course, unfortunate that Angelica C.J. Offemaria and the other accused, Leila Briones and Flor Nocete, at least momentarily, are able to avoid arrest and ward off the long arm of the law. Moreover, this Court sees no reason to discount the trial courts appreciation of the complainants and her witnesses truthfulness, honesty and candor. For such appreciation deserves the highest respect, since the trial court is best equipped to make the assessment of the witnesses credibility and demeanor on the witness stand, and its factual findings are generally not disturbed on appeal.[33] Petitioner failed to present evidence to rebut the evidence of the prosecution. She failed to present her mother and co-accused, Angelica C.J. Offemaria, nor the other accused, Leila Briones and Flor Nocete, who are the persons whom she claims are allegedly responsible for the crime against the private complainant. In fact, notwithstanding the seriousness of the charge against her, when petitioners mother, Angelica C.J. Offemaria, called her up on September 16, 1990 she made no mention of the case of estafa filed against her and her mother. [34] Such actuation is clearly contrary to human experience; a guiltless person would certainly exert every effort to prove her innocence. Because of her failure to do so, she risked the adverse inference and legal presumption that she did not present such witnesses because their testimonies would actually be adverse if produced.[35] For, indeed, petitioner could have presented her mother to rebut the claims of private complainant. Instead, she merely interposed denials in her defense. As against the positive and categorical testimonies of the complainant, petitioners mere denial cannot prevail. The penalty for the crime of estafa is prescribed by paragraphs 1 to 4 of Article 315 of the Revised Penal Code as follows: 1 . The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period to prision mayor in its minimum period, if the amount of the fraud is over 12,000 pesos but does not exceed 22,000 pesos, and if such amount exceeds the latter sum, the penalty provided in this paragraph shall be imposed in its maximum period, adding one year for each additional 10,000 pesos; but the total penalty which may be imposed shall not exceed twenty years. In such cases, and in connection with the accessory penalties which may be imposed and for the purpose of the other provisions of this Code, the penalty shall be termed prision mayor or reclusion temporal, as the case may be; st 2 . The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods, if the amount of the fraud is over 6,000 pesos but does not exceed 12,000 pesos; nd 3 . The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum period if such amount is over 200 pesos but does not exceed 6,000 pesos; and rd