junaidi bin abdullah v pp principles of sim

8/10/2019 Junaidi Bin Abdullah v Pp Principles of Sim

1/9

NOTE: JUNAIDI BIN ABDULLAH v PP: PRINCIPLES OF SIMILAR FACT EVIDENCE

Print Request: Current Dou!ent: "

Ti!e O# Request: $e%nes%&'( Nove!)er *+( *,-. *":/0:"+

Sen% To:

INTERNATIONAL ISLAMI UNIVERSIT1

MALA1SIA2 IIUM LIBRAR1

SERIALS SERVICES

Ter!s: 3si!i4&r #&ts evi%ene5

Soure: M&4&'&n L&6 Journ&4 Arti4es

Pro7et ID:


2/9

Page 2


3/9

Page 3

Malayan Law Journal Articles/1994/Volume 3/JUNAII !IN A!ULLA" # PP$ P%IN&IPL'( )* (IMILA%*A&+ 'VI'N&'

[1994] 3 MLJ ccxxii

Malayan Law Journal Articles

1994

JUNAIDI BIN ABDULLAH !!" !#IN$I!L%& '( &IMILA# (A$)%*ID%N$%

Norbani bte Mohamed Nazeri

Lecturer, Faculty of Law, University of Malaya

&i+ilar ,act ei-enceconcerns circumstances in w,ic, an accuse- .ersons .re#ious miscon-uct0 ot,ert,an t,at w,ic, gi#es rise to t,e oence c,arge-0 is ma-e a-missile to .ro#e guilt0 y #irtue o t,em eingsimilar to t,e oence +,e si+ilar ,act ei-encerule ,as long een acce.te- y u-ges to e a..licaleun-er ss 11560 14 an- 17 o t,e '#i-ence Act 1978 5t,e Act6 *or ease o un-erstan-ing0 t,ese .ro#isionsare re.ro-uce- elow

11) *acts not ot,erwise rele#ant are rele#ant

1. i y t,emsel#es or in connection wit, ot,er acts t,ey ma:e t,e e;istence or none;istence oany act in issue or rele#ant act ,ig,ly .roale or im.roale

1

14) *acts s,owing t,e e;istence o any state o min-0 suc, as intention0 :nowle-ge0 goo- ait,0negligence0 ras,ness0 illwill or goo-will towar-s any .articular .erson0 or s,owing t,e e;istence oany state o o-y or o-ily eeling0 are rele#ant w,en t,e e;istence o any suc, state o min- or o-y

or o-ily eeling is in issue or rele#ant

15) e- as suc,0 t,eir a..lication in t,e similar act area ,a#e een amaor .rolem in Malaysia as well as in (inga.ore1

Ju-ges eel t,e nee- to reer an- ,a#e long reerre- to 'nglis, ormulations o t,e rule0 .articularly t,eormulation enunciate- in Makin v A-G for New outh !ales2Lor- "ers,ell in Makinormulate- w,at ,eregar-e- to e t,e rule o a-missiility$3

It is un-oute-ly not com.etent or t,e .rosecution to a--uce e#i-ence ten-ing to s,ow t,at t,e accuse- ,as een

guilty o criminal acts ot,er t,an t,ose co#ere- y t,e in-ictment0 or t,e .ur.ose o lea-ing to t,e conclusion t,at t,eaccuse- is a .erson li:ely rom ,is criminal con-uct or c,aracter to

" ML# cc$$ii at cc$$iii,a#e committe- t,e oence or w,ic, ,e is eing trie- ?+,e irst lim@ )n t,e ot,er ,an-0 t,e mere act t,at t,ee#i-ence a--uce- ten-s to s,ow t,e commission o ot,er crimes -oes not ren-er it ina-missile i it e rele#ant to anissue eore t,e ury0 an- it may e so rele#ant i it ears u.on t,e =uestion w,et,er t,e acts allege- to constitute t,ecrime c,arge- in t,e in-ictment were -esigne- or acci-ental0 or to reut a -eence w,ic, woul- ot,erwise e o.en tot,e accuse- ?+,e secon- lim@

+,is ormulation will ,ereinater e calle- t,e s.eciic .ur.ose a..roac, It ecame t,e rule rom t,e time itwas ormulate-0 until 1970 w,en t,e "ouse o Lor-s reormulate- it in %oardman v &''4Lor-


4/9

Page 4

ormulation o t,e rule in %oardmanre=uires a alance etween .roati#e orce an- .reu-icial eect inassessing t,e a-missiility o si+ilar ,act ei-ence.In s,ort0 i t,e a-mission o t,e act seems to #ictimi>et,e accuse-0 t,en it s,oul- not e a-mitte- as e#i-ence Lor-


