KWAME NKRUMAH UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND

TECHNOLOGY
COLLEGE OF HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES
FACULTY OF LAW
(LAW OF EVIDENCE GROUP 6)
Group members

1. Angelina Antwi- 2394922

2. Bempah Abigail Serwaa -2396922
3. Dosoo Tracy Kabuki- 2398922
4. Tordimah Terry Sena - 2407722
5. Boatemaa Linda- 2397322
6. Adjei Peggy - 2392222
7. Osei-Adusah Kristony - 2405422
8. Danaa Illiasu Mubarak -2398322
9. Dok Esther Kologmah -2398822
10.Owusu Agyemang Rolland-2405522
11. Sarfo-Appiah Abena Achiamaa-2406922
SILENT OR MUTE OR TRACE EVIDENCE

‘Wherever he steps, whatever he touches, whatever he

leaves, even unconsciously, will serve as a silent
witness against him. Not only his fingerprints or his
footprints, but his hair, the fibers from his clothes, the
glass he breaks, the tool marks he leaves, the paint he
scratches, the blood or semen he deposits or collects-all
of these and more bear mute witness against him’ a
statement by Edmund Locard, a forensic science
pioneer.

Accordingly, in Proverbs 18:17 it is stated in a lawsuit

that the first to speak seems right until someone comes
forward and cross-examines. This presentation has
been structured in a comprehensive way to aid
understanding. Firstly, this presentation will explore the
concept of evidence and additionally examine what
trace or mute evidence is. Subsequently, the
presentation will tackle sub-topics including how to
prove silent evidence, what distinguishes it from the
other types, characteristics, and the importance of
silent evidence. Furthermore, the dangers associated
with silent evidence and its admissibility will be
discussed. Lastly, we shall conclude with the defenses
that avail to the suspect and a video.

What is evidence?

In substantiating the legal truth in a particular

happening or criminal scene, the laws relating to
evidence are duly applied. It is designed to help the
various adjudicatory bodies in proving the legal truth in
an allegation. Evidence law primarily encompasses the
establishment of legal truth based on relevant
admissible evidence of probative character with the
view of proving the existence or non-existence of
material facts in any issue in controversy. Evidence
constitutes testimony, writings, material objects, or
other things presented to the senses that are offered to
prove the existence or non-existence of a fact.1

The key purpose of law of evidence is to help us

establish guilt so that the innocent person is not
1
Evidence Act 1975 (NRCD 323), s 179
punished. However, what we generally refer to as the
legal truth may not necessarily represent the truth.
Meaning, the legal truth, some of which we celebrate,
are not in fact the truth of the matter. Accordingly, it is
appropriate to state that, the law of evidence helps to
establish the truth and at the same time condemn the
truth. This sometimes occurs because, the true evidence
of a crime scene to determine a guilt can be distorted or
manipulated or are not well proved before the court.

Trace, silent or mute evidence

The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines mute as

remaining silent, undiscovered or unrecognized.
Accordingly, Dr. Edmond Locard, a forensic science
pioneer in France formulated what became known as
Locard’s Exchange Principle. This principle states that
“every contact leaves a trace” As Paul Kirk eloquently
expressed, whenever someone enters or exits an
environment, they both take something with them and
leave something behind. This exchange of materials,
whether conscious or unconscious, creates a web of
physical evidence that can be instrumental in solving
criminal cases2

At crime scenes, there are tiny pieces of physical

objects, typical of these includes, hairs, semen, blood or
clothing fibers, or pieces of glass, which are frequently
found and can provide insight into the events that
transpired.3 They are known as trace or mute evidence,
and they can be transmitted when a movement or action
releases tiny particles or two items come into contact.
This type of evidence is usually not visible to the naked
eye and requires specific tools and techniques to be
located and obtained.4 Due to their nature, trace
evidence is often overlooked, and investigators must be
trained to detect it.5

2
https://enfsi.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Guidance-QCC-VAL-002.pdf
3
National Forensic Science Technology Center (NFSTC). “A Simplified Guide To Trace Evidence”:> Microsoft
Word - trace.docx<. 2.
4
New Jersy State Police: Trace Evidence Analysis. https://nj.gov/njsp/division/investigations/trace-
evidence.shtml#:~:text=Trace%20Evidence%20Analysis%20is%20the,requires%20care%20and
%20specialized%20techniques <
5
ibid
The integrity and significance of trace or silence
material as associative evidence relies on proper
detection, collection, and preservation.6 Thus, careful
collection of such materials from a crime scene can
yield a wealth of information about where a sample
came from and how it helps to talk about the happening.

