Q. Will you please tell us the names of those other persons who were present when you actually tender the P5,400.00 to the accused? A. Rebecca de Leon, Annie Nuque, Nenita Andasan, Angelyn Magpayo, Lina Ganot and Edgardo Salvador, sir. Q. At that point in time after you had given the amount of P5,400.00 to the accused, was there an official receipt that was issued or given to you by the accused? A. None, sir. Q. Do you know of any reason why there was no receipt? A. Because we trusted her, sir, because we were barriomates. Q. At that point in time that you actually handed the P5,400.00, where was Dominga Fortuna? A. She was present, sir. Q. Did she tell you anything before and after the giving of this P5,400.00? A. She said that we will be going to Manila to process our papers and passport and we will have a medical examination, sir.[7] The narration made by the complaining witnesses does appear to be straightforward, credible and convincing, and there scarcely is any reason for ignoring the trial court in its evaluation of their credibility. Indeed, the trial court has additionally observed: x x x. There is no showing that any of the complainants had ill-motives against accused Dominga Fortuna other than to bring her to the bar of justice. Furthermore, appellant was a stranger to private complainants before the recruitment. It is contrary to human nature and experience for persons to conspire and accuse a stranger of such a serious crime like this that would take the latters liberty and send him or her to prison. Against the prosecutions overwhelming evidence, accused could only offer a bare denial and an obviously concocted story. Doctrinally, the assessment made on testimonial evidence by the trial judge is accorded the highest respect for it is he who has the distinct opportunity to directly perceive the demeanor of witnesses and personally ascertain their reliability. The rule has been said that a person charged with illegal recruitment may be convicted on the strength of the testimony of the complainants, if found to be credible and convincing, and that the absence of receipts to evidence payment to the recruiter would not warrant an acquittal, a receipt not being fatal to the prosecution's cause.[8] The pertinent provisions of Republic Act No. 8042 state: SEC. 6. Definition. For purposes of this act, illegal recruitment shall mean any act of canvassing, enlisting, contracting, transporting, utilizing, hiring, or procuring workers and includes referring, contract of services, promising or advertising for employment abroad, whether for profit or not, when undertaken by a non-license or non-holder of