5/9

Page 7

merely ten- to -ee.en sus.icion -oes not go to .ro#e guilt0 so e#i-ence o similar acts s,oul- e e;clu-e- unlesssuc, e#i-ence ,as a really material earing on t,e issues to e -eci-e- I t,in: t,at it ollows rom t,is t,at0 to ea-missile0 e#i-ence must e relate- to somet,ing more t,an isolate- instances o t,e same :in- o oence

In #unaidi0 ater -iscussing ot, .rinci.les0 Mo,ame- A>mi (&J0 -eli#ering t,e u-gment o t,e court0 sai-$ 13

" ML# cc$$ii at cc$$v

)n t,e .rinci.le lai- -own in Makins case an- %oardmans case0 we are o t,e o.inion t,at w,ere t,e .ur.ose oa--ucing e#i-ence o similar acts or similar oences is ustiiale on t,e groun- o rele#ancy an- necessity to reutany -eence w,ic, woul- ot,erwise e o.en to t,e accuse- 5in a--ition to t,ose un-er ss 14 an- 17 o t,e '#i-ence

Act 197860 it is a-missile in e#i-ence .ro#i-e- t,e .roati#e #alue o suc, e#i-ence outweig,s its .reu-icial #alue+,ere must e a real antici.ate- -eence to e reutte- an- not merely cre-iting t,e accuse- wit, a ancy -eence

+,ree issues nee- to e -iscusse- ,ere +,e irst issue relates to t,at .art o Mo,ame- A>mi (&Jsstatement w,ic, rea-s$

w,ere t,e .ur.ose o a--ucing e#i-ence o similar acts or similar oences is ustiiale on t,e groun- o rele#ancyan- necessity to reut any -eence w,ic, woul- ot,erwise e o.en to t,e accuse- 5in a--ition to t,ose un-er ss 14an- 17 o t,e '#i-ence Act 197860

*rom t,e aoresai- statement0 it is o#ious t,at t,e court ,a- ollowe- t,e ormulation in Makin +,e issue isw,at -oes t,e .,rase in a--ition to t,ose un-er ss 14 an- 17 meanD As si+ilar ,act ei-enceis mainlya..licale un-er ss 14 an- 170 Makins secon- .ro.osition cannot e use- wit,out limitation as t,ea..lication o si+ilar ,act ei-enceis only allowe-0 un-er t,ose sections0 in .ro#ing a .ersons state omin- %eutting a -eence can also mean negating t,e actus reus +,e court reerre- to t,e case o win v''014w,ic, -oes not mention t,e .articular section o t,e Act w,en a..lie- to t,e similar act ormulation Ireutting a -eence is -irectly rele#ant to s,ow t,at t,e act was intentional an- not acci-ental0 t,en an- t,enonly woul- t,e state- .ur.ose a..ly to s 1717

It is res.ectully sumitte- t,at t,e time ,as come or t,e court to reer to t,e s.eciic sections w,en a..lyingt,e .rinci.les o si+ilar ,act ei-ence/as t,e rele#ancy o acts is controlle- y t,e Act (ection 7 rea-s t,ate#i-ence may e gi#en in any suit or .rocee-ing o t,e e;istence or none;istence o e#ery act in issue an-

o suc, ot,er acts as are ,ereinater -eclare- to e rele#ant0 an- o no ot,ers (ection 4 rea-s t,at one actis sai- to e rele#ant to anot,er w,en t,e one is connecte- wit, t,e ot,er in any ways reerre- to in t,e.ro#isions o t,is Act relating to rele#ancy

In t,e .resent case0 e#i-ence y t,e witness or t,e .rosecution was use- to negate t,e -eence w,ic,woul- ot,erwise e o.en to t,e accuse- !ut t,e court mentione- t,at t,is .iece o e#i-ence a..lie- un-er s11 5.resumaly s 11560 as ,is Lor-s,i. raise- t,e issue o .roaility to a-mit t,e socalle- si+ilar ,actei-enceregar-ing t,e accuse-s .re#ious in#ol#ement in an arme- roery61BIn ot,er wor-s0 t,e actw,ic, negati#es

" ML# cc$$ii at cc$$vit,e actus reus is not .ro#i-e- or in ss 14 an- 17 ut in s 1156 +,ereore0 in a--ition to ss 14 an- 170 similaract can e a--uce- to negate actus reus un-er s 1156

+,e secon- issue relates to t,e courts -ecision t,at in a--ition to t,e situations un-er ss 14 an- 17 o t,e

Act0 si+ilar ,act ei-enceis only a-missile i t,e .roati#e #alue o suc, e#i-ence outweig,s t,e.reu-icial #alue +,e =uestion t,at arises is t,e a..lication o t,e .roati#e #alue a..roac, un-er t,e Act PNair is o t,e #iew t,at in loo:ing at t,e sc,eme o t,e Act0 an- t,e act t,at it is ase- on t,e conce.t orele#ancy w,ere rele#ancy -etermines a-missiility0 it will not e .ossile to say0 t,at rele#ant e#i-ence maye ina-missile1(ection 13B516 rea-s$


