---
# System prepended metadata

title: Lecture 08 Evidence Analysis I
tags: [School, Notes, DISM, CLI]

---

---
title: 'Lecture 08 Evidence Analysis I'
disqus: hackmd
---

:::info
ST2502 Computer Law & Investigation
:::

Lecture 08 Evidence Analysis I
===

<style>
img{
/*     border: 2px solid red; */
    margin-left: auto;
    margin-right: auto;
    width: 80%;
    display: block;
}
</style>


## Table of Contents

[TOC]

Introduction
---
- evidence - legal means prove/disprove any matter of fact
- in both criminal & civil proceedings, rules of evidence must be complied with when drafting affidavits & when adducing oral evidence during trial
    - governed by provisions of Evidence Act (Cap 97)
- must be relevant & admissible

### The Evidence Act
- some evidence's prejudicial effect outweigh its believable value
    - hence many exclusionary rules - Eg. rule against hearsay
- However, the evi act is inclusive by nature & sets out all provable facts in terms of its relevancy
    - however, it does have exceptions to various rules but some may not be admissible
    - operate somewhat like common law exclusionary rules
- party's lawyer must file a __notice of objections__ to contents of affidavits of evidence-in-chief of all witnesses intended to be called
    - during trial, these objections would be adjudicated (hear/settle by judicial process) upon judge


Burden of Proof
---
- court decision in very case depend on whether parties satisfied the __burden & standard of proof__ that was imposed by law on him/her
- Section 103 of act - whoever asserts must bear burden of proving the facts in issue to support his assertion

### Facts in Issue
- __facts in issue__ - facts which plaintiff in civil action/prosecution in any criminal proceedings __must prove to succeed__ together with any further facts that defendant/accused __must prove to establish a credible defense__

### Legal Burden of Proof
- facts in issue sometimes AKA __legal burden of proof__
    - in criminal cases, this burden always remain on prosecution in relation to facts in issue throughout trial
        - they have to prove it
- must be distinguished with evidential burden of proof specified under Section 104 of evi act

### Evidential Burden of Proof
- prosecution in addition to legal burden of proof, must adduce (cite) sufficient evidence to meet the standard needed to prove the facts in issue
- Eg. if prosecution's evidence is "weak", defence may submit that there's "no case to ans" at end of prosec's case
    - if satisfied, court must acquit/free accused as evidential burden has not been discharged by prosecution



Standard of Proof
---

### Standard of Proof - Criminal
- in criminal cases, when prosecution required to prove facts in issue (ingredients/elements of crime), he must do so __beyond reasonable doubt__
- if accused relies on any defences/exceptions to liability spelt out in statutes, he must prove them based on __balance of probabilities__

### Standard of Proof - Civil
- in civil cases, plaintiff & defendant must as general rule prove the facts in issue which they assert & any defences they rellied on based on __balance of probabilities__

### Beyond Reasonable Doubt
- need not reach certainty but must carry highe degree of probability
- if evidence so strong against a man as to leave only a remote possibility in his favour which can be dismissed with the sentence "of course it's possible, but not in the least possible", the case is beyond reasonable doubt
    - nothing short of that will suffice

### Balance of probabilities
- must carry reasonable degree of probability
    - but not high as required in criminal case
- if evidence is such that a tribunal might say "we think it probable than not", the burden is discharged
- but if probabilities are equal, then its not


Circumstantial Evidence & Relevant Facts
---
- oftenly, direct evidence of facts in issue not available hence parties must rely on proving facts which tend to prove facts in issue
- this form of evidence, circumstantial in nature is regarded as __facts relevant to issue__

#### Example
- witness made statement at murder trial that he saw accused carrying blood-stained knife at door of apartment where deceased found
- prosec invites court to assume that witness is telling the truth & also infer that accused inflicted the mortal wound with his knife

### Relevant Facts
- under evidence act, a fact is relevant to another when one is connected with the other in any of the ways referred to part 1 of the act
    - part 1 of act spells out variety of general & specific categories of facts treated to be relevant
    - general categories covered by section 6 - 11 of act

