R. v. Said Rasamu Tamimi, Crim. Sass. 12-Z-66, 14/3/67, Kimicha, Ag. C. J.

R. v. Said Rasamu Tamimi, Crim. Sass. 12-Z-66, 14/3/67, Kimicha, Ag. C. J.

The accused was charged with casting away vessels c/s 296 of the Penal Decree. Upon the completion of the prosecution’s evidence, the High Court (heading the case under its original jurisdiction powers) found that the case against the accused consisted of (a) testimony by several fishermen that on the day before the offence was committed, the accused had warned them that he would cast away their boats that night; and (b) a statement made by the accused to the police in which he admitted having committed the offence.

Ruled: (1) The warnings given by the accused to the fishermen give rise to suspicion only. The accused may have changed his mind and not cast the vessels away; someone else who heard the accused utter the warnings may have taken advantage of the situation and committed the offence. A threat to do an act, unsupported by other evidence, is insufficient to make but a prima facie case for the accused to answer. (Citing R. v. Siprian s/o Nshange, 14 E. A.C.A. 72 (1947); Chabildas Somaiya v. R., 20 E.A.C.A. 144(1953).)

            (2) The accused’s statement to the police amounted to a confession. Confessions made to the police, or to anyone while in police custody are not admissible in evidence, under Criminal Procedure Decree sections 25 and 26. As the accused’s threat is the only evidence remaining, there is no case to answer.