LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CRIMINAL LAW – Evidence – Circumstantial Evidence – Test for Sufficiency
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
Each case depends on its own facts but the one test which such evidence must satisfy is that it should lead to the guilt of the accused person and leave no degree of possibility or chance that other persons could have been responsible for the commission of the offence.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
"Each case depends on its own facts but the one test which such evidence must satisfy is that it should lead to the guilt of the accused person and leave no degree of possibility or chance that other persons could have been responsible for the commission of the offence."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
The test for sufficiency of circumstantial evidence is that it must lead to the accused’s guilt and leave no degree of possibility that other persons could have committed the offence. Each case depends on its own facts. The standard is high—the evidence must exclude reasonable alternative hypotheses. “No degree of possibility” means no rational possibility, not speculative possibility. The court must be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt. The evidence must be inconsistent with any other rational conclusion. The principle applies regardless of the strength of individual pieces of evidence. The court examines the totality of circumstances. If there is a realistic chance another person could be responsible, conviction cannot stand. The principle protects against wrongful conviction.
CASES APPLYING THIS PRINCIPLE
None recorded.
