Davies v S (Criminal Appeal 10 of 1977) [1979] SLSC 4 (11 July 1979)

(9749211 SLBALR Davies The Sete Ey DAVIES y THE STATE cA

COURT OF APPEAL FOR SIERRA LEONE, Criminal Appeal 10 of 1977, Hon! Me

Justice During JA, Hon Mr Justice Shor JA, Hon Mi usice Kuubu JA, 11 July 1979

1) Criminal Law and Procedure ~ Murder - Summing up - Whether judge misdirected jury ~ Whether reference to “confession statement” adequately ‘distinguished from an admission ~ Whether all defences adequately dealt with — [Necessary to put case to jury as ordinary men and women

“The appellant was convicted by a jury of murder and sentenced to death He appealed against

conviction on a numberof grounds relating to how the judge directed the jury in his summing

Held, per Short JA, dismissing the appeal:

1. With regard to ground I, the language complained of inthe tral judge's summing up ‘vas notan error of law. The following direction when considered within the context of the summing-up asa whole was without lav: “If afer you have carefully considered the trie evidence in this case, yOU ae satisfied so ast fee sure thatthe prosecution have failed to discharge their duty as est upon them then you have to retum a verdict of Not Guilty ofthis offence of murder andthe accused will be acquted and discharge

2. With regards to ground 2, the language might be inflctous if taken out of context: “1 should opine, diect you tothe effect that the statement ofthe accused is tantamount to {confession siatement.” However, when read in its context, it was obvious that the trial judge was not equating the phrase “confession statement” with that of “confession of an offence charged but rather with “admission of ean facts sated by the accused. for {mmeiatly after the words complained of the judge went onto state what he mean and made the dichotomy between confession and admission manifestly clear.

3. The wal judge adequately dealt wih all posible defences which might be open tothe appellant and sated: “However i is sted law that where there is possible defence of Sa defence or of provocation I should direct you accordingly onthe law relating to them" The wal ude then directed fully on hese defences inte suring up.

4. was necessary that the judge put the ease to the juny as ordinary men and women, not as though he were addressing twelve graduates from Fourah Bay College. The trial judge put the case tothe jury in the only way it should have been put and more than adequately put the case forthe appellant othe jury. Rv Spriggs (1958) 1 QBD 276 applied

Cases referred to

Ry Spriggs (1958) | QBD276

Appeal

‘Tis was an appeal by Curtis Davis who was convicted by a jury of murder ad sentenced to

death. The fats appear sufficiently inthe following judgment

Mr EA Thomas and Mr Renner-Thomas forthe appellant

Miss MAC Jones, Senior State Counsel, forthe respondent.

SHORT JA: The appelan was charged with murder at a Session of the High Cour in Freetown

Dresded over by Golley J siting with a jury. He was convicted by the unanimous verdict of the

See eee

» Sioa ese Bar Asc Law Rts ——_‘(47443}1SLBALR jury and was sentenced to death Is against this conviction that he has appealed onthe following rounds

“1. That the Leared Trial Judge ered in law when at page 39 lines 22 ~27 he directed

the jury as follows:

“Af after you have carefully considered the entre evidence in this case, yOu are satisfied so as to feel sure that the prosecution have failed to discharging (sic) their ‘duty as cast upon them, then you have to retum a verdict of Not Guilty of this offence ‘of murder andthe accused wl be Acted and Discharged. |

2. That the Learned Trial Judge misdirected the jury when be sid at page $3 line 31 and

pave 5 lin 12 “I should, opine, ect you to the effect ha the statement of the

[ccsed is tantamount toa confesion statement.”