One of the most famous cases involving trace evidence

was that of Wayne Williams, convicted of two counts of
murder in 1982 in the Atlanta Child Murders case.7

In this case, it was noted that for a period of 22 months

beginning in 1979, 30 black children and young men
had disappeared or died under suspicious
circumstances.8 Through the investigation, trace
examiners found fibers and animal hairs that could not
be excluded when looking for links between the cases.
By identifying the fibers as carpeting, finding the

6
Scientific Working Group on Materials Analysis (SWGMAT) Evidence Committee. “Trace Evidence Recovery
Guidelines” 1998: > Trace Evidence Recovery Guidelines< . 2.1.
7
Williams v The State 251 Ga 749, 312 SE2d 40 (1983)
8
Headley, Bernard D. "Killings That Became" Tragedy": A Different View of What Happened in Atlanta,
Georgia." Social Justice 16, no. 4 (38 (1989): 55-74.
manufacturer, and computing probability statistics
regarding the chance that they could have come from
somewhere other than William’s home, investigators
were able to begin to use this evidence to tie the victims
to Williams. In doing the same with the animal hair in
comparison with Williams’ dog, then calculating the
statistics that someone would have a dog and carpeting
that would be consistent with those of Williams made
the case very strong and resulted in a conviction. In this
example, trace evidence was the centerpiece of the
prosecutor’s case, and only careful evidence collection
and examination made it possible.9

Again, in the notable case of R v. Pitchfork,10 the

defendant was found guilty of killing and raping two
young girls in Leicestershire. A semen sample from the
crime site that was compared to DNA samples from
suspects, including the accused, was the most important
piece of evidence. Pitchfork was found guilty after the
semen sample's DNA evidence matched his own. The
9
National Forensic Science Technology Center (NFSTC). “ A Simplified Guide To Trace Evidence”:> Microsoft
Word - trace.docx<. 5.
10
[2009] EWCA Crime 963
cases demonstrate that trace or silent evidence can take
numerous forms, linking a victim to suspects and a
victim or suspects to the crime scene. However, it is
also worth pointing out that trace or mute evidence
interrelates with other types of evidence to establish
guilt. These include forensic11 and circumstantial
evidence.

How to prove silent evidence

Every case may include trace evidence, taking into
account that investigators must apply their expertise,
education, and experience to thoroughly investigate the
scene, identifying and properly collecting the most
probative evidence including traces. This information
includes a focused search and meticulous gathering of
material that might provide hints or the possibility of
identifying important actors.

11
As has been stated earlier, the Locards exchange
principle that, ‘Every contact leaves a trace’ a theory
formulated by Dr Edward Locard, a forensic science
pioneer in France is a principal guide in proving silent
evidence.
An examination for trace evidence could happen at a
crime scene on the victims or suspect’s clothing or a
location the victim or suspect may have been recently.
Eg. Trace examiners may look for ligature fibres in the
case of a strangling to identify what might have been
used to commit the crime, or gunshot residue around a
bullet hole to indicate the distance between the shooter
and the victim.
Instruments used to take samples of trace evidence
Investigators using a holistic approach to the scene will
gather evidence and prioritize each item by assessing its
value based on the level of identification it may
provide.

Scientists examine the physical, optical and chemical

properties of trace or silence evidence and use a variety
of tools to find and compare samples, and look for the
sources or common origins of each item.12 Trace
examiners use tools such as tweezers, tape, specialized
vacuums, swabs, alternate light sources, and lasers to
find and collect trace evidence.

Following the principles of proper crime scene

investigation, the collected materials are packaged,
documented and sent to a crime laboratory for analysis.

Let us take a sample such as hair to prove this evidence.

