Practice question
An accused objects solely under the self-incrimination clause to a relevant photograph showing an existing physical scar. The photograph requires no compelled narrative or other testimonial act. Does that clause automatically exclude it merely because the image may be incriminating?
- Yes, every incriminating object is constitutionally inadmissible.
- No; relevant physical characteristics are distinct from compelled testimonial communication, although other lawful objections may remain.
- Yes, a photograph is always an oral confession.
- Yes, because physical identity can never be evidence.
- No; therefore the government may use any collection method whatsoever.
Legal references
- Dela Cruz v. People, G.R. No. 200748, July 23, 2014, main decision, testimonial and physical evidence distinguished: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/57255
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.