Philip Kanu & Anor V. The King (1952)

LawGlobal Hub Judgment Report – West African Court of Appeal

Criminal Law—Murder—Evidence—Extra-judicial confession—Confirmatory circumstances.

Facts

The facts were these: Feeling was high between the village of the appellants and the village of the deceased owing to a land dispute. The deceased was riding on the carrier at the back of a bicycle pedalled by another, in the dark; he was struck a cutting blow and fell. A number of persons were detained as suspects, among them the appellants.

The second appellant said to someone, in the hearing of the first, that the first had told him he had cut someone with a matchet. They were arrested; the first appellant told the police it was an accident. Both were cautioned and made statements that owing to one of their own people having been wounded, they were out to take vengeance on anyone of the deceased’s people; and they gave a full account of killing the deceased.

The first appellant also showed the police a blood-stained matchet at his house as the one he had used. The appellants were taken before a Superior Officer of Police, who verified from each that he assented to his confession and had made it after a caution he understood and of his own free will. The first appellant added, “ I was hot when
I made it “, the second, ” the man Philip (viz. first appellant) killed is my in-law”.

The first appellant gave evidence. He failed to explain what he meant by “hot ” so as to affect the value of his statement, which read as a sensible and deliberate account. He denied making it, though he admitted putting his thumb to a statement, but, he said, it was not the one read; he also said that before the Superior Officer he denied making the statement read to him.

The second appellant gave evidence to the same effect about his own statement. The trial Judge, however, held that each had made the statement attributed to him and confirmed it before the Superior Officer of Police; the Judge believed the Crown witnesses but not the appellants.

Each appealed on the ground that it was wrong to convict him on his confession alone. For the Crown it was submitted |hat a confession properly proved was enough.

There were, however, some facts in the Crown evidence which helped as corroboration: that someone of the appellants’ village had been wounded; that the appellants set out at night with matchets; the blood-stained matchet shown by one of them to the police; the wound on the deceased, etc. (stated in the penultimate para, of the judgment on appeal infra).

Held

The confession of murder in each case was free and voluntary and in itself fully consistent and probable, and the inculpating statements were corroborated by several facts testified to by witnesses for the Crown—which showed that the confessions were true.

Per curiam: It is desirable to have, outside the confession, some evidence, be it slight, of circumstances which make it probable that the confession was true.

Appeals dismissed.