Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
In my deliberations about each appellant's credibility I have taken into account each appellant's own evidence and also objective evidence before me.
Lilia had adduced for this appeal an unsigned statement dated 2 August 2000 in which she expresses (paragraph 1) her fears of being unable to answer questions about the contents of her statement during her appeal hearing because of her memory problems.
On account of al these factors, therefore I do not find credible Lilia's particular claims about being targeted for adverse interest by Correas or Acosta family members of their hired hands.
Bearing in mind that, quite clearly, from evidence supplied by Lilia and her family, numerous members of the Hurtado clan have been violently killed or have disappeared it seems to me that, particularly from the first appellant's claims that those who meant her harm often knew where she lived, that if members of the Acosta or Correa families were behind the problems that arose and meant her harm they would have easily been able to have taken action to have added Lilia to the list of those other deceased members of the Hurtado family.
I have difficulty in identifying any reason that might lay behind any adverse interest in Hurtado family members from the Acosta or Correa families.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.