DOMINICK SAMWEL MAYEGA EDITED 2222222

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA IN THE SUB REGISTRY OF MANYARA AT BABATI ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL SESSION CASE NO. 26 OF 2023 REPUBLIC VERSUS DOMINICK SAMWEL MAYEGA....................... 1st ACCUSED MAJALIWA MGAZA @MEJA.............................. 2nd ACCUSED WILLIAM PIASON@MWIGEMA........................................ 3rd ACCUSED JUDGMENT 1st July & August 2024 Kahyoza, J.: Bakari s/o Yasini was a riding a motorcycle taxi commonly known as "bodaboda". While on his normal duties of transporting people from one place to another, Bakari s/o Yasini disappeared on 21.10.2022. Bakari s/o Yasini's family members and his villagers became suspicious and mounted a search from 23.10.2022. On 26.10.2022, a dead body was found and identified to be that of Bakari s/o Yasini. The dead body had started to decompose. Bakari s/o Yasini's death was not natural. He died a violent death. The doctor perceived the cause of death to be excessive blood loss due to penetrating body injuries. The police arrested Dominick Samwel Mayega, Majaliwa Mgaza @ Meja and William Piason @ Mwigema (the accused persons) and arraigned them i with an offence of murder contrary to sections 196 & 197 of the Penal Code [Cap. 16 R.E 2022]. The Police alleged that, on the 21st day of October, 2023 at Olpopong'i village, within Kiteto District in Manyara Region, the accused persons did murder one Bakari s/o Yasini. They pleaded not guilty. The prosecution summoned twelve witnesses and presented eleven exhibits to establish the accused persons guilty. It is undisputed that Bakari s/o Yasini is dead. The court admitted the post-mortem report (Exhibit Pl) during the preliminary hearing. The post mortem report depicted that Bakari s/o Yasini's demise resulted from excessive blood loss due to penetrating body injuries. Exhibit Pl, additionally reports that Bakari s/o Yasini was discovered with multiple cut wounds on the neck, head, major neck vessels, upper and lower extremities, genitalia chopped off and stab wounds on the anterior aspect of the chest. Even though the body had started decomposing, Dr. Priscus Setas Shirima (Pw4) did identify the cause of death. He testified that the deceased's relative managed to identify the body as it had clothes. The accused persons'advocate cross-examined Dr. Priscus Setas Shirima (Pw4) who maintained that there was no need to examine internal organs. The prosecution's account was that on 21. 10.2023 Dominick Samwel Mayega, Majaliwa Mgaza @ Meja and William Piason @ Mwigema at 2 09:00pm hired Bakari s/o Yasin at 09:00pm to ride them to Olpopon'gi hamlet. Rajab Bakari Kamota (Pw2) got information that Bakari Yasin had been hired that night to ride passengers to Olpopon'gi village. He advised him through a person who had informed him to be careful. On 22.10.2023 at 00.00 hours while Jonas Makundi (Pw8) was at his work place received a night visitor who asked him push his motor cycle, which had suddenly stopped. Jonas Makundi (Pw8) was a security guard of Airtel Company tower at Meriongoma hamlet. He rendered the assistance of pushing the motor cycle to start it in vain. The night visitor requested to spend a night at the place. They pushed the motorcycle to Jonas Makundi (Pw8)'s hat, where the guest spent night. That night before they parted, Jonas Makundi (Pw8) request the vistor to tell him his name. The night guest told Jonas Makundi (Pw8) that his name was Wiliam Piason. The following morning at 06:00hrs before Jonas Makundi (Pw8) left his bed, heard his guest trying to start the motor cycle. It did not ignite. He advised him to take it the mechanic for repair. The guest told Jonas Makundi (Pw8) that there was no a need push the motor cycle to the mechanic but he prayed to go for the mechanic. He gave the ignition key to Jonas Makundi (Pw8) and left to pick the mechanic. Shortly after the guest left for the 3 mechanic, Jonas Makundi (Pw8) went to the shamba where he had people working to his farm. Later, Jonas Makundi (Pw8)'s son Fikiri telephoned informing that him William and Abel Raphael (Pw5), a mechanic, were at his home place and they wanted to repair the motor cycle. He told him that he had the ignition key with him in the shamba. Jonas Makundi (Pw8)'s son Fikiri and the night guest, William went to the farm to collect the ignition key. Jonas Makundi (Pw8)' son Fikiri gave the ignition key to William and they left. Abel Raphael (Pw5) did not manage to repair the mechanical defect, so he resolved take the motor cycle to his garage. He pulled it to his garage. After they reached the garage, Fikiri, Jonas Makundi (Pw8)'s son and William, the motor cycle owner told Abel Raphael (Pw5) to repair the motorcycle while they take tea. After sometime, Fikiri, Jonas Makundi (Pw8)'s son, went to Abel Raphael (Pw5)'s garage and told him that the owner of the motor cycle had left and that once he finished repairing the motorcycle he should notify him to pick it. Fikiri, Jonas Makundi (Pw8)'s son gave Abel Raphael (Pw5)'s the motor cycle's owner's mobile number. Abel Raphael (Pw5) became disturbed as to why the owner of the motorcycle left without talking to him. He decided to ring him. The motorcycle owner 4 did not pick his mobile phone. He rung him several times but that person hanged and disconnected. Abel Raphael (Pw5)'s suspicion heightened and ordered Fikiri, Jonas Makundi (Pw8)'s son not to leave the place. He went Mr. Daudi, the hamlet chairperson with Fikiri, Jonas Makundi (Pw8)'s son to report the incident. Mr. Daudi, the