Outline
-34
46
appellant has bot given evidence or called evidence.
ST. JELA (Mscussion that evidence fas equally consistent with innocence as with guilt - and there va no oase to go before jury). Mr. Maven The question is - did the Crown produce a priza
Vrom s
0n60.
k
Mr. Mimi 1 am mich obliged.
w
-
9 nisburn » .449
FENÉK DATA 759.
In this case I submit the jury might have beon zatisfied that
the conclusion put forward to them by the Crown, (that is that the ropellant must have pushed or thrown the other three children into the nullah including Mary Fine). That is not enough they must be further satisfied that all the evidence as put forward by the Crown are not inconsistent with any rational conclusion and the other rational conclusion is the conclusion put forward by the defence that these three children might have fallen over.
BI BERGUE is my friend asking your Lordships to retry this
Kr. Jackale cannot do that.
1 an asking your lordships to take all the evidence as put forward by the Crown as a whole and say whether they are not equally consistent with the conclusion put forward by the defenc I agree it has been put to the Jury, but I am putting it to this Curt - I mbmit the jury was wrong in coming to that conclusion They might be wrong in this – they may say "We are æti af led that the fact as put forward by the Crown as a whole argconsistent with the conclusion the Grown has asked xxxkaXKE us to come to They must consider further whether taking the evidences a whole there is no other rational conclusion which is equally consistent witha that which ta Vrown has naked them to ouie to.
Mr. Ezanori- kodukk
Exkarday» ìut
don't understand what that statement of the law has to do with this appeal?
My ground of argument is that there is no Chɛe to go to the jury and the verdict is against the weight of the eviden 1 submit the cases i have put before Your lordship is very relevan
*
The ground as to the admissibility of Era. Fairouzn↑ ♬ ovidence.
The first point raised by my friend yesterday was that the objection should have been taken at the end of the trial for the Crown whon it finisiled ite case.
Vol. 3 p.299.
Aa Ye Jadidera - Vol. 14 p.9.
In the case of a V. Payne it was held the application was not allowed and the angel dimissed. - enlarges upon the two case: Kr. Lim says he was taken by surprise when he learnt Mary was not
iza evidence this nevs dame about 2 hours before sho All Fave that although no objection was taken at the dose of
anse it should be allowed here.
Ay friend submitted three grounds on which he said the evider of Krs. #airburn should be admitted.
1 part of ree geatae
(a) to explain how the accused got into the nullah
to rebut this defence of mocidan tə
hat is th res gestas in tius osse without the evidence of
Kr. Fairburn ↑
Mr. Mayden- I don't follow you.
Aramis here was no case.
*T. Kayden- me fact in issue is the death of Michael Fine. The
used Caused the death of Sichael Fans,