Search court decisions

…Eight witnesses altogether gave evidence at the trial that they recognised the second appellant.…

…He cited the case of Cleophas Otieno Wamunga v Republic (Criminal Appeal No 20 of 1989)where this Court said: “ It is trite law that where the only evidence against a defendant is evidence of identification or recognition…

…The paucity of evidence on the mental element was, made up by what is clearly hearsay evidence.…

…Accordingly, the evidence narrated to the court about what the informant told the police was inadmissible as hearsay evidence and ought to have been rejected by the trial court. That evidence was not excluded.…

…The main ground in this appeal is on the confession statement which was retracted and repudiated and the corroborative evidence to make it admissible in evidence.…

…The link in the evidence leading to the blood-stain is missing and to rely on the bloodstain as corroborative evidence which evidence was not shown to have proved the guilt of the appellant would be unsafe.…

…that evidence.…

…statements and evidence.…

…As such they could not betaken as evidence against the other, even to the limited extent permitted by section 32 of the Evidence Act (cap 80).…

…30 of the Indian Evidence Act (now section 32 of cap 80).…

…The appellant’s contention in this appeal is on the grounds that the two courts below erred in law in not treating Mr Barlow’s evidence as that of an accomplice; the evidence of Samson Onyango (PW 2) was not impartial as…

…of PW 1 has been strongly corroborated by the evidence of PW 3, PW 5 and PW 7”.…

…The Evidence Act (section 124, cap 80).…

…of a child of tender years and had also overlooked significant items of evidence bearing on the reliability of her evidence the conviction could not stand.…

…The Evidence Act (section 124, cap 80).…

…of a child of tender years and had also overlooked significant items of evidence bearing on the reliability of her evidence the conviction could not stand.…

…All this was circumstantial evidence against the first appellant.…

…An offence like murder can be established by evidence tendered directly proving it or by evidence of facts from which a reasonable person can draw the inference that murder had been committed.…

…In his judgment, the trial magistrate recited the evidence adduced before him.…

…doubt without first making any specific findings on such evidence.…

…He denied the offence and said the evidence of PW1 was false. During cross-examination, he denied shouting that the deceased was a thief and repeated that the evidence of PW1 was false.…

…The prosecution case was dependent on the evidence of PW1.…

…There was no other evidence of any other kind whatever against the appellant.…

…The first ground of appeal that there was not sufficient evidence to sustain the conviction is a matter of law, though whether the evidence is sufficient (when there is some evidence) is a matter of fact: See R v T Mohamed…

…Replying to grounds 2 and 3 Miss Ngugi did not dispute that the conviction was based on circumstantial evidence.…

…For a reason which will emerge later we do not propose to enter upon a detailed discussion of the evidence.…

…Their appeals to the High Court were dismissed and they filed second appeals in the Court of Appeal arguing that their retracted confessions should not have been admitted in evidence, that the evidence against them was uncorroborated…

…Corroboration is no more than something tending to confirm other evidence. 2.…

…the evidence of the prosecution itself showed that the statements could not possibly be true.…

…, but the fact, in itself, does not automatically result in the exclusion of the statement from the evidence”.…

…The appellant’s Memorandum of Appeal does not limit itself to those two grounds, namely that the conviction is against the weight of the evidence or that the sentence is excessive.…

…advocate, Mr Owuor, submitted one witness was an accomplice for which that Court of Appeal could find no evidence to support that submission.…

…As regards the evidence in support of the prosecution case the court below relied on the identification of the appellant by both PW 1 and PW 2.…

…The learned trial magistrate considered all the evidence before him and including the appellant’s defence and was satisfied on the basis of that evidence that it was the appellant who snatched the complainant’s property.…

…There was no other evidence of any other kind whatever against the appellant.…

…The first ground of appeal that there was not sufficient evidence to sustain the conviction is a matter of law, though whether the evidence is sufficient (when there is some evidence) is a matter of fact: See R v T Mohamed…

…The appellant raised seven grounds of appeal; that the last appellate court judges erred in law by failing to analyse and re-evaluate the entire evidence and find that there was no evidence to convict; by passing a conviction…

…That receipt allegedly given to the complainant when he bought the phone was never mentioned by the complainant in his evidence.…