Anthony Ejinima Vs The State (1991)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

AKPATA, JSC 

This appeal has brought again into focus an issue this court has pronounced upon on a number of occasions. It is that the onus of proving insanity is on the accused who should make available evidence to satisfy the court that he was insane at the time he committed the offence. Also relevant to this appeal is the question as to the circumstances insane delusion can avail an accused person a defence to a charge of murder.

At the Nsukka Judicial Division of the Anambra State High Court holding at Nsukka the accused Anthony Ejinima was charged with the offence of murder punishable under section 319(1) of the Criminal Code Cap. 30 Volume 2 Laws of Eastern Nigeria, 1963, in that on the 16th day of July, 1983, he murdered Ngozi Anthony his daughter. It was the case for the prosecution that the accused had three children, two by Veronica Odo, P.W.7, and one by Maria Odo Ukwueze, P.W.4.

The children of Veronica were Nkiruka a girl aged 3 and Onuma a boy aged 1. Maria bore him Ngozi aged 5 at the time material to this case. The accused was said to have slaughtered the three children on the same day, 16th July, 1983, within his premises.  Before the date of the incident the two wives had left him. Maria took custody of Ngozi and Veronica took Onuma with her while Nkiruka lived with Odo Nwa Ejinima, P.W.3, an elder brother of the accused.

Maria claimed to have left the house of the accused because he neglected both herself and her child Ngozi.Veronica had to leave the accused because he  was always accusing her of indulging in adultery. On the date of the incident, 16/7/83, the accused went to the house of his brother, P.W.3 and took Nkiruka home. He proceeded to the house of Maria and collected Ngozi and promised he would return the child the following day. He also took away Onuma from Veronica. P.W. 2, Sunday Ejinima and P.W.3, on that day saw the three children playing in the premises of the accused. They went for the police.

On their return in company of P.W. 6, Sergeant Godwin Ifejeme, they found that the three children had been slaughtered. Post mortem examination was carried out by P.W. 1, Dr. Vincent Okafor. The Doctor confined his evidence mainly on the autopsy carried out in respect of the corpse of Ngozi. According to him his examination revealed that the child “was neatly sliced across the back in the region of the third thoraic vertebra such that the body could be pushed forward and all the contents of the chest cavity would be revealed”.

The arteries and veins were also sliced across. P.W.1 expressed the view “that death ensued from loss of blood from the cut vessels and damage to the internal organs of the chest, that is, the heart and the lungs, all of which were affected.” The accused who spoke in Ibo language made a confessional statement Exhibit B taken down in English by P.W.6 but interpreted by P.W.5 James Oke. P.W.8, Assistant Superintendent of Police, Aliu Isah authenticated the statement as having been voluntary.

It is necessary to set out the statement in full. It reads: In the year 1979, after the Federal election my wife by name Veronica Odo poisoned me with native medicine. When the effect of the poisonous medicine started working in me, my wife Veronica Odo then divorced me and left for her father’s house by name Odo Ogbonna. She left me carrying away with her two of my children namely Onuma Ejinima of about 1 year 3 months old and Nkiruka Ejinima of about 3 years old. She left me for her father’s place in the month of May, 1983 with the two of my children I mentioned above.

Earlier I was married to Maria Nwa-Odo who also divorced me and went away with my daughter of about 5 years old. She then gave my daughter by name Ngozi Ejinima to Orefi Urama to take care of. Orefi Urama is the mother of my wife by name Maria Nwa Odo. On 15/7/83 at about 7 p.m. my senior brother by name Odo Ejinima then came and told me that my daughter Nkiruuka Ejinima is sick. Both myself and Odo Ejinima then went to see my in-laws that is Odo Ogbonna and Oyodo Nwigbaba the parents of Veronica Odo. When we got to them, I then collected my two children, that is Onuma Ejinima and Nkiruka from Oyodo Nwigbaba for it is the poisonous native medicine that Veronica Odo gave me that is worrying the children also. Earlier before this I have collected Ngozi Ejinima my daughter from Ore Urama her grandmother to my house at Umachi.

I then told my mother-in-law that since Veronica Odo has poisoned me, I will go with my children to die with them instead of them to live while I die and they continue to suffer. When I got to Umachi village with the three children on 15/7/83 at about 10 p.m. I then took my cutlass and killed the three children. I am saying that I killed Onuma Ejinima, Nkiruka Ejinima and Ngozi Ejinima with cutlass. The cutlass I used in killing the three of my children belongs to me. My action of killing them is for me to die after killing them. I killed them in my house at Umachi Enugu Ezike. After killing them, the police then came to me with Odo Ejinima my senior brother and I followed them to the Enugu Ezike Police station.”

The accused who testified, but called no witness, put up a defence completely at variance with his confessional statement. It was his case that Ngozi and the other two children were killed by armed robbers. According to him the armed robbers came in a “spindle’ and killed the children. When police came to his house he had wanted to tell them the suffering he had gone through but they would not give him the chance to do so. As a result he attempted to kill himself by drinking half a gallon of petrol. He denied telling the police that he killed the children. He also did not tell the police that Veronica poisoned him, but added “but I know she did because she goes out with other men”.

PAGE| 4 In his judgment the learned trial Judge rejected the defence of the accused along with the defence of insanity canvassed by his counsel in his address. The learned trial Judge believed that the accused has a long standing suspicion that Veronica was committing adultery and that she had given him some poison from which he would die. It was for that reason he took the decision to die with his children.

The learned trial Judge was therefore satisfied that the accused was suffering from some delusion at the time, and that since the situation he imagined, if it has existed would not have exonerated him from guilt, he accordingly found him guilty of the murder of Ngozi Anthony, his daughter. In his notice of appeal to the Court of Appeal, the accused filed one original ground of appeal complaining that the decision of the trial judge was unwarranted, unreasonable and could not be supported in law. With leave of the Court of Appeal; he filed two additional grounds. The second additional ground is virtually the same as the original ground of appeal. While the original ground states that “the decision cannot be supported in law” additional ground 2 is that “ the decision cannot be supported having regard to the evidence”. I do not consider it necessary to reproduce additional ground 1 on which the sole issue for determination in the Court of Appeal was based. The only issue as formulated in the appellant’s brief was “ whether the defence of insanity raised by the appellant has been properly rejected by the trial Judge”.

Oguntade, JCA, in his judgment ,(concurred in by Katsina-Alu and Uwaifo, JJ CA), was of the view that there was not a shred of credible evidence suggesting that the appellant was insane at the time he committed the offence. He was satisfied that the trial court rightly rejected the defence of insanity. The appeal was accordingly dismissed. The accused not being satisfied with the judgment of the Court of Appeal lodged his appeal to this court on three grounds. I reproduce them with particulars supplied.