%20(1).png)
Lawrence Kaguruku Mutungi v. R., Crim. App. 401-M—67, 14/8/67, Mustafa, J.
Appellant and a co-accused were charged with theft. The co-accused was acquitted, but appellant was convicted on the bases of the co-accused ‘s testimony against him. The High Court found that the co-accused was “without doubt an accomplice” of appellant.
Held: (1) A conviction cannot be based solely on the testimony of a co-accused who is an accomplice. Such evidence requires corroboration. (2) The fact that appellant seemed an untruthful person in the witness box could not serve as such corroboration. Conviction quashed.
%20(10).png)
%20(28).png)
%20(1).png)
%20(1).png&description= Lawrence Kaguruku Mutungi v. R., Crim. App. 401-M—67, 14/8/67, Mustafa, J.){kind=link}
0 Comments
PLACE YOUR COMMENT HERE
WARNING: DO NOT USE ABUSIVE LANGUAGE BECAUSE IT IS AGAINST THE LAW.
THE COMMENTS OF OUR READERS IS NOT OUR RESPONSIBILITY.