Despite confessing to their roles in the crime, the three killers denied in the court proceedings that they were involved in killing Lim, and chose to remain silent during the defence phase of their trial.

On 9 October 1992, Judicial commissioner Amarjeet Singh of the High Court judged the trio guilty of Lim's murder and sentenced them to death by hanging.

In the aftermath, the Chin siblings and Ng were hanged at Changi Prison on 31 March 1995, and the case became a legal subject that touches on the validity of relying on a co-accused's statement to convict a person of murder.

Upon her arrest on 1 February 1989 at her Jurong East flat, Chin confessed during police custody that she hired two men to help her "get rid of" Lim, who apparently harassed her for money over a period of time and took over S$10,000 from her.

Ng spent two years living under fake names before he was caught by the Malaysian authorities on 20 July 1991, and turned over to the Singaporean police for investigations.

Deputy Public Prosecutor (DPP) Seng Kwang Boon led the prosecution team, and Judicial commissioner Amarjeet Singh presided the case hearing.

Lau stated that ever since that day, Lim, who would sometimes come live at his flat, told him that she was apparently attracted to Chin and often talked about her.

This led to Seow Noi deciding to call Yaw Kim and Ng, asking them to help her "get rid of" Lim.

Together, the pair met up with Ng, who remained disguising as a loan shark, and they drove to Choa Chu Kang Christian cemetery.

Chin Seow Noi's lawyer Ronald Ng (unrelated to Ng Kim Heng) argued against the admission of the confession, stating that the prosecution proceeded with the charge of abetment of murder based on Seow Noi's confession as sole evidence against her but not other incriminating evidence.

He pointed out that there was no direct mentioning of Seow Noi procuring her brother Yaw Kim and Ng to help cause Lim's death.

As for Yaw Kim's lawyer Choo Si Sen and Ng Kim Heng's lawyer Peter Cuthbert Low, they both made similar arguments against the admission of the men's confessions, stating that the two men's confessions were not amounting to their admission to committing the murder of Lim, but to clear themselves of the blame for the crime.

They also stated there was no other evidence to directly prove the charges of murder against Yaw Kim and Ng, the latter who additionally claimed he was forced to make incriminating statements.

[20][21] However, on 8 October 1992, the same date of Chin Seow Noi's fourth wedding anniversary, Judicial commissioner Amarjeet Singh ruled in favour of the prosecution and dismissed the defence lawyers' submissions, concluding that the prosecution had made out a prima facie case against the trio and established the essential elements of the offence charged.

If her meaning of "get rid of" was misunderstood by Yaw Kim, Seow Noi would have shown any feelings of outrage or surprise in her reaction to the news of Lim's death.

[23] Turning to the second accused Chin Yaw Kim, Singh judged from the forensic evidence that Lim was indeed being stabbed fatally whilst in a sitting position.

These above facts thus contrasted and refuted Yaw Kim's claim that Lim was stabbed by Ng outside the car while in a standing position.

They also agreed that the mastermind Chin Seow Noi's three words "get rid of" would only mean kill when she solicited Lim Lee Tin's murder.

With regards to this issue, the prosecutor Bala Reddy (who took over Seng Kwang Boon in the appeal) argued that Singh's earlier interpretation in the trial was not correct.

[26][27] After hearing Reddy's arguments, the three-judge panel noted that Singh convicted the trio based on the police statements and other evidence and not the co-accused's statements, and they agreed with Reddy that the confession of an accomplice can be evidence against a person and form a sole basis to conviction: The natural interpretation of s30 is that it allows the conviction of an accused person to be sustained solely on the basis of a confession by his co-accused, provided, of course, that the evidence emanating from that confession satisfies the court beyond reasonable doubt of the accused’s guilt.

[28] During the time the trio were held on death row, Chin Seow Noi's husband Siew See Kow unfailingly visited his wife regularly in prison.

Siew even wrote a personal letter to the President of Singapore for clemency (which may commute Chin's sentence to life imprisonment if successful), but the plea was rejected.

[32] The appeal related to Lim Lee Tin's murder, titled Chin Seow Noi and Others v Public Prosecutor in law reports, became a notable case report that discussed on the validity of the use of an accomplice's confession as evidence against a person in court, and as a sole basis to convict a person.