hamlet chairperson went to Abel Raphael (Pw5)'s garage while making inquiry from Fikiri, Jonas Makundi (Pw8)'s son. After the hamlet chairperson went to Abel Raphael (Pw5)'s garage, they rung the owner of the motorcycle, unfortunately, this time his mobile phone could not be reached. The chairperson saw blood stains on the motor cycle steering and alerted Abel Raphael (Pw5) who saw blood stains too. They resolved to take the motorcycle to Kijungu police station. They reached Kijungu police station where they found A/Inspector Gregory (Pwl). A/Inspector Gregory (Pwl) seized the motor cycle which he described that it was black in color with registration number MC 165 CFP, make TVS from Abel Raphael Tangasi (Pw5). A/Inspector Gregory (Pwl) that testified the motor cycle had blood stains on the petrol tank and steering. He tendered a seizure certificate Exh. P. 3. The certificate of seizure depicts that A/Inspector Gregory (Pwl) seized one motor cycle TVS, black 5 in colour No. MC 165 CPF from Abel Raphael (Pw5) and Mr. Daudi Hemed Mwendakilo witnessed. Later, news spread that a motorcyclist disappeared and his motorcycle had been recovered. A/Inspector Gregory (Pwl) took a photography of the motor cycle which he seized from Abel Raphael (Pw5) and shared it to the group of police investigators. On 24. 10. 2022 Rajab Bakari Kamota (Pw2), the deceased's nephew went to Kijungu, saw the motor cycle TVS, black in colour with Reg. No. MC 165 CPF. He identified it as Bakari Yasini's motor cycle. On 26.10.2023 at 10:30hrs A/Inspector Gregory (Pwl) handed the motor cycle TVS, black in colour with registration number MC 165 CPF to G. 7237 CpI Ramadhani (Pw3). He prepared a chain of custody form, which both signed. A/Inspector Gregory (Pwl) tendered the chain of custody form as exhibit P. 4. Rajab Bakari Kamota (Pw2) and G. 7237 CpI Ramadhani (Pw3) testified that the motor cycle had blood stains on the petrol tank and the steering. It was Inspector Lusekolo (Pw6)'s evidence that after receiving information on 21.10.2023 that a motorcyclist was killed, opened a police case file and commenced investigation. Inspector Lusekolo (Pw6) was at that time an A/Inspector of police and working as Deputy OC CID of Kiteto 6 district. Inspector Lusekolo (Pw6) testified that they received information that deceased's motor cycle was recovered on 22.10.2022 and that it was in A/Inspector Gregory (Pwl) possession at Kijungu police station. Inspector Lusekolo (Pw6) got information the person who rode the motor cycle had left his cellular mobile number, which was 0657 04 76 44. Inspector Lusekolo (Pw6) wrote to the cyber department via his OCD requesting for the owner of that sim card and where that person was. Some time passed without any reply. On 20.11.2022 at 11:00, the OC CID notified Inspector Lusekolo (Pw6) that the owner of cellular number, which was left with a mechanic, [Abel Raphael (Pw5)] was at Kibaigwa. Inspector Lusekolo (Pw6) went to Kibaigwa that day. He reported to Kibaigwa police station and went on to trace the person who was using cellular number 0657 04 76 44. Using his cellular phone number 0788 013638 called cellular number 0657 04 76 44, and a woman picked. The woman introduced herself as Medrina. He asked her to lead him to place where he wanted to go. Medrina went to the place where Inspector Lusekolo (Pw6) was. Inspector Lusekolo (Pw6) interviewed Medrina who was with her sister Sofia. Medrina Frank (PwlO) told Inspector Lusekolo (Pw6) that cellular phone number 0657 04 76 44 was her boyfriend's mobile number. Medrina Frank (PwlO) told Inspector Lusekolo (Pw6) her boyfriend's name 7 was William Piason Mwigema. Inspector Lusekolo (Pw6) testified that Medrina Frank (PwlO) told him that from 20.10.2022 to 27.10.2022 William Piason Mwigema was using her cellular phone while they were at Kiteto. Inspector Lusekolo (Pw6) requested Medrina Frank (PwlO) to take them to her boyfriend's home place. She told them that her boyfriend, William Piason Mwigema was staying at Kaloleni area within Kiteto district. She accepted to lead them to her boyfriend's place. On the same day, the drove to Kaloleni Kibaya where they arrived at 07:00pm. Medrina Frank (PwlO) testified that he notified her boyfriend that he wanted to pay him a visit. William Piason Mwigema told Medrina Frank (PwlO) that he wanted to go shamba. She beseeched him not to go. He agreed to wait for her. After they reached Kiteto bus stop, Medrina Frank (PwlO notified William Piason Mwigema, her boyfriend that she was at the bus stand. He went to the bus stand bur resolved not go where Medrina Frank (PwlO) was as there were many people. He requested Medrina Frank (PwlO) to find him at his home place. Medrina Frank (PwlO) took a motorcycle rode by a police officer who pretended to be "bodaboda". They went up to William Piason Mwigema's place. 