LAW OF EVIDENCE II

TUTORIAL –OPINION EVIDENCE

1. Explain the following:

i. What is the distinction between an opinion and a fact?

ii. Under what circumstances can opinion evidence be admitted in court?

iii. Explain the meaning of “science or art” under section 45 of the Evidence Act.

iv. Identify the main principles governing the admissibility of opinion evidence on hand
writing.

2. Kebab is charged with the offence of causing injury to his girlfriend, Cantik. During
trial the prosecution called Dr.Bijak, a psychiatrist from Singapore. According to Dr.
Bijak, based on his experience a person like Kebab has the tendency to commit violent
crimes.

The defence called Dr.Baik, and he testified that Kebab had committed the offence out of
stress arising from the constant nagging from his girlfriend. According to Dr. Baik,
Kebab’s stress became worse when he found out that Cantik had been unfaithful to him.

Advise the parties

3. Labu and Labi were charged with the offence of outraging the modesty of a girl. Based
on the facts of the case, they were charged with committing the offence against Comel,
aged 13. The prosecution brought in a video footage which was recorded by a CCTV
installed in the victim’s house. Both Labu and Labi submit that they are not the 2 persons
in the video. They further submit that the footage has been doctored to look like them
using advanced digital technology.

Both Labu and Labi have called an expert witness Mr. Pin, who testifies that the footage
was not that of Labu and Labi and that it has been doctored. The prosecution in turn has
called its own expert Mr. Tin who testified that the footage is that of Labu and Labi and
there is no conclusive evidence to suggest that it was doctored.

The prosecution has challenged the defence witness by suggesting that the defence
witness is not qualified to be an expert witness because he has never testified as an expert
in court before and no evidence was given on his qualifications. The defence has
challenged the testimony of Mr.Tin on grounds that he has not provided any explanation
for his conclusions.

Advise the parties.