Search court decisions

…Mr Njuguna, on behalf of the respondents, equally drew attention to several differences in the other side’s case, notably that under cross-examination the plaintiff said first that he had received the log book from Nairobi…

…Neither was it ever put to the appellant in cross-examination that he and Hawala had acted in collusion so as to deprive the AFC of its security.…

…During cross-examination the plaintiff explained that on that fateful evening Lawi appeared from behind him and held his waist, then the two fell down and the fore-man came to separate them.…

…The witness said that Lawi had hit several other people before, and on cross examination he said: “That night, Lawi was drank because of the way he was talking. He was harsh to the people.…

…In cross examination Wayua answered that although she did not have a spotlight, on thatcloudless full moon night she saw clearly the incident in issue.…

…In cross examination PW2 told the court that his house and that of the accused lie opposite each other across the road. But the scene of the attack was closer to the accused's house.…

…In the instant case there was no formal refusal to allow the cross-examination but the 2nd appellant was unrepresented.…

…In his evidence in court the first accused Charles Ndolo who is appellant in HCCRA 52/03 said that he had a grudge with the complainant which he never put to the complainant in cross examination.…

…The issue of a grudge has been displaced by this court as being an after thought as it was not in cross examinations. Even if PW 1 had a grudge no explanation exists as to why PW 2 and 3 should frame the appellants.…

…PW7 died before his cross – examination by the appellant was completed.…

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

…In the case giving rise to this appeal PW1 said during cross-examination:- “Deceased and accused are my customers” And during re-examination he said “Both deceased and accused were my friends.”…

…He testified in hisevidence in cross examination that he does not know who was driving thedefendants motor vehicle but the owner is the defendant. He further testifiedthat defendants driver was prosecuted by police.…

…Under cross-examination, PW 1 he identified Chacha at the parade but not during the robbery. All that meant that PW 2 was the sole identifying witness in so far as Chacha was concerned.…

…The answer to this puzzle in this case comes from the cross-examination of these two witnesses.…

…In cross-examination Sarah was asked about Exh l the card - Pass-Book Certificate Account which indicates that Margaret was authorizing Meshack her husband to take the money.…

…In the cross examination of the respondent, it was suggested to her that she owned plot No 133R Ongata Rongai and not plot No 133B Ongata Rongai.…

…In the course of cross examination of the second appellant, she said that she did not know where plot No 133 B and or 133 R was nor who occupied them, thus conceding that plot No 133 B could belong to the respondent and could…

…The plaintiff was subjected to searching cross-examination by the learned counsel for the first defendant. He stated that he was looking at the road, the road was straight and it was on a clear night.…

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

…In the case giving rise to this appeal PW1 said during cross-examination:- “Deceased and accused are my customers” And during re-examination he said “Both deceased and accused were my friends.”…

…His evidence is more complicated by his answers under cross examination when he said: “The driver went out of the motor vehicle and joined the lady officer and I saw the driver give her something. I knew it was money.…

…These letters had not been put to the plaintiff’s PW1 in cross-examination and were only introduced into the case after PW1 had left for Germany making his recall both expensive and impracticable.…

…The second accused’s statement was not a confession nor was it evidence on oath which could be tested by cross-examination.…

…brief is as follows:- PW1 the 1st plaintiff, PW5 a nephew of the 1st plaintiff and uncle to 2nd plaintiff and PW6 brother to 1st plaintiff and uncle to the 2nd plaintiff were firm both in their examination-in-chief and cross-examination…

…In cross-examination he stated:- “I have not cultivated plot No 243 or 1022 as I was not married, I was married in 1980. I have not cultivated it because the defendant refused.”…

…The evidence of the ballistics expert as to his conclusions does not appear to have been seriously challenged in cross-examination.…

…As a recorded police statement, not made on oath, not subject to the test of cross examination, exhibit 122 could not take the place of sworn testimony.…

…Then she made significant observations during her cross examination by the appellants to the 1st accused (1st appellant) she said.…