Saeng-Un Udom v PP: Murder Charge Reduced to Attempted Murder Due to Forensic Evidence
In Saeng-Un Udom v Public Prosecutor, the Court of Appeal of Singapore on 2001-05-12 allowed the appeal of Saeng-Un Udom against his conviction for murder. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Udom's actions caused the death of Weerasak Suebban, based on forensic evidence. The court convicted Udom of attempted murder under section 307 of the Penal Code and sentenced him to ten years imprisonment.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Court of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Appeal Allowed
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Saeng-Un Udom's murder conviction was overturned due to forensic evidence contradicting his confession, leading to a conviction for attempted murder.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Respondent | Government Agency | Partial Loss | Partial | Bala Reddy of Deputy Public Prosecutors Edwin San of Deputy Public Prosecutors |
| Saeng-Un Udom | Appellant | Individual | Appeal allowed; convicted of attempted murder | Partial |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Chao Hick Tin | Justice of Appeal | Yes |
| L P Thean | Justice of Appeal | No |
| Yong Pung How | Chief Justice | No |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Bala Reddy | Deputy Public Prosecutors |
| Edwin San | Deputy Public Prosecutors |
| James Masih | James Masih & Co |
| Ramli Salehkon | Ramli & Co |
4. Facts
- Udom admitted to hitting Suebban with a metal rod.
- Forensic pathologist testified deceased's wounds were caused by a heavy instrument with a sharp cutting edge.
- Udom and Suebban had a heated quarrel before the incident.
- Udom believed Suebban would kill him.
- Udom retrieved a metal rod and hit Suebban while he was sleeping.
- Udom threw the metal rod into the sea after the incident.
- Suebban was found dead with severe head injuries.
5. Formal Citations
- Saeng-Un Udom v Public Prosecutor, Cr App 3/2001, [2001] SGCA 38
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Drinking session between Udom, Suebban, and friends. | |
| Quarrel between Udom and Suebban. | |
| Udom retrieves metal rod. | |
| Udom hits Suebban with metal rod. | |
| Suebban found dead. | |
| Metal rod retrieved from slipway basin. | |
| Udom tells Chai he hit someone with a metal pipe. | |
| Judgment issued. |
7. Legal Issues
- Causation in Murder
- Outcome: The court found that the prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused caused the death of the deceased.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Failure to prove accused caused death
- Admissibility and Weight of Expert Evidence
- Outcome: The court held that the trial judge erred in rejecting the unchallenged expert evidence and substituting it with his own opinion.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Rejection of unchallenged expert evidence
- Substitution of court's opinion for expert opinion
- Attempt to Commit Murder
- Outcome: The court found the accused guilty of attempt to commit murder.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Acquittal
- Reduction of Charge
9. Cause of Actions
- Murder
- Attempted Murder
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Appeals
- Homicide Law
11. Industries
- Construction
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bailey | English Court of Criminal Appeal | Yes | [1977] 66 Cr App R 31 | England | Cited for the principle that a court cannot reject expert opinion if it is based on sound grounds and supported by basic facts. |
| Official Administrator Federated Malay States v State of Selangor | N/A | Yes | [1939] MLJ 226 | Malaysia | Cited for the principle that the court may agree with the expert if there is no definite expert evidence to the contrary. |
| Re Choo Eng Choon, decd | N/A | No | [1908] 12 SSLR 120 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the court must not blindly accept expert evidence merely because there is no definite opinion to the contrary. |
| Muhammad Jefrry bin Safii v PP | N/A | Yes | [1997] 1 SLR 197 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the court's role is restricted to electing or choosing between conflicting expert evidence or accepting or rejecting the proffered expert evidence, though none else is offered. |
| Sek Kim Wah v PP | N/A | Yes | [1987] SLR 107 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the court is not obliged to accept expert evidence by reason only that it is unchallenged. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Penal Code (Cap 224) s 300 | Singapore |
| Penal Code (Cap 224) s 302 | Singapore |
| Penal Code (Cap 224) s 307 | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68) s 122(6) | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68) s 121(1) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Expert evidence
- Mens rea
- Actus reus
- Causation
- Reasonable doubt
- Forensic evidence
- Metal rod
- Sharp cutting edge
- Parang
15.2 Keywords
- Murder
- Attempted murder
- Expert evidence
- Forensic pathology
- Causation
- Singapore Court of Appeal
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Murder | 95 |
| Criminal Law | 90 |
| Evidence Law | 70 |
| Criminal Procedure | 60 |
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Evidence
- Forensic Science