Is a witness's testimony considered true until there is some reason to doubt it?

Additionally, I stated in R. v. C.R.B. [1999] N.S.J. No. 217 at para 11: Overall, it seems to me that a witness' testimony is considered true until there is some particular reason to doubt it. Doubts may arise from the inherent unreasonableness of the testimony itself. Doubts may also arise from the cross-examination of the witness. Such cross-examination may show that a fact is incredulous because of commonsensical inaccuracies that reveal obvious errors. In addition, extraneous evidence, or lack of it, may point to errors or inaccuracies in a witness' testimony and if never corrected to rehabilitate the credit of the witness that testimony would have little or no probative value. (See also, R v. W.D. 1991 CanLII 93 (SCC), [1991] 1 S.C.R. 742).