8 Medrina Frank (PwlO) pointed to police William Piason Mwigema's room. At that time, there were two more police officers. They arrested William Piason Mwigema. Inspector Lusekolo (Pw6) took William Piason Mwigema to Kibaya police station and handed him to G. 5648 D/Cpl Desdery (Pwll). G. 5648 D/Cpl Desdery (Pwll) interviewed William Piason Mwigema. He admitted to participate in the commission of the offence commit and mentioned Dominick Samwel Mayega and Majaliwa Mgaza @ Meja as co-culprits. G. 5648 D/Cpl Desdery (Pwll) tendered William Piason Mwigema's caution statement after a trial within trial case was conducted as William Piason Mwigema retracted his confession. He tendered the statement as Exh. P. 10. There was evidence that William Piason Mwigema confessed to commit the offence before Aron Erasto Losioki (Pw9), the Justice of Peace on 28.11.2022. Aron Erasto Losioki (Pw9) tendered the extrajudicial statement of William Piason Mwigema as Exh. P. 9. Inspector Lusekolo (Pw6) got information that William Piason Mwigema confessed and mentioned other culprits and where they resided. He took William Piason Mwigema who lead them to arrest Dominick Samwel Mayega and Majaliwa Mgaza @ Meja. They went to Lessoit Secondary school to arrest Dominick Samwel Mayega. Dominick Samwel Mayega was a 9 secondary school teacher. Inspector Lusekolo (Pw6) deposed that they arrived at Lessoit Secondary school at 09:00am, introduced themselves to the headmaster and told him that they wanted to meet Dominick Samwel Mayega. The headmaster summoned Dominick Samwel Mayega. Inspector Lusekolo (Pw6) introduced himself to Dominick Samwel Mayega put him under arrest and went to Majaliwa Mgaza @ Meja led by William Piason Mwigema. Majaliwa Mgaza @ Meja's residence was not very far away from Lessoit Secondary school. They did not find Majaliwa Mgaza @ Meja at his residence. They found Majaliwa Mgaza @ Meja's wife who told them that Majaliwa Mgaza @ Meja went to Kilindi three days ago. Inspector Lusekolo (Pw6) went back to Lessoit Secondary school together with William Piason Mwigema and other police officers. He found Dominick Samwel Mayega talking to his colleagues who were inquiring as to what had happened. He took Dominick Samwel Mayega to Kijungu police station, which was not very far from Lessoit Secondary school. He instructed G. 2260 D/Cpl Moshi (Pw7) to interrogate Dominick Samwel Mayega. Inspector Lusekolo (Pw6) went to Kilindi, Gitu area at Kibrashi. He reported to Kibrashi police post. The OCS of Kibrashi police post gave them a militiaman to lead them to the place where Majaliwa Mgaza @ Meja was allegedly staying. They did not find him. They went back to Kijungu. 10 G. 2260 D/Cpl Moshi (Pw7) interviewed Dominick Samwel Mayega who admitted to partake in the murder of a motorcyclist he did not know his name. Dominick Samwel Mayega denied to have made the caution statement. Dominick Samwel Mayega's advocate submitted G. 2260 D/Cpl Moshi (Pw7) did not caution his client before he confessed. After conducting a trial within trial case, the Court admitted Dominick Samwel Mayega's caution statement as Exh. P. 6. Aron Erasto Losioki (Pw9), the Justice of Peace, testified that on 28.11.2022 Dominick Samwel Mayega confessed to commit the offence. Aron Erasto Losioki (Pw9) tendered the extra judicial statement of Dominick Samwel Mayega as Exh. P. 7. It is on record that the Dominick Samwel Mayega did not sign on the part of the extra judicial statement he was bound to sign. Even though he did not sign on the part he was required to sign, he signed on each page, thus ruling out chances that the extra judicial statement was fabricated. I am of the view that he made the extra judicial statement and made it voluntarily. On information that Majaliwa Mgaza @ Meja was at Gitu-Kibrashi staying at one pastor's house, Inspector Lusekolo (Pw6) on 24.11.2022 went to arrest him. He went to Gitu-Kibrashi with D/Cpl Salum, D/Cpl Ramadhan, DC Robert and William Piason Mwigema, the third accused 11 person. They left Kibaya at 07:00pm. Upon reaching Gitu-Kibrashi, they went to pastor's house where they found the pastor, his family and Majaliwa Mgaza @ Meja. Inspector Lusekolo (Pw6) testified that William Piason Mwigema identified Majaliwa Mgaza @ Meja. He introduced himself to Majaliwa Mgaza @ Meja and told him that he was suspected to murder a motorcyclist. He arrested him. He notified the OC CID at 11:00pm or 23:00hrs on 24.11.2022, that he had arrested Majaliwa Mgaza @ Meja. The OC CID directed D/Cpl Musa to record Majaliwa Mgaza @ Meja's caution statement. G 5310 D/Cpl Musa (Pwl2) interviewed Majaliwa Mgaza @ Meja. G 5310 D/Cpl Musa (Pwl2) contended that Majaliwa Mgaza @ Meja admitted to participate in the commission of the offence. G 5310 D/Cpl Musa (Pwl2) tendered Majaliwa Mgaza @ Meja's caution statement after conducting a trial within trial case as Exh. P.ll. Aron Erasto Losioki (Pw9), the Justice of Peace, testified that on 28.11.2022 Majaliwa Mgaza @ Meja confessed to commit the offence. Aron Erasto Losioki (Pw9) tendered the extra judicial statement of Majaliwa Mgaza @ Meja as Exh. P. 8. It is on record that the Dominick Samwel Mayega did not sign on the part of the extra judicial statement he was bound to sign. Even though he did not sign on the part he was required to sign, he signed 12 on each page, thus ruling out chances that the extra judicial statement was fabricated. I am of the view that he made the extra judicial statement and made it voluntarily. Dominick Samwel Mayega, Majaliwa Mgaza @ Meja and William Piason @ Mwigema (the accused persons) gave their evidence on oath. They denied to commit the offence and deposed that they were tortured and forced to sign documents. Dominick Samwel Mayega (Dwl) deposed that he was arrested on 21.11.2022 while at school discharging his duties. He deposed that during that time there were Form IV examinations going on. He deposed that on 20.10.2022 they had meeting with the school headmaster planning Form IV graduation ceremony, which was due on the following day, i.e. 21.10.2022. Dominick Samwel Mayega (Dwl) was assigned to clean the place where the ceremony was to take place with other teachers who were Schola, Gwamaka and Paschal Banga. He worked up to 06:00pm. He supervised decorations up to 10:00pm and did the