Argumentation and Debate

Midterm Examination

Instruction: Majority of the questions are hypothetical and will require that you analyse the facts before
applying the principles that we have studied. Take time to carefully read the problems before answering
them.

I. Definition and Distinction

A. Define evidence.
B. Distinguish proof from evidence.
C. Discuss the two methods and approach of argumentation and debate.
D. Who is a witness? Please define.
E. What is the difference between object evidence and testimonial evidence?
F. Distinguish admissibility from relevance.

II. Hypothetical Questions

A. (Witness)
1. Marina and Mario married each other in a civil wedding. Since they are really in love with
each other they decided to leave town and build a family outside of Metro Manila. The Lord
blessed them with three kids. Few weeks after the birth of the last child, Marina died in a car
accident. However, few minutes before breath left her she was able to call Minda over the
phone to tell her that it was her husband who staged the car accident so that he can finally
marry Ambrosia his long time sweetheart. The sister of Marina filed a case against Mario
alleging that he killed his wife. However, after the testimony of Marina’s sister the lawyer of
Mario objected alleging that the testimony being offered by Marina’s sister is hearsay.
a) What is hearsay? Is the testimony of Minda her sister admissible in evidence? Why?
b) Mario contested the testimony being given by Minda because it violates the marital
privilege rule. Do you think the claim of Mario is correct? Why?
i) What is marital privilege rule?
ii) Is it applicable in this case?
c) Mario admitted to his lawyer that he is the one who fixed the car crash of Marina because
she is always jealous of all his actions. The lawyer placed all the narration on his journal
because he is aware that Mario is already suffering from mental illness.
i) `Can the lawyer of Mario testify against him through his diary left here in the
Philippines? Is it admissible in evidence? Why?
ii) Considering that Mario is already suffering from mental illness is he still a
competent witness?
iii) The doctor that examined Mario was placed in the witness stand to testify on
a certain kind of mental illness, can the doctor testify as to a certain kind of
mental illness despite the objection of Mario?