#### Sections
- section 6 - facts which form part of the same transaction
- section 7 - facts which are occasion, cause or effect of facts in issue
- section 8 - facts which show motive, preparation & prev/subsequent conduct
- section 9 - facts necessary to explain/introduce relevant facts
- section 10 - facts showing things said/done by conspirator in ref to common intention/conspiracy
- section 11 - facts which are normally irrelevant becomes relevant when
    - inconsistent with any facts in issue/relevant fact
    - by themselves/in connection with other facts they make existence/non-existence of any fact in issue/relevant fact hgihly probable/improbable

### Example/Illustration
- accused charged with murdering X by stabbing him in X's home
- evidence of passerby that he heard screams at time of murder is relevant under section 6 (part of same transaction)
- fact that accused wore shirt stained by X's blood is relevant under section 7 (effect of fact in issue)
- fact that accused had heated argument with X shortly before murder relevant under section 9 (explaining the murder) and section 8 (possible motive)


Similar Fact Evidence
---
- section 14 & 15 of act deals with situations whr accused acts/state of mind on occasions other than present one giving rise to offence charged, will be deemed relevant by virtue of their similarity ot that offence

#### Example
- A sues B for injuries inflicted by B's dog
- the fact that dog had previously bitten X who had lodged a complaint to NEA is relevant fact
    - such facts are admissible as matter of law but there's judicial discretion granted to exclude its admissibility if its effect is overly prejudicial

### Rule Against Hearsay
- under section 62 of evi act requires direct evidence to be given
- its provided that witness who gives oral evidence must testify as to what he perceived
    - NOT permitted to testify to facts in issue/relevant facts perceived by others & recounted to him

#### Rationale
- witness cannot verify truth of facts which he has no personal knowledge of
- as the person who has personal knowledge is not in court, the accuracy of his perception cannot be accessed & tested in cross-examiniation
- furthermore, possibility of fabrication increased in situations of hearsay


Admissions & Confessions
---
### Admissions
-  admissions - statement oral/documentary which suggests any inference as to any fact in issue/relevant fact
    - section 17 of evi act
- admissions may be proved against person who made it & can be proved in both civil & criminal cases
    - section 21 
- in criminal cases, admission may constitute a confession

### Confessions
- confession - admission by accused person which states/suggest that he committed the offence
    - section 17(2)
- several conditions must be met before confession is admissible

#### Issue of Admissibility
- conditions that have to be met before confession can be admitted in court
    - in criminal cases, accused must admit to all elements of offence that constitutes it
        - Eg. intention & unlawful act
    - confession/admission must be made voluntarily with no inducement/threat/promise
    - confession will not be admissible if made to police officer below rank of sergeant


Corrobation
---
- defined as independent evidence which implciates person accused of crime by connecting him with it
    - covers evidence which cfms in some material particular not only that crime committed but also accused committed it
- essentially concerned with effect/weight of evidence distinct from its admissibility

### Admissibility VS Weight of Evidence
- admissibility of evidence (question of law) depends on
    - concept of relevancy of sufficiently high degree
    - fact that evidence tendered does not infringe any provisions under evi act
- weight of evidence - qns of fact & involves court deciding on value it would place on evidence
    - this value (AKA probative value) is significant in deciding whether court likely to believe evidence despite it being admissible

### When Accused Lies
- when accused lies abt material matter & motive is to evade detection/fabricate defence, evidence of  his lie may corrobate other evi against him
- court must be cautious not to treat lie as evidence of guilt as it may be innocently motivated
    - Eg. to buy time for himself
    - task for court is to determine motive behind the lies
    - Eg. accused lie in course of events (before chargs brought) so that there will be an opportunity to resolve differences between persons involved - ???


Privilege
---
- privilege - exceptional right/immunity given to person/class of persons
    - in law of evidence, certain matters are protected from disclosure in court on grounds of privilege
- matters granted privilege by evi act
    - marital communications
    - legal professional privilege
    - privilege aginst self-incrimination
    - public interest priv
    - protecting identity of informers
    - statement to police in course of investigations
    - priv of judges & magistrates




###### tags: `CLI` `DISM` `School` `Notes`