roll call of students. He deposed that on 11.10.2022 when he was stranded at Kiteto bus stand, met Majaliwa. As they could not get public transport, Majaliwa advised him to take motorcyclist and summoned a person he knew to ride them to Lessoit. Majaliwa summoned William who agreed to ride them to Lessoit at 13 a cost of Tzs. 50,000.00. He paid him Tzs. 20,000.00 and promised to pay the balance at Lessoit. On the following day Majaliwa went to Lessoit secondary school with William. Dominick Samwel Mayega (Dwl) had no money to pay he borrowed from colleague. Dominick Samwel Mayega (Dwl) denied to confess and that the police tortured him severely. Dominick Samwel Mayega summoned Paschal Michael Banga (Dw2) gave evidence that he was teacher and that he worked together with the accused person. He deposed that on 21.10.2022 in the afternoon hours they had a meeting planning how to hold a Form IV Graduation on 22.10.2022. He deposed that Dominick Samwel Mayega (Dwl) attended the meeting. He tendered the minutes of the meeting conducted on 17.10.2022 as Exh D. 2. Dominick Samwel Mayega summoned another witness Stephen Yamay (Dw5) who deposed that he was a representative of the teacher's association at their school. After the police arrested Dominick Samwel Mayega, he on 22.11.2022 went to police to made follow up. He did not manage to see Dominick Samwel Mayega. He was with one Kalist Fabian. He reported to the District Teacher's Association office that he went to police and failed to meet Dominick Samwel Mayega. The chairman and the secretary of the Teacher's Association went to Mr. Pastor Florence, 14 Dominick's advocate to consult him on regarding the issue of Dominick's arrest. Songalaheri Petro Migire (Dw6), a secretary of the Teacher's Association Kiteto district, went to police station on 23.11.2022 to pay a visit to Dominick Samwel Mayega. He did not see him. On 24.11.2022 Songalaheri Petro Migire (Dw6) went with Dominick Samwel Mayega's father and the advocate to demand the police to take him to court. They asked the OC CID who told them that he did not know why Dominick was arrested. Songalaheri Petro Migire (Dw6) testified that he was at the district court on 28.11.2022 when the police arraigned Dominick Samwel Mayega. He testified that Dominick Samwel Mayega was unable to walk properly. He had injuries. Majaliwa Mgasa (Dw3), the second accused person denied to commit the offence on oath. He deposed that on 21.10.2022 was at his home place doing his work. He stated that he knew Dominick but he did not know his name but he knew that he was a teacher. On a date he could not mention, Majaliwa Mgasa (Dw3) testified that he met Dominick at Kiteto bus stand waiting for transport back to their home. They were unable to get public transport. Since Dominick was required at his work place and Majaliwa Mgasa (Dw3) wanted to home as his wife had recently delivered and the child was crying interminably, they hired a motorcyclist to ride them home. 15 They hired Willaim Piason Mwigema and paid him Tzs. 20,000.00 out of Tzs. 50,000/=, the agreed fare. They promised to pay him the balance upon reaching their destination. After they reached Lessoit, Majaliwa Mgasa (Dw3) went with Mayega to his home place and the following day he took him to Dominick as he had no money to pay the balance. He left William Piason Mwigema with Dominick and went to hospital. He denied to commit the offence of murder or to be associated with motor vehicle with Reg. No. MC 165 CPF. William Piason Mwigema (Dw3), the third accused person, denied on oath to commit the offence. He deposed that he was is a motorcyclist and that on 11.10.2022, Dominick and Majaliwa hired him to ride them from Kiteto bus stand to Lessoit. They agreed to pay him Tzs. 50,000.00 and paid Tzs. 20,000.00. He rode them to Lessoit and spent a night at Majaliwa's home. The following day Majaliwa took him to Mayega's place. Mayega agreed to pay the balance but asked him to wait for him at the centre. William Piason Mwigema (Dw3) refuted to know Medrine Frank Chamkaya (PwlO) or to have had any relationship with her. He denied to go Lessoit on 21.10.2022 as he had no passenger to ride to that area. He deposed that police arrested him on 20.11.2022 at his home place at Kaloleni at 07:00pm. 16 He deposed that police tortured him after they arrested him forcing him to admit that he left a motor cycle at Kijungu. He deposed that he saw the co­ accused persons at Kiteto police station on 28.11.2022. He was forced to sign the document on that day before the police took him to Kiteto district court. After a brief account of the prosecution's and the defence's case, I wish to commence by stating the obvious that, the prosecution bears a burden to prove that the accused persons murdered Bakari s/o Yasini and to do that beyond reasonable doubt. To prove that the accused persons murdered Bakari s/o Yasini, the prosecution must prove; one, that Bakari s/o Yasini is in fact dead; two, that, that he died a violent death under the contrivance of the accused persons; three, that the accused persons had malice aforethought, that is they intended to cause death of or to cause grievous bodily harm to Bakari s/o Yasini; finally, that the accused persons are the perpetrator of Bakari s/o Yasini's death. See Mohamedi Matula vrs R [1995] TLR3. Is Bakari Yasin dead, if he is, was his death unnatural? As shown above, there is not wrangle that Bakari s/o Yasini's death was unnatural. Even if, suspicion as to the cause of death existed, I would have held without hesitation that the prosecution proved