Testimony is Evidence

[Redbeard The Pink]

To you first question, I'm assuming, that you are referring to my religious beliefs.  It's going to depend on what you are talking about.  Some yes and some no.

For the second question I don't know that there is a formula or a checklist.  I think that much of it lies in the details and context of the testimony.  What I think of as witness testimony only include what they describe as seeing or experiencing.  If the testimony only includes the conclusion, I don't consider that very good evidence or testimony.  Many have included the possibility of lying or mistaken in their objections.  Corroborating evidence (either other testimony or physical evidence left behind)  goes a long way towards reducing these issues, and makes  for stronger testimony.  If they are independent of the circumstances (not benefiting), or there is reason for them not to give their testimony and they do anyway, then I think this makes their testimony better.  I ask questions, like if they are including details non relevant to the conclusion or are they editing large parts out?  Is there reasons to question it?

But generally, I give them the benefit of the doubt until I have reason to dismiss them (principle of charity). 

How do you decide what testimony to believe and what not to?

Well, for most mundane claims I do often take people at their word unless I have a really good reason not to. Beyond that, I typically withhold belief until there's enough good information to decide what's true. Human perception and memory are faulty and easily fooled, and I don't trust either in situations where it actually matters.