The Appellant was convicted of murder contrary to section
196 of the Penal Code [Cap 16 R.E. 2002] and sentenced to death. Aggrieved, he
is appealing. No witness testified in court to have seen the Appellant killing
the deceased. His conviction was based on both the cautioned and the
extra-judicial statements. The High Court was particularly influenced by the
extra – judicial statement where the Appellant confessed. The main complaint is
that the judge erred in holding the cautioned statement corroborated the
extra-judicial statement. Caution statement was challenged on the ground that
in his summing-up, the judge did not direct the assessors on the cautioned
statement; rather his address was in respect of the extra-judicial statement
only.
In regard to extra judicial statement, that the judge
mentioned to the assessors the existence of the extra-judicial statement,
without more. The Appellant’s defence was premised on an allegation that he was
tortured before he was sent to the justice of peace. That he was in police
custody for a period of about six days before he was sent to the justice of
peace.