R vs Moustache (Criminal Side CO 25/2011) [2013] SCSC 69 (18 October 2013)

R vs Moustache (Criminal Side CO 25/2011) [2013] SCSC 69 (18 October 2013)

The prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was in possession of the controlled drug due to serious contradictions and inconsistencies in the evidence, particularly regarding the chain of events, the discovery of the drugs, and the credibility of key witnesses. The benefit of the doubt must be given to the accused.

Citation
[2013] SCSC 69
Parties
Prosecution: The Republic; Accused: Garry Moustache
Court
Supreme Court
Jurisdiction
Seychelles
Judgment Date
18 October 2013
Case Number
Criminal Side CO 25/2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Judgment
Outcome
Acquittal
Legal Topics
Possession of Controlled Drugs, Standard of Proof, Credibility of Witnesses
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Possession of Controlled Drugs Standard of Proof Credibility of Witnesses

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Republic

Prosecution

Garry Moustache

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused was in possession of a controlled drug
  2. 2 Whether the prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt

Ratio Decidendi

The prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was in possession of the controlled drug due to serious contradictions and inconsistencies in the evidence, particularly regarding the chain of events, the discovery of the drugs, and the credibility of key witnesses. The benefit of the doubt must be given to the accused.

Court Disposition

Acquittal

Orders

  • The accused is found not guilty and acquitted of the charge of possession of a controlled drug.