In Omonga v. State (2006) 14 NWLR (Pt. 1000) 532 at 553, C—F per Omokri JCA: ‘Having carefully considered the evidence of PWs 2, 3 and 4, it is glaringly clear and undeniable that it is speculative, presumptuous and conjectural. Something that looks like salt is certainly not poison. It is not every substance that looks like salt that is a poison and it is not every poison that looks like salt. To prove beyond reasonable doubt that the substance the appellant put in the rice he gave to the deceased is a poison, the substance must be identified, produced and tested by an expert in the field who has the scientific knowledge and competence to test same in a laboratory. After that, his report must be properly produced and tendered in the court at the trial. Any evidence offered by a witness without such test as stated above on whether any substance is poison or not is grossly speculative, mere conjecture or supposition which has no place in criminal trial.’
Click the icons to like, follow, and join JPoetry