Summary
Convictions for kidnapping for ransom, murder and concealment of evidence were set aside because the circumstantial chain was incomplete. Telephone-booth evidence was not linked to the recipients’ numbers, the threatening letter was not forensically connected to the accused, and the alleged carriage of the body conflicted with the medical estimate of death. The remaining recoveries and circumstances did not exclude reasonable hypotheses consistent with innocence.
Issues
- Whether the proved circumstances formed a complete chain establishing the appellants’ guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Held
- Every incriminating circumstance must be fully established and the circumstances together must exclude every reasonable hypothesis other than guilt. Suspicion or a merely possible inference does not meet that standard. (¶ 14–15)
- Identification of the appellants as telephone-booth callers did not prove that they made the threatening calls: the prosecution failed to show that the dialled numbers belonged to or were controlled by the relevant witnesses. (¶ 16(a))
- Recovery of a drawing book did not establish authorship of the threatening letter. No forensic or handwriting examination connected the writing with either appellant. (¶ 16(b))
- The theory that the appellants carried the body the day after the disappearance did not fit the subsequent postmortem estimate of death. The remaining scarf recovery, discovery of the body and discarded wrappers did not complete the evidentiary chain. (¶ 17–18)
Result
Appeal allowed and appellants acquitted of the charges on benefit of doubt. Immediate release directed unless custody required in connection with another offence.