REPUBLIC VRS. ADJAIDOO AND OTHERS (CCD/CC1/51/24) [2025] GHACC 6 (8 January 2025)

REPUBLIC VRS. ADJAIDOO AND OTHERS (CCD/CC1/51/24) [2025] GHACC 6 (8 January 2025)

The prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was the person who committed the offence or conspired with others, as the evidence was based on suspicion and probabilities, with no direct or cogent circumstantial evidence linking the accused to the crime. The prosecution's failure to call the complainant as a witness and to establish proper identification created reasonable doubt, necessitating acquittal.

Citation
[2025] GHACC 6
Parties
Prosecution: The Republic; Accused: Albert Adjaidoo; Accused (at Large): Quarshie; Accused (at Large): Adjei; Accused (at Large): Atoo; Accused (at Large): Atter
Court
Circuit Court
Jurisdiction
Ghana
Judgment Date
8 January 2025
Case Number
CCD/CC1/51/24
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Judgment
Outcome
acquittal
Legal Topics
Conspiracy, Stealing, Escape From Lawful Custody, Burden of Proof, Circumstantial Evidence, Identification Evidence
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Conspiracy Stealing Escape From Lawful Custody Burden of Proof Circumstantial Evidence Identification Evidence

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Republic

Prosecution

Albert Adjaidoo

Accused

Quarshie

Accused (at Large)

Adjei

Accused (at Large)

Atoo

Accused (at Large)

Atter

Accused (at Large)

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused conspired to commit stealing
  2. 2 Whether the accused was properly identified as the perpetrator of the crime
  3. 3 Whether circumstantial evidence was sufficient to link the accused to the offence

Ratio Decidendi

The prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was the person who committed the offence or conspired with others, as the evidence was based on suspicion and probabilities, with no direct or cogent circumstantial evidence linking the accused to the crime. The prosecution's failure to call the complainant as a witness and to establish proper identification created reasonable doubt, necessitating acquittal.

Court Disposition

acquittal

Orders

  • The accused person is acquitted and discharged.