R. v. Kakengele Msagikwa, Crim. Sass. 91-M-67, 9/10/67, Cross J.

R. v. Kakengele Msagikwa, Crim. Sass. 91-M-67, 9/10/67, Cross J.

Accused and two others were charged with murder. There was evidence that a fight started between the other two accused and deceased in a house. Accused then entered the house without a weapon and told the others to leave. A witness testified that accused hit deceased twice and said he would not leave without beating deceased. However, on cross-examination he admitted that he had seen only hands and could not be sure the blows were inflicted by accused. At the close of the prosecution case, accused moved that he not be called upon to make a defence since the prosecution had not made out a prima facie case. The prosecution argued that a prima facie case had at least been made that accused had assaulted deceased.

            Held: (1) A prima facie case at least must be one on which a reasonable tribunal could convict if no evidence is offered by the defence. [Citing Ramanlal Ttrambaklal Batt v. R., (1957) E.A.C.A 332, 335.] The onus is on the prosecution to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt; and a prima facie case is not made out if it is one which on full consideration might possibly be thought sufficient to sustain a conviction. Still less is a prima facie case established by part of the testimony of a witness considered in isolation and without reference to other parts of the witness’s testimony. (2) The evidence of the prosecution did not establish a prima facie case. Accused acquitted.