| UKSC 76
|Date of Judgement
|16 December, 2015
|Supreme Court of United Kingdom
|Murder, Human Right
|R (Wang Yam)
|Central Criminal Court
|Lord Neuberger, President Lady Hale, Deputy President, Lord Mance, Lord Clarke, Lord Sumption, Lord Reed, Lord Toulson
|UK Supreme Court website
Facts of the Case
It involves a man named Wang Yam who was convicted of the murder of a retired Chinese author named Allan Chappelow. The case raised several legal issues, including the admissibility of evidence and the right to a fair trial. Witnesses played a crucial role by providing testimony about seeing Wang Yam near the victim’s residence. Forensic evidence like fingerprints and DNA were also presented. On the first trial, the jury could not agree on the murder charges but the appellant was convicted on the charges of fraudulently misuse of the deceased’s identity and bank accounts.
There were several key legal issues that came into play:-
- One of the main issues was the admissibility of evidence, particularly regarding of the accused.
- Another important issue was the right to fair trial.
The arguments included the interpretation of the law. one of the arguments regarding the fairness of the trial was related to the jury’s access to certain evidence. The defense argued that the jury had been exposed to prejudicial material outside of the courtroom, which could have influenced their decision-making. This raised concerns about the impartiality of the trial and whether the defendant received a fair opportunity to present their case. In addition to this one of the key arguments revolved around the admissibility of certain statements and materials, another argument focused on the interpretation of the law and how it applied to the specific circumstances of the case.
The jury found him guilty based on the evidence presented during the trial. The conviction of Wang Yam for the murder was upheld, the court found that there was no unfairness in the trial and that the evidence presented was admissible.
Written by Nehal Soni from BM Law College, Jodhpur, an intern under Legal Vidhiya.
Disclaimer: The materials provided herein are intended solely for informational purposes. Accessing or using the site or the materials does not establish an attorney-client relationship. The information presented on this site is not to be construed as legal or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon for such purposes or used as a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney in your state. Additionally, the viewpoint presented by the author is of a personal nature.