Mwidin s/o Mohamed v. R., Crim. App. 671-D-67, 18/10/67, Biron J.

Mwidin s/o Mohamed v. R., Crim. App. 671-D-67, 18/10/67, Biron J.

Complainant believed his nephew and perhaps others had robbed him. The nephew confessed to the crime after the uncle had threatened to bring a witchdoctor to bewitch the culprits. In this confession the nephew said second accused was his confederate, and gave the uncle a letter addressed to second accused asking him to disclose the where about of the stolen property. Before the uncle could do anything with this letter the stolen property was found in the bush by a villager. At trial both accused denied participation in the theft, and first accused (the nephew) denied making the confession. There was no evidence other than the confession to implicate the two accused.

            Held: (1) The magistrate believed the complainant rather than the accused, as he was entitled to do. (2) The conviction of the first accused solely on the basis of the confession was perfectly proper. (30 “Although the confession may be said to have been induced by fear, that of witchcraft,

It is properly valid confession and the explanation for its having been made is eminently reasonable….” (4) As against the second accused the statement by the first accused to the uncle was hearsay. However, since that statement constituted a full confession, implicating second accused to the hilt, it is admissible against him. (5) In the absence of any corroboration, the confession standing alone was insufficient to support a conviction of theft. Conviction of second accused quashed.