Chapter 2.3 - Burden & Standard of Proof: Circumstantial Evidence

Question 1

CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Overview

Answer 1

1) Meaning of circumstantial evidence
2) Conviction based on circumstantial evidence
3) Standard of proof for circumstantial evidence
4) Examples of cases based on circumstantial evidence

Question 2

MEANING OF CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Overview

Answer 2

1) Undesigned, unexpected coincidences

2) Sufficiently compelling & irresistible conclusion

Question 3

MEANING OF CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Undesigned, unexpected coincidences

Answer 3

Idris v PP:

Circumstantial evidence consists of:

• a series of undesigned, unexpected coincidences;
• as a reasonable person, based on the coincidences, you find that your judgment is compelled to one conclusion.
• if the circumstantial evidence is such as to fall short of the standard, it does not satisfy the test;
• if it leaves gaps, then it is of no use at all.

Question 4

MEANING OF CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Sufficiently compelling & irresistible conclusion

Answer 4

Sunny Ang v PP:

Circumstantial evidence consist of:

• facts that were sufficiently compelling that gives cumulative effect & leads to the irresistible conclusion that the accused has committed crime.
• there must be no other possible explanation for the facts adduced;
• the conclusion must be one & only that irresistible that the accused has committed the crime.

Question 5

CONVICTION BASED ON CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Whether conviction can be based on circumstantial evidence

3C’s

Answer 5

PP v Azilah Hadri & Anor:

Conviction can be based on circumstantial evidence, provided that:

1) circumstances: circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is sought to be inferred has been established.
2) consistency: the facts so established is consistent with the guilt of the accused.
3) conclusiveness: chain of evidence is complete as to the conclusiveness of the guilt of the accused.
- i.e. conviction can be based on circumstantial evidence provided that three-pronged test is satisfied. see below.

Question 6

STANDARD OF PROOF FOR CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Overview

Answer 6

1) Strength of rope
2) No reasonable alternative
3) Three-pronged test
4) Whether standard is higher than BRD

Question 7

STANDARD OF PROOF FOR CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Strength of rope

Answer 7

Chan Chwen Kong v PP:

• Judge has to observe not only an individual strand of evidence;
• But the combined strength of the strands to form a rope;
• And ask “is the rope strong enough to hang the prisoner?”.

Question 8

STANDARD OF PROOF FOR CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

No reasonable alternative

Answer 8

Kartar Singh v R:

• Circumstantial evidence, if believed, must be no reasonable alternative to the guilt of the accused.

Question 9

STANDARD OF PROOF FOR CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Three-pronged test

Answer 9

Lim Hean Chong v PP:

• Established: circumstances from which inference of guilt is sought to be drawn must be established;
• Pointing: the circumstances should be of indefinite tendency unerringly pointing towards the guilt of the accused.
• Conclusive: the circumstances, cumulatively, should form a chain that the crime is committed by the accused & no other.

Question 10

STANDARD OF PROOF FOR CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Whether standard is higher than BRD

Answer 10

Jayarahman & Ors v PP:

• Irresistible conclusion test is the same as BRD.

Question 11

EXAMPLES OF CASES BASED ON CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Overview

Answer 11

1) Weak - existence of other DNA
2) Weak - failure to show motive
3) Weak - no accused’s DNA
4) Strong circumstantial evidence

Question 12

EXAMPLES OF CASES BASED ON CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Existence of other DNA

Answer 12

PP v Hanif Basree:

• the PP’s case becomes hampered with the existence of the BNA belonging to “Unknown Male 1”;
• several findings could be made from the findings of such evidence on the body of the deceased.
• the discovery of the accused’s DNA per se cannot be sufficient to conclude that he has caused the death.

Question 13

EXAMPLES OF CASES BASED ON CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Failure to show motive

Answer 13

PP v Sarjit Kaur Najar Singh:

• PP failed to show the accused’s motive of killing her husband & that the accused is in position to benefit from the death of the husband since she was not the sole beneficiary of the insurance policy.
• each of the strand is so brittle, that even tied, they are not strong enough for prosecution to hold on to.

Question 14

EXAMPLES OF CASES BASED ON CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

No accused’s DNA

CA, 2020

Answer 14

PP v Zurailie Mohammad:

• profile DNA 1 is not compatible with the accused’s DNA;
• there is also no accused’s DNA found at the crime scene;
• the existence of the deceased’s husband’s DNA & non-existent of the accused’s DNA on the deceased have substantially hampered the prosecution’s case.

Question 15

EXAMPLES OF CASES BASED ON CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Strong circumstantial evidence

Answer 15

Sunny Ang v PP:

• evidence adduced are, inter alia, the accused in need of money & the deceased was insured against accident;
• on the day she was allegedly drowned, the accused did not go down into the waters even though she failed to resurface & knowing that she was a novice diver.
• although deceased’s body has never been found, there is overwhelming evidence pointing towards the accused’s guilt.

Question 16

EXAMPLES OF CASES BASED ON CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Strong circumstantial evidence

Answer 16

Juraimi Hussin & Ors v PP:

• evidence adduced are, inter alia, the body was recovered from the accused house, the deceased was last seen with the accused & the accused is in possession of the deceased’s personal belongings.
• The accused also went on shopping spree & made a payment using the bank notes that are consistent with the ones withdrawn by the deceased before his death;
• all the evidence leads to an irresistible conclusion that all three accused committed the crime.