The case is a straightforward application of established circumstantial evidence principles to a murder prosecution. It illustrates the application of the 'only rational inference' test in a case where the accused's explanations were rejected as implausible and inconsistent with proven facts, and where financial and relationship motives were established as part of the circumstantial case. The case demonstrates how evidence of motive, while not sufficient alone, can significantly support a circumstantial prosecution when combined with the improbability of the alternative hypothesis and the accused's lack of credibility.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 5 later cases that cite this judgment.