Salum s/o Chakapu v. R., Crim. App. 884-D-66, Saidi Alli Mandai v.R. 885-D-66; 25/1/67; Biron, J.

Salum s/o Chakapu v. R., Crim. App. 884-D-66, Saidi Alli Mandai v.R. 885-D-66; 25/1/67; Biron, J.

Accused were convicted of housebreaking and stealing solely upon the testimony of their alleged accomplice who was convicted on his own plea. Neither of the accused had a criminal record.

            Held: Although uncorroborated testimony by an alleged accomplice may support a conviction, the “general practice”    

Is not to convict on such evidence. Departures from this practice are justified only if the judge, fully cognizant of the dangers, is satisfied that the accomplice’s testimony is so exceptionally cogent that the danger has disappeared. Citing Canisio s/o Walwa v. R., 25. E.A.C.A. 453.