Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Evidence
Reliability And Relevance As The Touchstones For Admissibility Of Evidence In Criminal Proceedings: Muhammad Bin Kadar V Pp [2011] 3 Slr 1205 [Case Note], Siyuan Chen
Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law
The Court of Appeal in Muhammad bin Kadar v PP [2011] 3 SLR 1205 (“Kadar”) formally recognised the judicial discretion to exclude evidence as an integral part of the law on criminal evidence in Singapore. This discretion, the court held, would help ensure that all evidence coming before the court would be as reliable as possible. While this commentary agrees that the foundational basis for the exclusionary discretion doctrine is desirable, it suggests that there are difficulties with the application of the doctrine. An alternative approach that works around the difficulties is canvassed for consideration.
The Corroborative Effect Of Lies, Siyuan Chen
The Corroborative Effect Of Lies, Siyuan Chen
Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law
PP v Kamrul Hasan Abdul Quddus [2010] SGHC 7; Kamrul Hasan Abdul Quddus v PP [2011] SGCA 52. Overview of the case: In PP v Kamrul Hasan Abdul Quddus, the accused was charged with murder. He and the deceased had been in a tumultuous relationship, and the main evidence that connected the deceased’s death to the accused, apart from the fact that her body was found in the construction site that the accused worked at, was that DNA taken from her rectum tested positive for semen that matched his DNA.
Juror Comprehension And The Hard Case: Making Forensic Evidence Simpler, Mark Findlay
Juror Comprehension And The Hard Case: Making Forensic Evidence Simpler, Mark Findlay
Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law
The complexity/comprehension nexus as it impacts on juror decision-making is addressed in the particular context of prosecution-led DNA evidence. Such evidence is for jurors the subject of pre-trial preconceptions, and is notoriously difficult to present and argue before a jury. The article looks at the comprehension of forensic evidence by jurors, a task qualified by the opinion of legal professionals whose responsibility it is to present and interpret such evidence in adversarial contexts.Jurors were surveyed post-verdict in trials where forensic evidence featured in circumstantial cases. These insights into comprehension were qualified by contesting views of legal professionals, and critical reflections …