PRINCIPLE STATEMENT

Circumstantial evidence is nothing more than evidence of surrounding circumstances which by their very nature are capable of establishing a proposition, such as the criminality of an accused person with the highest exactitude.

RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)

Per Achike, JSC, in Ebre & Ors v. State (2001) NLC-591999(SC) at p. 16; Paras A–B.
"Circumstantial evidence is nothing more than evidence of surrounding circumstances which by their very nature are capable of establishing a proposition, such as the criminality of an accused person with the highest exactitude."
View Judgment

EXPLANATION / SCOPE

Circumstantial evidence is evidence of surrounding circumstances that can establish a proposition—including criminality—with high exactitude. It is not inferior to direct evidence. Circumstantial evidence includes facts from which the existence of a fact in issue may be inferred. Examples: fingerprints, DNA, presence at scene, possession of stolen goods, motive, opportunity. The cumulative effect of circumstantial evidence can be as compelling as direct eyewitness testimony. The principle recognises that many crimes lack eyewitnesses. Circumstantial evidence, properly evaluated, can prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The court must examine all circumstances together, not in isolation. The strength of circumstantial evidence lies in its interlocking nature.

CASES APPLYING THIS PRINCIPLE