“But,” added the judge, “there are two things I must tell you about circumstantial evidence. The first is that it is the cumulative effect of all the evidence that is important, not one isolated link in the chain of circumstantial evidence. It would be quite wrong for you to consider the case link by link, and looking at one link in the chain, say to yourselves, ‘Well, that is certainly very suspicious, but not enough’, and discard it: and so on through each separate link doing the same thing until nothing is left. That would be an utterly erroneous approach to this question, and you must consider circumstantial evidence in its totality. The cumulative effect of every one of those links must be considered together, not individually. The second thing I must draw your attention to is that the question in this case, depending as it does on circumstantial evidence, is whether the cumulative of all the evidence leads to the irresistible conclusion that it was the accused who committed this crime. Or is there some reasonably possible explanation such as, for example: was it an accident?”
The Triaclass="underline" Case For The Prosecution
The trial lasted 13 days. The foreman of the seven-man jury was a Dane, Nielsen Jorgan Neinholdt. Court documents showed that the case had been marked No. 13 of 1965. Mr Francis Seow, prosecuting on behalf of the State, was assisted by Mr Syed Alwee bin Ahmad Alsree.
The charge was: “That you, Sunny Ang, alias Sunny Ang Soo Suan, alias Anthony Ang, on or about the 27 day of August 1963 at or about 5:00 PM at sea off Pulau Dua, also known as the Sisters Islands, Singapore, committed murder by causing the death of one Jenny Cheok Cheng Kid and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Penal Code Chapter 119.”
“I claim trial,” said Sunny Ang.
Mr Francis Seow’s opening speech was not unduly lengthy. “The case for the prosecution,” he began briskly, “is that Sunny Ang on 27 August, 1963, at about 5:00 PM murdered Jenny Cheok Cheng Kid by causing her to be drowned whilst she was scuba-diving in the Straits between Pulau Dua… the prosecution suggests that her body was carried by the currents probably out to the open sea. At any rate, it was never found, despite intensive search for several days by divers from the Royal Navy and from the RAF Changi Sub-aqua Club.”
At once Mr Seow sought to establish the legal fact that murder can be determined through circumstantial evidence even though the body of the victim is missing. He said, “This is the first case of its kind to be tried in our Courts. There is no body here. There is a general belief that you cannot charge a person with, let alone convict him of, the offence of murder where the victim’s body has not or could not be found. This is, of course, quite fallacious. If a person who kills another person is crafty enough to dispose of the body of the victim successfully, say by dissolving it in an acid bath or where he intentionally causes his victim to drown at sea, using his knowledge of the tides and currents, calculates that his victim’s body would be carried by tidal streams out to the open sea (which makes it difficult if not impossible to recover the body), it does not mean that he cannot be prosecuted for murder, and if prosecuted, cannot be convicted of it. It only means that the onus of proof on the prosecution becomes heavier than usual. In such cases, there are two main questions which the prosecution will have to prove to your satisfaction. The first is: is the person named in the charge dead? Is Jenny dead? If so, the second question will be, at the end of this triaclass="underline" has it been proved that the prisoner, Sunny Ang, murdered her? In the context of this case, members of the jury, and subject to what my Lord may say, murder is the intentional killing of one human being by another human being.”
“Jenny,” continued counsel, “at the time of her disappearance was 22 years of age. She received her formal education in English up to Standard Three. She was married according to Chinese rites at an early age to Yui Chin Chuan, with whom she had two children. A few years later she separated from him and continued to remain separated up to the date of her disappearance. Her father had died and her mother married Toh Kim Seng. They had a daughter, Eileen Toh, with whom Jenny grew up and with whom she later lived.”
Jenny worked as a waitress at the Odeon Bar, North Bridge Road, where she earned a modest wage of $90 a month, in addition to which she would receive tips from customers whose generosity, no doubt, depended upon the quality of service she had rendered to them. In any event, Jenny’s average daily income by way of tips was about $10. In all, she earned approximately $350 a month.
Sunny Ang was 27. He came from a middle class family of not inadequate means. Since leaving school in 1955 with a Grade One pass, he had a varied career. He included part-time studies in law, canvassing for insurance, and poultry-farming, among his many activities. In 1962 he was made a bankrupt, which meant that his affairs were, ‘and still are’ being managed by the Official Assignee.* (*The Official Assignee had given evidence at the inquiry that Ang had been made a bankrupt on the petition of Madam Goh Ah Eng who obtained judgment for $2,091. Ang in his statement of affairs admitted that he also owed a total of $3,187 to two other creditors.)
Jenny met Sunny Ang sometime about May 1963. He proceeded to cultivate Jenny’s acquaintanceship. “You may think, in the course of this trial,” remarked counsel, “that Jenny was a simple and naive girl, who, flattered by Sunny Ang’s attentions, fell completely under his spell. He came from a world so very much different from hers. He was far superior in intellect and in education to this unhappy waitress. The stage was soon reached when Jenny began to entertain notions of matrimony and the probability that Ang encouraged her in that belief cannot be excluded. Indeed, members of the jury, you will hear evidence that he intended to marry her. At any rate, within two months or so after they had first met. Sunny Ang had so completely won Jenny’s confidence that at his suggestion, and without so much as a murmur of protest, she was to leave everything she possessed to Yeo Bee Neo, a woman whom she hardly knew.”
Mr Seow then dealt with the insurances which Sunny Ang hurriedly look out on Jenny’s life. On 18 June 1963 Jenny applied to the Great Eastern Life Assurance Company, through Sunny Ang, for a $10,000 endowment insurance policy for 20 years with accident benefits of $200,000, the premium for which was $453 per year, and the premium for the $200,000 additional accident benefits was $250 per year. Thus the total premium payable was $703 per year, or $61.60 per month. Sunny Ang filled in the application form, and Jenny’s occupation was given as, ‘I serve food and drink to customers at a bar and restaurant’. The beneficiary was named as Madam Yeo Bee Neo. She was described as a close friend.
The Great Eastern Life Assurance wrote to Jenny asking her why she wanted accident benefits of $200,000 and why Madam Yeo was named as beneficiary. “You may agree with the company,” Mr Seow told the jury, “that it was most unusual that Jenny should want to leave the benefits to a relative stranger when she had other relations living, among whom was her half-sister, Eileen, for whom she had real affection.”
On 29 June, the Great Eastern Life Assurance received a letter from Jenny in which she attempted to answer the queries, but the company was not satisfied. A few days later, the company received another letter dated 2 July. This was also signed by Jenny. It was a further attempt to answer the queries. Jenny said she intended to make flights in commercial aircraft to the Borneo territories. This was completely untrue, and was obviously said in the hope that the company would be influenced to grant the policy. There was a marked difference in the English language between the two letters. Although signed by Jenny it was in fact written by Sunny Ang. Neither of the letters satisfied the company, which remained suspicious; and they decided to grant only $20,000 accident benefits, and not $200,000. This brought the total premium down to $41.90 per month.