When hair samples are collected using tweezers, it is

sent to the laboratory along with control samples from a
suspected individual. Here, analysts can tell
investigators if individual hairs are human or animal,
and in the case of human hair, where on the body the
12
Mohammad, Athar. “Trace Evidence: A Versatile Key in Forensic Investigation”, 2020:
>https://medwinpublishers.com/IJFSC/IJFSC16000193.pdf<. 1 -2.
sample originated. Samples can be tested to determine
the color, shape, and chemical composition of the hair,
and often, the race of the source individual. This
information can assist investigators in including or
excluding particular individuals as the source of the
hair.

What distinguishes silent evidence from other types

of evidence

What distinguishes silent evidence from other types of

evidence is that all the other types of evidence provide
investigators and lawyers a prima facie inference or
conclusion which may ultimately lead to the
establishment or otherwise of a fact while silent
evidence always does not have such inferential value at
first glance. For example, when hair is found at a crime
scene, it may not be of evidential value unless it is
subjected to a forensic test to determine the DNA of the
person to whom it belongs. It is after this that inferences
or conclusions can be drawn.

Characteristics and Importance of Silent Evidence

1. Trace evidence may provide a link between the
victim and a suspect, a victim and a scene, or the
suspect and a scene13 In the trial case of William
Wayne of the Atlanta child murder case, the
presence of animal hair and fibre found on the
bodies of victims was used to link Wayne to the
victims and this made a strong case which led to
his conviction.
2. Edmond Locard in his book, Crime Investigation,
stated that trace evidence "will serve as a silent
witness" against the perpetrator as all humans are

13
https://www.nj.gov/njsp/division/investigations/trace-evidence.shtml#:~:text=Trace%20evidence%20may
%20provide%20a,the%20suspect%20and%20a%20scene.
 covered in trace evidence of their surroundings
constantly.14
3. Silent evidence proves crucial in investigations
where tangible clues are absent, and conventional
evidence is lacking, allowing investigators to fill in
the gaps and piece together the puzzle.
4. The integrity of silent evidence is generally
preserved, as it is often overlooked by defendants
in civil or criminal proceedings, who tend to focus
on more obvious forms of evidence, thereby
reducing the likelihood of tampering or destruction.

5. It can be used to corroborate other types of

evidence, including circumstantial evidence,
forensic15 evidence and physical evidence.

Dangers or disadvantages associated with silent

evidence
14
https://dofs-gbi.georgia.gov/departments/trace-evidence
15
Roux C, Talbot-Wright B, Robertson J, Crispino F, Ribaux O. The end of the (forensic science) world as we
know it? The example of trace evidence, (2015.
Silent or trace evidence used to pin down a suspect to a
crime may have some difficulties or dangers.

1. Firstly, uncovering and analyzing silent evidence

can be a resource-intensive and time-consuming
process. This is because it requires significant
investment in specialized equipment, expert
analysis, and manpower, which can potentially
delay judicial proceedings.

2. Innocent people can easily be convicted since this

type of evidence can be misinterpreted or
improperly analyzed.

3. In the process of collecting trace evidence,

contamination may occur, leading to inaccurate
results.
 4. Due to lack of technological advancement in some
parts of the world, some types of trace evidence are
difficult to analyze.

5. There is a strong tendency to overlook silent

evidence, either because of its microscopic nature
or even when it is conspicuous, there is a tendency
for investigators to avoid considering them.

Admissibility of silent evidence

Admissibility of evidence is the recognition and
acceptance by a court of evidence offered or tendered
by a party. The prima facie requirement for evidence to
be admissible in the courts is that the evidence must be
relevant. This is provided for in section 51(2) of the
Evidence Act 16

16
Evidence Act 1975 (NRCD 323)
Relevant evidence here has been elucidated in section
179 of the Evidence Act to include evidence relevant to
the credibility of a witness or a hearsay declarant, which
makes the existence of any fact that is of consequence
to the determination of the action more or less probable
than it would be without the evidence.

Inherent in the requirement of relevance are the

concepts of materiality and probative value.

With the concept of materiality, the court will ascertain

whether there exist a logical or material connection that
links the evidence submitted to the accused person or
the issue at hand. This is determined by the specific
facts of each case.

The probative value of the evidence will also be

examined. The probative value is the degree of
connection between the evidence adduced and what it
seeks to project, prove or disprove.