through the post- 17 mortem report (Exhibit Pl) and Dr. Priscus Setas Shirima (Pw4)'s evidence that Bakari s/o Yasini died a violent death. Did Bakari s/o Yasini's killer have malice aforethought? Bakari s/o Yasini died from excessive blood loss due to penetrating body injuries. Bakari s/o Yasini suffered from multiple cut wounds on the neck, head, major neck vessels, upper and lower extremities, genitalia chopped off and stab wounds on the anterior aspect of the chest. It is undisputed that a person who inflicted the injuries had no any intention other than to cause grievous harm or death. He used a sharp weapon and inflicted cut wounds to sensitive parts of Bakari s/o Yasini's body, the neck, injuring the major neck vessel. The Court of Appeal in the famous case of Enock Kipela v. R., (Criminal Appeal 150 of 1994) [1999] TZCA 7 (10 June 1999) held that the attacker in most case does not disclose his intention to kill or cause grievous harm. For that reason, malice aforethought may be inferred from- a) the type and size of the weapon if any used in the attack; b) the amount of force applied in the assault; c) the part or parts of the body the blows were directed at or inflicted on; d) the number of blows, although one blow may, depending upon the facts of the particular case be sufficient for this purpose; 18 e) the kind of injuries inflicted; f) The attacker's utterances if any; made before, during or after the killing and the conduct of the attacker before and after the killing; or g) the conduct of the attacker before and after the killing. I find therefore, that a person who inflicted cut wounds to Bakari s/o Yasini had an intention to kill him, thus, given the nature of the injuries and the place targeted, the killer had malice aforethought. Consequently, I hold that the prosecution did establish beyond all reasonable doubt that Bakari s/o Yasini died a violent death and the killer had malice aforethought. For that reason, there is one disputable issue, that is whether the accused persons killed Bakari s/o Yasini. Did the accused person(s) kill Bakari s/o Yasini? There is no eye witness. The prosecution's case is circumstantial. The prosecution relies on the accused persons' extra-judicial statements, and caution statements, and the evidence that William Piason @ Mwigema, the third accused person, was found with Bakari s/o Yasini's motor cycle, TVS with registration number MC 165 CPF. The prosecution's evidence was that the offence was committed at night on 21.10.2022 and the third accused person went to Jonas Makundi (Pw8) with the deceased's motorcycle the 19 same night at 00:00hrs. The accused persons refuted the prosecution's allegations that they confessed. I examined the caution statements of the accused persons. It was submitted that the caution statement did not amount to confession as no accused person admitted to murder Bakari s/o Yasini. It is true that no accused person admitted to murder Bakari s/o Yasini, however, they all admitted to participate in inflicting injuries to Bakari s/o Yasini. Dominick Samwel Mayega stated in the caution statement that Majaliwa stubbed Bakari s/o Yasini with a knife on his neck while William Piason Mwigema held Bakari s/o Yasini's hands tightly on the ground. During the tussle with Bakari s/o Yasini, Dominick Samwel Mayega held Bakari s/o Yasini's legs. Then he got a knife from Majaliwa who instructed him to chop off the required parts from Bakari s/o Yasini's body. Dominick Samwel Mayega stated in the caution statement, thus- "...mara tu baada ya kusimamisha pikipiki ndipo WILE alimshikilia yule bodaboda na kumkaba shingoni na MEJA aliwahi kumshikilia ndipo MEJA alitoa kisu na kunipa mimi ila kwa wakati huo MEJA alishamchoma kisu cha shingoni yule bodaboda na kupoteza nguvu na baada ya kukata roho tulimweka ch ini, wakati tunamuua mimi nilishika miguu ya yule bodaboda asifurukute, WILE alishika mikono na MEJA atimchoma shingoni na baada ya kutulia ndipo 20 nilipewa hicho kisu ndipo MEJA alinie/ekeza nianze kutoa viungo ambavyo vinahitajika, mimi nilikata kwenye koromeo shingoni na kutoa koromeo na mshipa wa hewa, nilikata kidole kimoja cha mguu wa kushoto cha kati na kutoa kucha za mguu wa kushoto zote na kumalizia kutoa nywele zi/izokuwa juu ya utosi yaani niliona eneo la utosi, MEJA yeye alitoa kwa kukata sehemu za siri za yule marehemu alikata korodani na mboo, alikata na nyama ya msuli wa mguu wa kushoto yaani nyama iliyokuwa chini ya goti mguuni na pia alimalizia kutoa kucha za mguu wa ku/ia, WILE yeye baada ya kumalza sisi kuvitoa hivyo viungo yeye alichukua kisu na kuanza kumkatakata hovyo marehemu usoni na mwili wake Hi kufisha sura isijulikane ni nani na baada ya kutoa hivyo viungo tulivihifadhi kwenye mfuko laini wa nailoni na mimi ndiye nilivichukua na kuamua kuondoka eneo la tukio" Majaliwa, the second accused person stated in the caution statement that Mayega chopped off the figure from the hand he was holding and cut Bakari s/o Yasini. Majaliwa stated that he held Bakari s/o Yasini's hand when Mayega cut the deceased's neck. He stated thus- "Baada ya kuutafuta tulifanikiwa kumpata William Piason ndipo Mayega alimweleza anatakiwa atupeleke sehemu ndipo alisema hana pikipiki, pikipiki yake ilichukuliwa na mwenzake. Ndipo alitutafutia bodaboda m wingine wa kutupeleka, hapohapo Mayega alisema lengo lake kuwa anahitaji vidole vya binadamu na anaomba nimsaidie ndipo bodaboda alifika na tulikubaliana atupeleke maeneo ya mlima wa Olpopong kwa gharama ya elfu tano alitupakia wote 21 watatu mimi, Mayega na William Peason, baada ya kutufikisha mlima wa