LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CRIMINAL LAW – Evidence – Circumstantial Evidence – Onus on Accused to Rebut on Preponderance of Probabilities
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
The onus is on the accused person to rebut the guilt based on circumstantial evidence but this is merely on the basis of preponderance of probabilities.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Iguh, JSC, in Adeniji v. State (2001) NLC-2101999(SC) at p. 18; Paras A–B.
"The onus is on the accused person to rebut the guilt based on circumstantial evidence but this is merely on the basis of preponderance of probabilities."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Where circumstantial evidence points to the accused’s guilt, the accused bears an evidential burden to rebut it on a preponderance of probabilities—not beyond reasonable doubt. This is a lower standard. The accused must provide a plausible alternative explanation or cast doubt on the prosecution’s inferences. The legal burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt remains on the prosecution throughout. The evidential burden shifts to the accused only to provide an explanation; if the accused fails, the court may draw an adverse inference. The principle applies where the prosecution has established a prima facie case based on circumstantial evidence. The accused’s explanation need only be probable, not proven beyond doubt.