Because of an oil company's questionable safety record, the board of directors bought a life insurance policy from an insurance company on the life of the president of the company.

The life insurance policy provided for payment of the face amount if death occurred as a result of an accident.

The president's wife took out a policy from the same company that paid triple the face amount if death resulted from a violent, intentional act.

The president died as a result of a fall from an offshore oil rig he was inspecting. The cause of death was drowning. The company claimed it was just another accident, and the insurance company agreed.

The wife claimed it was intentional and filed suit against the insurance company, demanding payment of triple the face amount of the policy. She testified that she was on the rig at the time of the "accident," and that she saw a worker running away from the spot where the president had been standing just seconds before his fall.

The insurance company's lawyer objected to the wife's competency to testify.

Should the president's wife be ruled competent to testify?