Olpopong Mwalimu Mayega alimweleza bodaboda kuwa atupeleke Kalakala kwa sababu watu anaowatafuta wameshafika Kalakala". Wiliam Piason Mwigema's caution statement had it that Majaliwa held the deceased's legs and he held the deceased chest ribs and pressed him down. Dominick cut the neck vessel and took out the parts he required. Wiliam Piason Mwigema stated in the caution statement that- "Tulipita OLPOPONG tukaenda hadi maeneo ya LENGA TI porini ndio MAJALIWA MGAZA @ MEJA akamwambia dereva huyo asimamishe pikipiki na akawa anasimama sisi wote watatu tukashuka kwenye pikipiki akabaki dereva peke yake. Mwalimu Mayega akamwambia yule dereva huku akiwa anamsogelea karibu kwamba yuko chin! ya ulinzi. Hivyo, ashuke kwenye pikipiki na hapo hapo Mwalimu Mayega akawa amemshika Hi asikimbie na akamwambia alale chini na akamlaza kifudifudi na Majaliwa Mgaza @ Meja nae akawa amemsaidia Mwalimu kumthibiti yule dereva akamthibiti upande wa miguuni na Mwalimu akanitaka na mimi nimthibiti sehemu za mbavu ndio nikamkandamiza mbavuni. Baada ya kumthibiti ndio Mwalimu Mayega akatoa kisu akamchoma yule dereva kooni huku dereva akijaribu kufurukuta na kwa haraka Mwalimu Mayega akaingiza vidole mahali alipochoma akavuta viungo kisha akavikata kwa kisu na hapo yule dereva akawa amekata roho na Mwalimu Mayega 22 alikuwa na begi nyeusi ndio vile viungo alivyovikata akavihifadhi kwenye begi hilo." ( emphasis added) All accused persons played an active role to inflict cut wounds which led to Bakari s/o Yasini's death. Evidently, there is no dispute that Bakari s/o Yasini died due to blood loss secondary to multiple cut wounds. It is trite law that where an accused person retracts his confession the court can convict him on the uncorroborated confession provided that it warns itself of the dangers of acting solely on such confession and if it is fully satisfied that the confession cannot be, but true. See, Hatibu Ghandi & Others v. Republic [1996] TLR 12. In the present case, the accused person retracted the caution statement. I read the statement and re-read the statement and came to the conclusion that the accused persons told truth in the statement save that each accused person was trying to avoid to state that he was the first to stub the deceased. Every one explained how he participated to assist the other accused person stub the deceased. It does not matter which role the accused person played what matters is that all the accused persons were present when one of them inflicted cut wound onto the deceased. Each accused person played an active role to assist each other to inflict cut wounds which led to Bakari s/o Yasini's death. 23 Section 22 of the Penal Code provides that a person who aids a principal offender before or after the commission of the offence is as good as the principal offender. It stipulates thus- "22. -(1) When an offence is committed, each of the following persons is deemed to have taken part in committing the offence and to be guilty of the offence, and may be charged with actually committing namely- (a) every person who actually does the act or makes the omission which constitutes the offence; (b) every person who does or omits to do any act for the purpose of enabling or aiding another person to commit the offence; (c) every person who aids or abets another person in committing the offence; (d) any person who counsels or procures any other person to commit the offence, in which case he may be charged either with committing the offence or with counseling or procuring its commission. (2) A conviction of counseling or procuring the commission of an offence entails the same consequences in all respects as a conviction of committing the offence. The above apart, the accused persons had common intention to commit the offence of harvesting human parts. The parts they required could not be obtained without causing grievous harm or death. They wanted to harvest esophagus, private parts, a finger, and nail. Majaliwa stated in his 24 caution statement that he did not contemplate that harvesting human parts meant to kill him. These were crocodile tears. He knew that Dominick wanted esophagus, nail and private parts. How did he think that those parts would be harvested and leave a person alive? The accused persons planned and executed the plan of harvesting human parts. They had common intention to commit the offence. Section 23 of the Penal Code states that- "23. When two or more persons form a common intention to prosecute an unlawful purpose in conjunction with one another, and in the prosecution of such purpose an offence is committed of such a nature that its commission was a probable consequence of the prosecution of such purpose, each of them is deemed to have committed the offence." The defence strongly contended that the accused persons were tortured to make the statement. It was Dominick Samwel Mayega's advocate's submission that Dominick Samwel Mayega did not confess or that he was tortured before he confessed. He also submitted that his client was warned before he made the statement but he was not warned just before he commenced to confess. Dominick Samwel Mayega's advocate referred to section 57 of the CPA. I find therefore, that Dominick Samwel Mayega confessed but before he started to confess he was not warned. The police recording the statement warned him that he was not compelled to give 25 statement and if he gave the statement it might be used in evidence against him. Failure to warn Dominick before he commenced to confess was not fatal provided he was warned before he made the statement. I find that