Summary of [2017] SGHC 205: Public Prosecutor v Chan Lie Sian
Introduction:
The accused, Chan Lie Sian, was charged with the murder of Tiah Hung Wai William on 14 January 2014. He was accused of causing William’s death by hitting him on the head with a metal dumbbell rod. Chan was convicted and sentenced to death. He appealed against his conviction and sentence.
The Prosecution’s Case:
- Witness Accounts: Witnesses who knew Chan testified about his activities on the day of the incident. Witnesses described Chan returning to his lodging house after gambling, discovering money missing, and accusing William of theft. Chan was described as violent, hitting both William and another worker, Chua, with a metal rod.
- SCDF and Police Reports: SCDF paramedics and police officers found William critically injured at the lodging house. He was unresponsive and had multiple injuries.
- Medical Evidence: Neurologist Dr. Vincent Ng examined William, who was in a coma with multiple skull fractures. Forensic pathologist Dr. Wee Keng Poh performed the autopsy, concluding that William died from bronchopneumonia following multiple skull fractures.
The Accused’s Statements:
Chan provided several statements to the police, initially admitting to hitting William but later claiming the blows to the head were accidental. He claimed to have consumed sleeping tablets and cough syrup, affecting his behavior.
Medical Examinations:
Chan underwent medical examinations which documented minor injuries, contradicting his claims of being attacked by William.
Scientific Evidence:
Forensic analysis of bloodstains and DNA matched William’s blood, supporting the Prosecution’s case of a violent attack.
The Defence’s Case:
- Chan’s Testimony: Chan testified in his defense, maintaining that the blows to William’s head were accidental and that he was under the influence of drugs.
- Credibility Issues: Chan’s accounts were inconsistent, and the Defense did not call the expert witness initially intended to support claims of intoxication.
Rebuttal Witness:
The Prosecution called Dr. Subhash Gupta as a rebuttal witness, who testified that Chan’s actions did not align with severe intoxication.
Legal Analysis:
- Intention to Cause Death: The court found that Chan had the intention to cause William’s death based on the nature and severity of the attack.
- Chain of Causation: The court rejected the Defence’s argument that bronchopneumonia broke the chain of causation, determining that the head injuries were sufficient to cause death.
- Sudden Fight Defence: The court found that Chan acted in a cruel and unusual manner, rejecting the partial defense of a sudden fight.
Conclusion and Sentence:
The court concluded that Chan had the intention to cause death and dismissed his defenses. He was convicted of murder and sentenced to death.
This case highlights the thorough examination of witness testimonies, medical evidence, and legal principles in reaching a verdict in a murder trial.
