Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 3

TUTORIAL 3

Q. 4: State the methods of proving identity.

Section 9 makes relevant,


the identity of a person.

INTRODUCTION

Relevant section : Section 9 of the Evidence Act.


There are 5 classes of relevant facts which fall under this section,
namely:
(1) Facts necessary to explain or introduce a fact in issue or relevant
fact;
(2) Facts which support or rebut an inference suggested by a fact in

issue;
(3) Facts which establish the identity of anything or person
whose identity is relevant;
(4) Facts which fix the time or place at which any fact in issue or
relevant fact happened; and
(5) Facts which show the relation of parties by whom any such fact
was transacted.

Identification of a person can be done in a number of ways.

METHODS
Identification by
fingerprints

- Regularly resorted to
when necessary.

Identification by
photograph

RELEVANT CASES
PP v. Toh Kee Huat
- It was convinced that it was the accused
who had stolen the car. Fingerprints expert
identified that the fingerprints belong to
the accused as it was found from inner
surface of the glass on the drivers
window. The mark could not be there
except after someone had unlawfully
tampered with the locked car to gain entry.
The position of the mark alone makes it
self evident that it was not made by a
casual passerby.
PP v. Kok Heng & 2 Ors
- Identification of a suspect by photograph
before arrest is acceptable but once he has
been arrested, the identification should be
by personal inspection.
Loke Soor Har v. PP
- A crucial issue on accuseds murder trial
was the identification of the murderer. To
establish the accused persons identity,

- Must not be
prejudicial to the
accused. Must not
potray more than his
identity as to show his
bad character.
Identity parades

the police officer had to shown to the


identifying witness some photographs of
known pickpocket. Held: the evidence was
inadmissible as it was prejudicial to the
accused as it led to the impression that he
was a known pickpocket.

Dato Mokhtar Hashim v. PP


- IP is only necessary if the accused persons
are not previously known to the witnesses.
If known, then IP is not necessary.
Chang Kim Seong v. PP
- The witness had the opportunity to see the
appellant beforehand.
- Was held that the manner the
identification was conducted was highly
Must be conducted
irregular.
fairly and properly.
The police must not Low Thim Fatt v. PP
- Before the witness attended the parade,
say or do anything
she was asked by the police to peep
that persuades the
through the glass to see whether the
witness to identify
appellant was the one who pointed the
the suspect that
gun at her.
they prefer.
Chan Sin v. PP
- IP should be conducted in the usual and
proper manner. The suspect must be
placed with sufficient number of others of
the same nationality and age as himself.

Identity by voice

Teng Kum Seng v. PP


- The identity of the accused was
established by his 3 victims who were able
to recognise his voice on the telephone,
which was found to be similar when the
accused telephoned the victims when
trying to put them in fear of injury in
furtherance of extorting money from them.

Identification by
genetic
fingerprinting (DNA
testing)

PP v. Hanif Basree Abdul Rahman


- Main issue: whether from the pathologists
and chemists evidence it could be
irresistibly concluded that the accused was
the last person who had sexual intercourse

with the deceased and later caused her


death?
The DNA profile from the swabs taken from
part of the deceaseds body showed that it
belonged to an unknown male 1 and did
not match the DNA profile of the accused.