6/9

Page B

+,e wor- use- is s,all an- t,is in-icates a man-atory re=uirement I t,e Act wis,es to gi#e t,e court-iscretion0 t,ere s,oul- ,a#e een an e;.ress .ro#ision or it0 suc, as t,e one in s 128536 on t,e .ower ot,e court in restricting crosse;amination *rom ss 7 an- 13B5160 t,ereore0 it woul- a..ear t,at t,e court ,asno -iscretion to reect rele#ant acts +,is woul- also mean t,at t,e %oardmanormulation cannot a..lyun-er ss 14 an- 170 as t,e court ,as no -iscretion to -o so "ow t,en was it a..lie- in #unaidiD Nair

suggests t,at it can e -one y a..lying t,e sai- ormulation w,en -etermining w,et,er a act is rele#ant ornot I t,e .roati#e #alue is ,ig,er0 t,en an- t,en only will t,e act ecome rele#ant an- a-missile +,is#iew is su..orte- y s 13B o t,e Act w,ic, states clearly t,at t,e u-ge s,all -etermine w,et,er t,ee#i-ence is rele#ant or not +,e u-ge0 ater all0 can only ma:e ,is -ecision ater ,earing sumissions romcounsel on t,e .reu-icial eect an- t,e .roati#e #alue o t,e sai- e#i-ence1C!e t,at as it may0 t,e courts,oul- e;.lain t,e .ossiility o a..lying t,e .roati#e #alue a..roac, w,ic, is im.ortant or a air trial

%eturning to t,e .resent case0 t,e courts #iew may also e inter.rete- t,is way t,at a.art rom ss 14 an-170 s 1156 can e use- to negate -eences an- a-mit e#i-ence .ro#i-e- t,e .roati#e #alue o suc,e#i-ence outweig,s its .reu-icial #alue

In #unaidi0 t,e u-ge acce.te- t,e e#i-ence o .,ysical .ossession o t,e re#ol#er -uring t,e roery as #italto t,e -eence an- rele#ant un-er s 11 o t,e Act to cast a reasonale -out on t,e .rosecution case t,at t,ere#ol#er was not in t,e a..ellants .ossession at t,e time o arrest i suc, e#i-ence was acce.te- as.roale +,e court elt t,at since t,e e#i-ence o t,e arme- roery orme- a #ital .art o t,e -eence in t,ecircumstances o t,e case0 t,e .roati#e #alue o suc, e#i-ence woul- outweig, its

" ML# cc$$ii at cc$$vii.reu-icial #alue as e#i-ence o a- c,aracter Accor-ing to t,e u-ge0 it is not rig,t to e;clu-e suc, e#i-enceas it woul- e against t,e interests o ustice0 an- it #irtually meant -enying t,e accuse- t,e o..ortunity otesting ,is -eence in t,e crosse;amination o .rosecution witnesses It woul- also -eny t,e .rosecution t,eo..ortunity to reut a -eence w,ic, woul- ot,erwise e o.en to t,e accuse- in -ealing wit, t,e ao#eissue A.art rom eing .roati#e0 t,e court also insiste- t,at t,ere must e real antici.ation o t,e -eence toe reutte- an- not merely cre-iting t,e accuse- wit, a anciul -eence In t,e .resent case0 t,e court wasnot merely -ealing wit, an antici.ate- -eence +,e -eence .ut u. y t,e accuse- was a com.lete -enial o.ossession o t,e re#ol#er an- t,is -eence was in-icate- at t,e early stage o t,e trial +,e court ,a- no.rolem o acce.ting t,is as e#i-ence

+,e t,ir- issue relates to t,e courts statement0 )n t,e .rinci.le lai- -own in Makins case an- %oardmans

case It woul- a..ear t,at not only is a s.eciic .ur.ose nee-e- to enale a act to e roug,t as si+ilar,act ei-enceut t,e act must also e .roati#e +,is is0 as e;.laine- earlier0 only .ossile un-er ss 14an- 17 i t,e court consi-ers t,e .roati#e #alue eore ma:ing a -ecision on rele#ancy o t,e act It loo:sas i t,e s.eciic .ur.ose a..roac,0 w,ic, is wi-er0 is also a..licale un-er s 11560 eore t,e .roati#e#alue is consi-ere- un-er t,at section

)ne =uestion still remains to e answere- +,e rele#ant .ortion o s 17 rea-s$ t,e act t,at t,e act orme-.art o a series o similar occurrences +,e wor- series seems to lay some im.ortance on t,e numer ooccurrences Illustration 5a6 to s 170 rea-s$