3. That the Leamed Til Judge misdirected the jury on evidence and the lw

applicable thereon when he sid at page 54 ine 2-10. "He admied in a voluntary

ition statement which isin evidence that he src the deceased a blow with &

‘windsreen winding instrument. I he did no do this at nor inthe het of passion

then he was master of his mind then jou have to rule ou povecton and consider

murder simplictr”

4. That the Leamod ial Judge ered in law when he directed the jury a page 47 tne 13

= 17 as follows: "You will have to weigh inthe scale the nature ofthe force used as

against must bear reasonable eltionship to he provocation ithe offence of murder ist

be reduced to manslaughter (5 ;

5, ‘The Learned Til Judge eed inlaw in that efile to put the case for the Defence

tothe jury adequately and properly. |

6. The verdict is unreasonable and canot be supported having regard tothe evidence"

“The brief facts of the case for the prosecution are as follows. On the 2™ of December 1076, the daceased, Benoni Legh let his home at No4A, Upper Allen Town Main Road, fer Freetown. Incidentally the appent ved at No 4B, Upper Allen Town Main Road i the Same compound. The deceased retuned shomly afterwards and enter their common Compound where he found one Mis. Bemice Pearce, a cousin of the apelant and the ppl siting.

“The decease also sat ona bench nthe same compound and spoke of his visit oa cousin ‘of his who had retumed from overseas. According to Bemice Pare, the appellants cousin. ttho gave evidence forthe prosecution, the appellant got up suienly, approached the ‘deceased who wa sil siting ona bench and si

“You Benoni you (wicked mother and father) when I was ite and was being looked

afte by your parents Ihave not organ the teste I ecived. ki sil n my mind

‘Your mather used to give me rermant and leftovers from meals, and she sed to give

mea lot of laundry to do ad I ook them to the Kissy Brook and laundered ther. Your

tober sed tell es on me to your father who wed to inflict a oof punishment on

‘me without asking”

‘The witness intervened and remonstated with the appellant. who then tured to where hehad ben siting. The deceased was sil iting onthe Bench, The witness further sated that ‘not too long afterwards, the appellant got up from where he was sitting and “appeared to be Tooking around for something and soon a he went near to the deceased he picked up an ron which was by.” The appellant was alleged by this witness to ave then suid

| (1974-82) | SLBALR ‘Davies v The State 8 | Ce a ee, ape ere eterna free pe eee ee Sy ee oa en hp oee erp tay ppt ppc peel eer eet Re hoe ered papa gi ote ae = eee ger ie te ee pi aaa espe alan ee ee Soltero an i ce oer ere eS ne Sone Caen re eee tee Ba re gee pe ckopomaiae te ee ea ee gL CORSE eee SUN emer eee Pe Dk tse bet centr pot gocher ee “Get up. You suid you wanted to fight me. Get up now and let us ight.” Ree Soli real ae a ceo BCS ee ee Smtr See eee agen: pe Fc eat a ass dite Soy ages peep a ‘scene on the same day. He said he found the appellant lying in a pool of blood ~ dead. When ‘questioned by him after showing him the body of the deceased Benoni Leigh, the witness said pepe eins ieee Sear Soe Se aie Ws stand MeGee eros pt safe een es per ree a et cP open ore ee ergels rep best gig trie ee ag te ah rma es oa ee ee peppy epee eee ene ey eerie! need

2 ‘Sierra Leone Bar Associaton Law Reports {1974-82} | SLBALR- | ciskannnintniecasiatuillieas: out Tatacuinehcacmen bani Ace etcetera pr roe oer et en pop eee chee ace ‘made by the appellant to the Police on the 5* of December 1976 after he had been cautioned. ‘The substance of it is that on the 2” of December 1976, after his visit to Freetown, the aetna eee eres re rer ers Spock teaee sae seeemenamacaes pester reer areemee Soeeeteeeree ee atereaas mie alata ork geraceee mee Seeker are mmmereemen eae tree miee cranes naar eran mast aetege menrat aera = Snieeoerceee Seay ome nnee atae etna Sortie mentennenae la oan iene (ieee rere ena ert ee peerneeere mini eees eee Saaieeesone st pereeereneants se peeteey retro pe th “on Thursday 2 December 1976 after I had struck the deceased and he fell dead, the Saar poeerne rage eelvacanmeenec a tence tga secant cotacteage ieee reac oe eee ered Soeteatieawee ctmeneor rope dois Sor awl ouraase rene length. With regard to grounds 1, the language complained of in the leamed trial judge's 4 Tac watelnaele ocr ttt meres pvamiteren uss te taeunar cm ttanataeconteuea Societe org oor ccna Binaeiee neces seas vost

The pages read for this report end here. The judgment continues in the PDF.