Search court decisions

…The evidence adduced was collaborated in material aspects by the evidence of an independent witness who was found by the magistrate to be honest and the evidence could therefore not be impeached. 2.…

…Mr Gatonye did not give hearsay evidence.…

…The evidence against the appellant was overwhelming as he was identified by the purchaser and an eyewitness to the theft. 2.…

…Then there was the evidence of Francis Lihanda alias Cisco (PW 19) who bought this lorry from the appellant in Western Kenya (Kisumu and Kakamega).…

…In view of the sketchy evidence of the eyewitnesses and the sketch plan, which seemed consistent with either version, the evidence of the turnboys was of importance and the magistrate should have given opportunity for the…

…The absence of such evidence materially prejudiced the appellant. 2.…

…There was no expert evidence to show what speed was implied by the 44.50 meter skid marks. 3.…

…At the point of the accident the road is straight and the evidence is that the weather was good. Further evidence by the motor vehicle examiner suggested that the appellants’s matatu did not have any preaccident defect.…

…The principles for the successful grant of a review are well settled and the two which are pertinent to this application are that some new and important matter or evidence which could not with diligence have been discovered…

…Why this authority could not have been discovered after the exercise of due diligence even if this authority could be regarded as “new and important matter or evidence”’ is not explained.…

…Where the only evidence against a defendant is evidence of identification or recognition, a trial court is enjoined to examine such evidence carefully and to be satisfied that the circumstances of identification were favourable…

…Evidence of visual identification in criminal cases can bring about miscarriage of justice and it is of vital importance that such evidence is examined carefully to minimize this danger.…

…of the evidence of the five prosecution witnesses whose evidence we have just referred to and who should be considered as accomplices but whose evidence we believe what the accused is alleged to have said in his inquiry…

…The inspector gave evidence as did the accused.…

…Sufficiency of evidence must be looked at from the subjective view of the investigating officer. Sufficient evidence must be such that in the opinion of such police officer such evidence may result in conviction.…

…This must be considered in the light of all the evidence. There is evidence that there was a crowd outside the store after the police started arriving.…

…Sufficiency of evidence must be looked at from the subjective view of the investigating officer. Sufficient evidence must be such that in the opinion of such police officer such evidence may result in conviction.…

…This must be considered in the light of all the evidence. There is evidence that there was a crowd outside the store after the police started arriving.…

…(except the one regarding the camera and the calculator) was called to give evidence or to identify the comparatively large number of items which were found upon the appellants, that the bus inspector’s evidence of purported…

…In the absence of any other evidence, Mr Harwood quite properly could not see how all the appellants had been in joint possession of these items.…

…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 learned Magistrate did not accept the evidence of the appellant that the respondent was her causal worker. She thought this evidence was untrue.…

…Given the evidence the Magistrate heard and the statement the appellant made at Kasarani police station and which was admitted as evidence in the case, she was entitled to hold this view.…

…Having considered both the evidence of the plaintiff and the D.W. 1, I think, between the two, that of DW 1 is more credible.…

…As regards the defendant’s counter-claim, no evidence was led to show that the plaintiff was responsible for the breakage.…

…It was submitted by counsel for the appellant that these witnesses (PW6 and PW7) were accomplices and it was not safe to convict on their evidence without the necessary caution or to act on such evidence without corroboration…

…There would however be no need for corroboration if the trial magistrate found their evidence as falling within the rare exception where the accomplice evidence is exceptionally cogent and credit worthy, in which case it…

…The 2nd defendant’s evidence as to the most likely point of impact is supported by the evidence of his employer (DW 1) who had happened to pass on that road after the accident and was at the scene while the police were still…

…And I see no reason why I should not accept the evidence of the 2nd defendant. I would also observe that the police were at the scene. They could haveprovided valuable evidence at least as to the point of impact.…

…We now turn to a consideration of the particular evidence in the case of each appellant, bearing in mind as we do so the whole of the evidence.…

…It is said in the evidence of these witnesses that it was the home of the 2nd accused, but, apart from a report of what the 1st accused said, there is no other evidence upon which to base that allegation, and that evidence…

…In his evidence in Cross examination, Mr.…

…The trial Judge preferred the evidence of those who saw the testator to the evidence of Dr. Ahluwalia. The Court of Appeal agreed saying that the evidence of those who saw the testator was the best available 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.…