he volunteered to make a caution statement. Not only that but also since, Dominick Samwel did not confess under section 57 of the CPA but section, it was sufficient that he was warned before he made the statement. There was no required for a second warning before he commenced to confess under section 58 of the CPA. There is another piece of evidence that, the accused persons confessed to Aron Erasto Losioki (Pw9), the Justice of Peace on 28.11.2022. Aron Erasto Losioki (Pw9) tendered the extra judicial statement of Dominick Samwel Mayega, Majaliwa Mgaza @ Meja and William Piason Mwigema as Exh. P. 7, Exh. P. 8, and Exh. P. 9, respectively. The defence complained that Erasto Losioki (Pw9) did not comply with the Chief Justice Guide to the Justice of peace. I did not find the objection with any merit and overruled them. Aron Erasto Losioki (Pw9) deposed that the accused persons confessed freely to commit the offence before him. I have no reason to fault Aron Erasto Losioki (Pw9). The accused persons signed on each page of the extra-judicial statement, thus, eliminating a chance of having fabricated the statement. 26 I considered another issue whether the prosecution proved the allegation that Wiliam Piason Mwigema was found with the deceased's motorcycle. A/Insp. Gregory (Pwl) deposed that on 22.10.2022 Abel Raphael Tangasi (Pw5), a motorcycle mechanic, and another person surrendered a motorcycle make TVS black in colour with Reg. No. MC 165 CPF. A/Insp. Gregory (Pwl) prepared a certificate of seizure, which Abel Raphael Tangasi (Pw5) and the witness, Mr. Daud signed. He tendered the certificate of seizure as Exh.P. 3. After receiving information that one motorcyclist is suspected to be killed and his motorcycle stolen he shared the information that there was a motorcycle at Kijungu police station. Rajab Bakari Kamota (Pw2) a motorcyclist and the deceased's nephew went to Kijungu police station and identified the motorcycle as the property of Bakari Yasini, the deceased. A/Insp. Gregory (Pwl), Rajab Bakari Kamota (Pw2) and Abel Raphael Tangasi (Pw5) deposed that the motorcycle had blood stains on the steering and petrol tank. Unfortunately, there was no forensic evidence to link blood stains on the motorcycle with the deceased. The only evidence is that Rajab Bakari Kamota (Pw2), which linked the deceased with the motorcycle. I had no reason to raise doubts to Rajab Bakari Kamota (Pw2)'s credence. 27 Rajab Bakari Kamota (Pw2) was a motorcyclist and the deceased's nephew, thus, he knew him very well and he knew the deceased's motorcycle. I am of the firm view that Rajab Bakari Kamota (Pw2) did properly identified the motorcycle as the deceased's property. The deceased was a special owner as defined under section 258 of the Penal Code. It was possible to steal from him as a special owner. Section 258 (3) of the Penal Code defines special owner- "(3) For purpose of this section "special owner" means any person who has lawful possession or custody of, or any proprietary interest in, the thing in question." I find it proved that the deceased had lawful possession of motor cycle with Reg. No. MC 165 CPF. William Piason Mwigema strongly refuted the allegation that he was in possession of the deceased's motor cycle with Reg. No. MC 165 CPF and the allegation that he was Medrine Frank (PwlO)'s boyfriend. The prosecution's evidence was that on 22.10.2022 at 00:00hrs, William Piason Mwigema, the third accused person went to Jonas Makundi (Pw8) for assistance as his motor cycle developed mechanical defects. He asked Jonas Makundi (Pw8) to push the motorcycle so that he could start it. They failed. As it was late at night, William Piason Mwigema asked Jonas Makundi (Pw8) to accommodate him that night. Jonas Makundi (Pw8) 28 agreed and let William Piason Mwigema to spend a night in one of his hats. Before they parted that night, Jonas Makundi (Pw8) asked the guest his name. The guest told Jonas Makundi (Pw8) that his name was William. The following morning Jonas Makundi (Pw8) head William trying to start the motorcycle. He could not, so he advised him to take the motorcycle to the mechanic. William told Jonas Makundi (Pw8) that the best option was to call the mechanic at that place rather than taking it to the mechanic. Jonas Makundi (Pw8) directed William where to get a mechanic. William went to the mechanic and gave the ignition key to Jonas Makundi (Pw8). After William left, Jonas Makundi (Pw8) went to his farm. When William came with a mechanic he did not find Jonas Makundi (Pw8) at home. Jonas Makundi (Pw8)'s son rang Jonas Makundi (Pw8) asking him to come back as William had a mechanic and they wanted the ignition key. Jonas Makundi (Pw8) asked them to go the farm for the ignition key. Jonas Makundi (Pw8)'s son and William went to the farm and took the ignition key from Jonas Makundi (Pw8). Jonas Makundi (Pw8) identified William, person who spent a night at his place on 22.10.2022 and who was in possession of the defective motor cycle. He deposed that he saw him at night as there were solar lights with high intensity. He also saw him and identified him in the morning when he 29 was trying to start the motorcycle and talked to him advising him to take the motorcycle to the mechanic. He saw and identified him once again when he went with his son (Jonas Makundi (Pw8)'s son) to collect the ignition key from him when he was at his farm. He contended that he properly identified him. He pointed out that William was the third accused person. It is a settled position of the law that when a Court is considering the evidence