Also, in DPP v Killbourne,17 where the concept of

materiality and probative value was inherent, Lord
17
Dpp V Kilbourne [1973] Ac 729
Simon stated that an evidence is relevant if it is
logically probative or dis probative of some matter
which requires proofs.

Fundamentally, evidence is deemed to be relevant when

it establishes a logical link between itself and what it
seeks to prove.

In Mensah and Others v the Republic,18 the following

dicta is relevant. It was stated that ‘Evidence was
relevant if any two facts to which it was applied were so
related to each other that according to the common
course of events either taken by itself or in connection
with other facts proved or rendered probable the past,
present or future existence or non-existence of the
other.’

Essentially, it is not all evidence that are acceptable by

the court. The determination as to whether evidence is
acceptable or not is left to the domain of the court or the
particular adjudicatory body. When evidence are
18
[1979] GLR 523
proved, it is left to the court to determine whether the
evidence provided commensurate with the fact for the
purpose of convicting an alleged criminal. Acceptance
of evidence by the court is contingent on whether the
evidence is relevance or not.

The court in its discretion may exclude relevant

evidence pursuant to section 5219 if the probative value
of the evidence is substantially outweighed by concerns
about excessive delay, waste of time, or needless
presentation of cumulative evidence.

Secondly, the court may exclude relevant evidence if

there is a possibility that the admission of that evidence
will seriously jeopardize the issues created or create
unfair prejudice

Lastly, if there is a possibility that in a civil action

where a stay is not appropriate or possible, the
admission of that evidence will unfairly surprise a party
who has not had a reasonable basis to expect that such
evidence will be presented
19
Evidence Act 1975 (NRCD 323)
Defences to liability arising from silent or mute
evidence
For a person who has been traced to be a suspect,
certain defenses avail to him.
1. For one, contextual interpretation. The defendant
may argue that when the evidence is considered in
context, it doesn’t actually support the
prosecution’s claims but instead give another
meaning. For instance, a person may have worn a
certain jacket to a party some weeks ago, however
yesterday, he was strangled to death in the same
jacket while leaving his house, hair or fibers found
on his attire may not necessarily point to the actual
victim because this attire has been used earlier or at
a previous location before his death.
In R v Turnbull,20 the defendant argued that his
fingerprints found at the crime scene were there because
he had been there previously for non-crime reasons.
2. Secondly, defendant can also argue that, the
evidence has been contaminated. It is possible that
the evidence may have been accidentally
contaminated during the investigation process, and
the defence can argue that. In the case of Dubert v
Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals,21 the court
highlighted that if proper procedures aren’t
followed, challenges to the evidence’s authenticity
may arise.
3. Also, the defence can argue that the silent evidence
doesn’t establish a direct link to the alleged crime,
meaning it cannot prove guilt beyond a reasonable
doubt.
In the case of Jackson v Virginia22, the court maintained
that, circumstantial evidence including trace evidence,
must be strong enough to support a conviction.
20
R v Turnbull [1977] QB 224
21
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993)
22
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979)
 4. Another tangent he can come under is the basis of
lack of clarity. The defendant can argue that silent
or mute evidence is too unclear to support claims of
wrongdoing.

Conclusion.
Dr. Henry Lee, a renowned Forensic scientist said “The
smallest crack in the wall can bring down the entire
structure. Similarly, the tiniest piece of trace evidence
can unravel the entire crime”
Indeed , Justice may be blind! however, silent evidence
serves as the vision that perceives.

The significance of trace evidence in forensic science is

profound. Through meticulous collection and analysis
of minute particles and residues, forensic specialists
have successfully reconstructed crime scenes, linked
offenders to their victims, and supplied essential
evidence for judicial proceedings. The advancements in
forensic science are remarkable. By integrating state of
theart technology with traditional investigative
methods, we have been able to resolve cases that may
have otherwise remained unsolved. As we strive to
expand the frontiers of forensic capabilities, it is
imperative to remain proactive and innovative. This
commitment will ensure that trace evidence continues
to serve as a valuable instrument in the pursuit of justice
and the preservation of the integrity of our legal system.
The influence of trace evidence on criminal
investigations has been transformative. As we advance,
let us persist in leveraging the potential of trace
evidence to effect meaningful change in society, as in
the darkness of doubt mute evidence becomes the
source of light.