Recent Posts

6/recent/ticker-posts

Yusufu Kabong v. R., Crim. App. 64-D-68, 20/3/68, Biron J.



Yusufu Kabong v. R., Crim. App. 64-D-68, 20/3/68, Biron J.

Accused was convicted of an offence covered by the Minimum Sentences Act. Whether the Act applies to accused depends on whether he is a juvenile ---i.e., whether he is under 16. The charge sheet listed his age as 16; a medical examination found his age to be 16 or 17. The record contained no mention of the qualifications or experience of the medical officer.

            Held: “However high (the medical officer’s) qualifications and the extent of his experience, I am very far from persuaded that a doctor, particularly having regard to the equipment here (the case originated in Tukuyu, Rungwe District,) could give a definite assessment in respect of age, that is, whether a person has reached the age of 16 or not, with that degree of certainty required in a criminal case.” Accused to be treated as a minor. 

Post a Comment

0 Comments