewitness to rape
2. Circumstantial – existence of a particular fact is inferred from a set of facts
Eg. In a rape with homicide, there is no eye witness. But, the shoes proved to be belonging to the
accused is left in the crime scene; victim was last seen with the accused; suspect’s hair in the
fingers of the victim; accused’s DNA found underneath the victim’s fingernails. Unless the accused
can satisfactorily explain these damning evidence, there is moral certainty that the accused is
guilty. After all what is required is only proof beyond reasonable doubt – not proof beyond any
kind of doubt.
When is circumstantial evidence sufficient to produce conviction?
(a) When there is more than one circumstance;
(b) When the facts from which inferences are derived are proven; and
(c) When the combination of all the circumstances is such as to produce conviction beyond a
reasonable doubt (Rule 133, Sec. 4) i.e. other explanation or conclusion can be drawn from
such circumstances.
3. Corroborative evidence – additional evidence of different kind and character tending to prove the
same point
 4. Cumulative evidence – additional evidence of the same kind and character as that already given
and tending to prove the same point
Ex. The testimony of 2 or more witnesses seeing A’s act of stabbing are cumulative; another
witness who saw A dispose of the bloody weapon is corroborative

THE MEDICAL WITNESS

Qualification of an Ordinary witness – “one who can perceive and perceiving can make known his
perception to others.” (Rule 130, Sec. 20) (N.B. Additionally, a witness should also understand the
significance of his oath or affirmation)

Ex. Mute is qualified to testify by sign language; a blind on what he hears or feels or smells.

OPINION of an ordinary witness is admissible except regarding identity of a person; handwriting he is

familiar with; mental sanity of a person he is acquainted and his impressions of the emotion, condition,
behavior or appearance of a person like fear, anger, jealousy, intoxication. (Rule 130, Sec. 48)

But, the opinion of an expert is admissible. (Rule 130, Sec. 49) His answers to hypothetical questions are
admissible where an ordinary witness may be incompetent to testify to.

A physician may be presented in court as an ordinary witness and/or as an expert witness. As an ordinary
witness, he should ONLY be allowed to state the facts which come to his own perception. As an expert
witness, he is allowed to give his inference, deduction, conclusion or opinion from the facts presented to
him.

Hence, an expert witness must first be qualified as an expert. How? By showing he possesses special
knowledge, skills, experience or training on the subject of inquiry. Sometimes it is not advantageous to
immediately avail of the opposing counsel’s admission of an expert witness since the proponent will lost
the opportunity to high-light his unique knowledge on the particular subject of inquiry or his standing in
a particular field/specialization, thus, making his testimony carry more weight and persuasion as well as
enhance the witness’ credibility. Ex. On the witness’ extensive research on the subject; or as a recognized
international authority; or an author of a publication on the subject.

Preservation of Evidence – photograph and sound recording sketch/narrative description

Deception DETECTION methods: (The Search for Truth):

1. Intoxication – IN VENUM VERITAS (in wine there is truth?)

2. Confession by hypnotism or torture
3. Truth serum – atropine sulfate or scopolamine + barbiturates like Sodium Amytal
4. Lie detector or Keeler’s polygraph – continuously records blood pressure, respiration, psycho-
galvanic reflex, variation in skin electrical phenomena. It is admissible in some states in the USA
but not in PH. The result is heavily dependent on the one who interprets the tracings and it may
violate the Right against Self-incrimination; recently Voice Stress Analysis.
5. Cross examination – its importance is herein illustrated:
A judge who after hearing the plaintiff’s story said “You are right, Juan.” Defendant complained
“Wait a minute Judge, you haven’t heard my story yet.” “Go on then” the judge said impatiently.
After hearing the side of defendant, the judge said “I guess you are right too, Pedro.” The judge’s
 wife overhearing the decision exclaimed “Sweetheart, both sides can’t be right. One of them must
be wrong.” In great surprise the judge said “By golly, darling, you are right too!”

NB Forensic experts almost always rely on physical evidence because he is naturally absent during the
incident but is asked to make inferences.

Medico-legal aspects of Identification – “Biometrics” such as Video analysis from CCTV and Digital Face
Recognition are very useful.

1. Dental diagram or chart; bite marks identification

2. DNA from body fluids, mucosa scrapings, hair;
3. Voice print; voice stress analysis (involuntary micro-muscle action of the larynx detected by
computer program)
4. Iris/retinal scan;
5. Blood type in paternity cases – Ex. Mother is type A, Father is type O. Their child can never be type
B or type AB (Exclusionary evidence) or if parents are both type O, the child cannot be A, B or AB;
Blood recovered from the scene is of different type from that of the suspect; blood stain from the
suspect’s knife matches that of the victim.
6. Dactyloscopy – is the art of identification by comparison of fingerprints. Unchanged throughout
life
7. Ex. John Dillinger burned them with acid but as long as the dermis is not completely destroyed
the fingerprint remains unchanged.