Charina B.

Basilonia JD-III
Quiz in Qualitative Research
1.
No. In a case decided by the Supreme Court probable cause has been defined
as the existence of such facts and circumstances as would excite the belief in a
reasonable mind, acting on the facts within the knowledge of the prosecutor, that the
person charged was guilty of the crime for which he was prosecuted. The term does not
mean "actual or positive cause" nor does it import absolute certainty. It is merely based
on opinion and reasonable belief. Thus, a finding of probable cause does not require an
inquiry into whether there is sufficient evidence to procure a conviction. It is enough that
it is believed that the act or omission complained of constitutes the offense charged.
While clear and convincing evidence is less than proof beyond reasonable doubt (for
criminal cases) but greater than preponderance of evidence (for civil cases). The
degree of believability is higher than that of an ordinary civil case. Hence, I believe that
the threshold on the findings of the prosecutors be remained from probable cause. We
must understand that filing of case by the prosecutor is just part of the rules of court.
The trial is still part of the criminal procedure where in the complainant can prove in a
the clear and convincing evidence and even beyond reasonable doubt that a crime is
committed or the accused can prove that there is no reasonable doubt that the crime is
committed. Even if the threshold will be raised from probable cause to clear and
convincing evidence it will not even guaranty the acquittal or the conviction of the
accused. It is still in the trial or the trying of the criminal case can we determine if the
crime is committed beyond reasonable doubt.
2.
The implication of this to the complaints that will be filed by the police officers
with respect to their investigation is that they cannot file the same to the prosecution if
there is no clear and convincing evidence presented. Further, the police in respect to
their investigation must gather enough evidence that would supplement the complaint
and would lead to a clear and convincing evidence, otherwise, the same will be dismiss.
Moreover, the Revised Penal Code under Article 125 reiterated on how many
hours should a police officer delivered a detained person. According to the law xxx
public officer or employee who shall detain any person for some legal ground and shall
fail to deliver such person to the proper judicial authorities within the period of; twelve
(12) hours, for crimes or offenses punishable by light penalties, or their equivalent;
eighteen (18) hours, for crimes or offenses punishable by correctional penalties, or their
equivalent; and thirty-six (36) hours, for crimes or offenses punishable by afflictive or
capital penalties, or their equivalent. Hence, if the needed findings from the prosecutor
is a clear and convincing evidence, delivery of detained person should be more than the
hours stated in the RPC since the police officer should also find a clear and convincing
evidence that the crime was committed.
 3.
It would not be favorable to the prosecutor. Workloads of the prosecutor will
continue to increase as they will not base their findings on their reasonable belief that a
crime is committed. They need a higher degree of believability that a crime is committed
and there should be enough evidence that would support such. It is not as well
favorable to the complainant as clear and convincing evidence is needed in order to file
the case in the court. It would be favorable to the accuse who has been accused of the
crime he did not committed as he can be spared from the false accusation, however, it
is more favorable to the accuse who really committed the crime as he will be not be
detained longer as allowed by law if there is no clear and convincing evidence that he
committed a crime.
4.
No. Probable cause will not determine the acquittal nor the conviction of the
crime. It is merely the existence of such facts and circumstances as would excite the
belief in a reasonable mind, acting on the facts within the knowledge of the prosecutor,
that the person charged was guilty of the crime for which he was prosecuted. It is still in
the trial that would determine whether or not the accuse has committed the crime
beyond reasonable doubt.

5.
I stand by the fact that the findings of the prosecutor be remained in probable
cause, as it will not fully determine the conviction and the acquittal of the accused. The
real problem is not threshold in findings of the prosecutor but rather a fair and speedy
trial. Even if we increase the threshold in a clear and convincing evidence if there are
still backlogs of cases, real justice will not be attained. Hence, one of my
recommendation is a continuous hiring of prosecutors as well as judges that will
somehow ease the backlogs of cases in our courts. Workforce is important in attaining
justice.