In Brief
A man convicted of sexually assaulting a four-year-old child based entirely on circumstantial evidence has been acquitted by the Supreme Court. The Court found critical flaws: material facts were omitted from the initial complaint; the four alleged eyewitnesses were only identified after the incident through unclear circumstances; the investigation was negligent with inadequate forensic procedures; and recovery of evidence lacked proper chain-of-custody documentation. Applying the five-part test for circumstantial evidence convictions, the Court held the chain of circumstances incomplete and the prosecution's narrative unreliable. The appellant was released after nearly 13 years in prison, reaffirming that suspicion—however grave—cannot substitute for proof beyond reasonable doubt.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.