LEGAL PRINCIPLE: EVIDENCE LAW – Circumstantial Evidence – Test of Incompatibility with Innocence
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
For circumstantial evidence to be relied upon and believed, justifying the inference of guilt of the accused, the inculpatory facts must be incompatible with the accused's innocence.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Mohammed, JSC, in Adepetu v. State (1998) NLC-1761997(SC) at p. 30; Para B.
"I know that for circumstantial evidence to be relied upon and believed, justifying the inference of guilt of the accused, the inculpatory facts must be incompatible with the accused’s innocence."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Circumstantial evidence must exclude all reasonable hypotheses consistent with innocence. The facts must point irresistibly to guilt. The principle applies to criminal trials. The prosecution must prove that no other rational conclusion is possible. The court will consider the totality of circumstances. The rule protects against wrongful conviction. The accused is entitled to acquittal if the evidence is consistent with innocence. The principle is fundamental to criminal justice.