A is accuse- o urning -own ,is ,ouse in or-er to otain money or w,ic, it is insure- +,e acts t,at A li#e- in severalhousessuccessi#ely0 eac, o w,ic, ,e insure-0 in eac, o w,ic, a ire occurre-0 an- ater eac, o w,ic, ire A recei#e-.ayment rom a -ierent insurance oice0 are rele#ant as ten-ing to s,ow t,at t,e ire was not acci-ental 5'm.,asisa--e-6

+,ere must e more t,an two occurrences 5meaning one e#i-ence an- t,e .resent occurrence6 to enaleacts to e a-missile as si+ilar ,act ei-ence.Illustration 5619w,ic, mentions ot,er entries an-illustration 5c6 w,ic,

" ML# cc$$ii at cc$$viiimentions t,e act t,at countereit -ollars were -eli#ere- to &0 an- ' is rele#ant as s,owing t,at t,e -eli#eryto ! was not acci-ental0 also seem to suggest t,at t,ere must e some occurrences +,e .roati#e #aluea..roac, ,owe#er -oes away wit, numersE it -oes not matter i t,ere are only two occurrences *or as longas t,e .roati#e #alue outweig,s t,e .reu-icial #alue0 t,e act in =uestion is acce.te- as si+ilar ,actei-ence.I t,e illustrations are acce.te-0 ,ow will .roati#e #alue e a..lie-D +,is can e -one wit, some


7/9

Page

mo-iication in rea-ing t,e .roati#e #alue a..roac, into s 170 t,at is0 t,ere must e more t,an oneoccurrence an- t,e act in =uestion must also e .roati#e0 to enale it to e a-missile as e#i-ence I t,ereis less0 t,en t,e a-missiility o t,e act will not e consi-ere- un-er s 17

Alt,oug, t,e 'nglis, or common law .rinci.les may .ro#e to e goo- law an- are well acce.te-0 t,ey mustalways e rea- in t,e lig,t o t,e .ro#isions un-er t,e Act In '' v /uvara)028t,e Pri#y &ouncil -i- o.ine t,at

in so ar as any .art o t,e law relating to e#i-ence is e;.ressly -ealt wit, y t,e t,en '#i-ence )r-inance0t,e courts in Malaysia must gi#e eect to t,e rele#ant .ro#isions o t,e )r-inance0 w,et,er or not t,ey -ierrom t,e common law rule o e#i-ence w,ic, is a..lie- y 'nglis, courts

In conclusion0 courts in Malaysia s,oul- egin reerring to t,e s.eciic .ro#isions in t,e Act w,en -eterminingt,e a..lication o Makinan- %oardmanecause t,ere is a great nee- or clearer inter.retation o t,erele#ant law

1 (ections 11560 14 an- 17 o t,e (inga.ore '#i-ence Act are in .ari materia wit, t,e Malaysian .ro#isions

2 ?1C94@ A& 7 (ee0 or e;am.le0 (a)u 0rs v (?1973@ MLJ 210 w,ic, a-o.te- Makins case an- '' v 0n1 +ok 2an?19B9@ 1MLJ 11C0 w,ere t,e *e-eral &ourt ,el- t,at t,e .rinci.les in Makinare emo-ie- in s 17 o t,e t,en '#i-ence )r-inance

3 ?1C94@ A& 7 at . B7

4 ?197@ A& 421

7 Ii- at . 444

B Ii- at . 4B2

(u.ra n 2

C ?1998@ 3 MLJ 49C

9 ?1993@ 3 MLJ 21

18 (u.ra n 2

11 ?1949@ MLJ 29

12 (u.ra n 4 at . 439

13 (u.ra n 9 at .. 22B22

14 (u.ra n 11

17 In #acob v ''?194C49@ MLJ (u.. 280 &allow J was o t,e #iew t,at s 17 s,oul- e conine- to a -eence o acci-ent0mista:e or ot,er con-ition o min-

1B (u.ra n 9

1 P Nair0 (imilar *act in t,e (u.reme &ourt ?1991@ JM&L 11

1C Ii-

19 Illustration 56 to s 17 rea-s$

A is em.loye- to recei#e money rom t,e -etors o ! It is As -uty to ma:e entries in a oo: s,owing t,eamounts recei#e- y ,im "e ma:es an entry s,owing t,at on a .articular occasion ,e recei#e- less t,an ,ereally -i- recei#e +,e =uestion is w,et,er t,is alse entry was acci-ental or intentional +,e acts t,at ot,erentries ma-e y A in t,e same oo: are alse0 an- t,at t,e alse entry is in eac, case in a#our o A arerele#ant


8/9


9/9

junaidi bin abdullah v pp principles of sim

Documents