LAW578/591 – LAW OF EVIDENCE II

TUTORIAL QUESTIONS
TOPIC 2 - CHARACTER EVIDENCE

Question 1

Abdul, who writes jingles for advertisements, is accused of raping Balita. It is alleged that he
offered her a lift in his car on a rainy day, and then drove her to a remote wood. There, it is
claimed that he sucked her toes before raping her. Abdul argues that although Balita picked
him out on an identification parade, she was mistaken. Shortly before the trial the
prosecution receive several pieces of information. One of Abdul’s former girlfriends,
Charlotte, comes forward to say that she regularly had sexual intercourse with him in the
same wood several years earlier and that he quite frequently sucked her toes in the process.
Another woman, Delia, informs the prosecution that on the day in question, she was offered
a lift by Abdul, but turned ipt down as he seemed a little ‘strange’. The prosecution has also
found that, several years earlier, Abdul was convicted of committing an indecent assault in
the same wood, and has another conviction, from 20 years ago, for raping a woman in his
car after she accepted a lift from him. All of these women had their hair in dreadlocks and
were wearing very short skirts at the time the offences were committed, same as Balita.

To compound his problems, Abdul finds that he is being sued for breach of copyright by
Eleanor, who alleges that one of Abdul’s recent advertisement jingles is very similar to one
that she produced seven years earlier. Abdul claims that this is sheer coincidence. However,
Eleanor has found out that Abdul was successfully sued by another advertising agency, two
years earlier, for a similar breach of copyright.

i. Will the prosecution be allowed to adduce the evidence of Charlotte and Delia, as well
as Abdul’s previous convictions, to support their case on the rape of Balita?
ii. Will Eleanor be able to adduce evidence from the previous action in which Abdul was
successfully sued for breach of copyright to support her own action?

Question 2

Jay and John are jointly charged with arson and both intend to plead not guilty. The
prosecution allege that the two co-accused set the fire to a barn. Jay has not decided
whether he will testify in his defence. John intends to call Reverend Michael who will testify
that John is a lay preacher at his church who is well respected in the community and who
regularly takes part in sponsored activities to raise funds for the new church renovation. Jay
on the other hand has two previous convictions for arson and another previous conviction for
offences of dishonesty. John has no previous convictions.

i. Consider the admissibility and relevance of the evidence of John’s good

character.
ii. Consider the admissibility and relevance of the evidence of Jay’s bad character.

Question 3

James was tried at the Sessions Court at Shah Alam having committed an indecent assault
upon Madam X, a 70 years old. The defence called several witnesses who had known him at
different periods of his life, and they gave him an excellent character as a moral and well
conducted man. To contradict this evidence, the prosecution called Remy. The following was
recorded.

Prosecution: “What is the accused’s general character for decency and morality of conduct?”

Remy: “I know nothing of the neighbourhood’s opinion, because I was only a boy at school
when I knew him; but in my own opinion, and the opinion of my brothers who were also
pupils of his, is that his character is that of a man capable of the grossest indecency and
most flagrant immorality.”

James was convicted and he appealed against the conviction on the ground that the judge
had erred in law in admitting the evidence as to his character.

As the appellate judge, decide over the appeal with reference to statutory provisions and
judicial precedents.

Question 4

During the trial of the accused, Abu, made gestures to Joyah, the witness for the
prosecution, that she was sexy and he is desirous of having her. Joyah became nervous and
started giving all the wrong answers to questions put to her by the prosecution . Harry, the
prosecuting officer then immediately began asking questions about how rude and bad Abu
had behaved in the past.

The presiding judge allowed the remarks and subsequently Abu was convicted.

Advise Abu whether he could appeal against the conviction based on the conduct of the
prosecution.

Question 5

Yong, Tong and Hong are jointly charged with robbery of a mini market. They each have a
number of previous convictions for the same offence. The prosecution rely on the evidence
of Samy, who testified that he was tricked by the three accused into driving them to the mini
market in question but upon learning of their plan to rob it, he fled from the scene.

i. Yong’s counsel through rigorous cross-examination of Samy gets him to admit that he
had five previous convictions for theft. Yong elects to remain silent when the defence
is called. Consider whether the prosecution may lead evidence of Yong’s previous
convictions.
ii. Tong in his evidence asserts that whatever Samy stated in his evidence was a pack
of lies. Consider whether the prosecution may cross-examine Tong on his previous
conviction.
iii. Hong testified that he was invited by Yong and Tong to come along to help them rob
the mini market and he refused the invitation but was put under duress and he merely
agreed to ride in the car. Consider whether Yong’s counsel may cross-examine Hong
on his previous conviction.
iv. Assuming Yong’s counsel does not cross-examine Hong on his previous convictions,
may the prosecution do so, and if they may, consider why would they want to take
such action. Support your answer with reference to the provisions of the Evidence Act
1950 and decided cases.

Question 6

With reference to decided cases, explain the phrase ‘giving evidence against’ appearing in
Section 54 (2) (c)?