Facts
This is an appeal from a conviction of murder by the High Court. The facts were that the appellant and the deceased were husband and wife and were living together at the material time. There was no dispute that the appellant stabbed and killed the deceased. What was in dispute was the motive, circumstances and reasons for the attack. The I prosecution relied on a dying declaration, Exh. P.2, which stated that the appellant attacked the deceased when she told him that she was leaving him on account of his drunkenness and quarrelsome behaviour. But, according to the defence, the appellant attacked the deceased on account of her refusal to give him his money and provocative words and acts accompanied therewith. The trial judge was of the view that the deceased's dying declaration was weak and unreliable. However, he held that the words and acts of the deceased did not amount to legal provocation. On appeal.
Held:
(i) For the defence of provocation to stick, it must pass the objective test of whether an ordinary man in the community to which the accused belongs would have been provoked in the circumstances.
(ii) the words and actions of the deceased did not amount to legal provocation.
(iii) the recording officer had no reason to lie against the appellant and that the dying declaration was authentic and contained a painful lament by a dying mother.
Case Information
Appeal dismissed.
No comments:
Post a Comment