Facts
In a trial for murder, the trial judge held that as the appellant had previously heard confessions by the deceased of having killed his victims by witchcraft, the threat by the deceased to cause death of the appellant by witchcraft did not come as a shock and never put the appellant in fear of any danger to his life or that of his brother when he killed the deceased. On appeal, the justices of appeal found that on previous occasions when the deceased admitted to have killed people by witchcraft he had made no threats to the appellant and thus on the day of the incident the deceased's threat to kill him was sudden and must have come to him as a shock. Accordingly they quashed the conviction for murder and substituted therefore conviction for manslaughter.
Held: Although mere belief in witchcraft is no defence to a charge of murder, a threat to kill by witchcraft may in certain circumstances constitute legal defence to that charge.
Case Information
Order accordingly.
Great post.
ReplyDeletehttps://themepalace.com/users/josephfalls/
Great post.
ReplyDeletehttps://github.com/JeffreyHuffman