of a single witness should exercise great care. See Ahmad Omari V R, Criminal Appeal No 154 of 2005 (CAT unreported), where the Court stated that there is a need to take greatest care when dealing with the evidence of a single witness. There is yet another position of the law that, when the court is dealing with the identification evidence of a single witness it must find out if that witness is a credible. This position was taken in Chacha Jeremiah Murimi and 3 Others v R Cr. App. No. 551/2015 where the Court of Appeal stated that- "In matters of identification, it is not enough merely to look at factors favouring accurate identification, equally important is the credibility of the witness. The conditions for identification might appear ideal but that is not guarantee against untruthful evidence. The ability of the witness to name the offender at the earliest possible moment is in our view reassuring though not a decisive factor". (Emphasis provided) 30 I am satisfied the circumstances surrounding identification of the third accused person by Jonas Makundi (Pw8) were favourable. Let alone the fact that he spent sufficient time with the third accused person at night in the presence of solar lights with intensity, he saw him and identified him in the morning when it was already dawn and they had a conversation. On a third encounter Jonas Makundi (Pw8) saw the third accused when he went to collect the ignition key when Jonas Makundi (Pw8) was at his farm. Jonas Makundi (Pw8) could not have mistakenly identified William Piason Mwigema. The third accused person's defence was that he did not to Jonas Makundi (Pw8)'s place and leave the motorcycle at his place. I do not find merit in the third accused person's defence of alibi, that he was not at the scene of the crime or that he did not visit Jonas Makundi (Pw8). Jonas Makundi (Pw8) did properly identify William Piason Mwigema, the third accused. In addition, William Piason Mwigema, the third accused, raised the defence of alibi without giving a notice as per section 194(4) of the CPA. If the said notice cannot be given at that early stage, the said person is under obligation, then, to furnish the prosecution with the particulars of the alibi at any time before the prosecution closes its case. Should the accused person raise the defence of alibi much later, later than what is required under 31 subsections (4) and (5) above, as was the case herein, the court may, in its discretion, accord no weight of any kind to the defence (s.194 (6)). Since the third accused person raised the defence of alibi belatedly it casts doubts on its authenticity. In Kibale v. U (1969) Vol. 1 E.A 148, the erstwhile the East African Court held that a genuine alibi is expected to be revealed to the police investigating the case or to the prosecution during trial. When it so given, the prosecution has an opportunity to investigate its genuineness. The defence of alibi given for the first time during the defence, there is a likelihood that it is an afterthought. In Masoud Amina v. R [1989] TLR 25 the Court denied the accused's defence of alibi on account that the accused did not issue a notice and that he did not call the witness who was with him. All in all, if one considers Jonas Makundi (Pw8)'s evidence, a conclusion that the accused person's defence of alibi has no weight is inescapable. As pointed out Jonas Makundi (Pw8) did properly identify the third accused person. I find without any doubt in mind that Jonas Makundi (Pw8) did identify the third accused person as the person who went to his place with motorcycle with Reg. No. MC 165 CPF, the deceased's property. Thus, William Piason Mwigema, the third accused, was in possession of the Bakari Yasin's (the deceased) motorcycle with Reg. No. MC 165 CPF, shortly after 32 he met his demise. Bakari Yasin was hired on 21.10.2022 at night hours, murdered and his motorcycle robbed. Some hours thereafter, William Piason Mwigema, third accused person, was found in possession of Bakari Yasin's motor cycle, that is on 22.10.2022 at 00:00hrs. The prosecution tendered the motorcycle with Reg. No. MC 165 CPF as exhibit P. 5. I agree with the defence advocates' submission that motorcycle with Reg. No. MC 165 CPF was wrongly admitted as it was not part of the committal proceedings. However even if, exhibit P. 5 is not considered as I have done, there is ample evidence that a person called William, the third accused person, took motorcycle with Reg. No. MC 165 CPF to Jonas Makundi (Pw8) at mid night on 22.10.2022, and on the following day handed it to Abel Raphael Tangasi (Pw5) for repair. There is ample evidence that Abel Raphael Tangasi (Pw5) surrendered motorcycle with Reg. No. MC 165 CPF to A/Insp. Gregory (Pwl). A/Insp. Gregory (Pwl) prepared the certificate of seizure, which Abel Raphael Tangasi (Pw5) and his witness signed. The Court admitted the certificate of seizure as Exh.P.3. Thus, in the absence of exhibit P. 5, the motor cycle, there is ample evidence that the motorcycle with Reg. No. MC 165 CPF was recovered, handed to police by Abel Raphael Tangasi (Pw5) and identified the deceased's property by Rajab Bakari Kamota (Pw2). 33 It is settled that the court may expunge the exhibit still hold a fact proved if there is another evidence instead to prove the fact. This position was taken in Issa Hassani Uki vs R. (Criminal Appeal No. 129 of 2017) [2018] TZCA 361 (10 May 2018) where the Court of Appeal held that- “That is the reason why we think, despite expunging Ext. P3, there was ample evidence in its stead to show beyond reasonable doubt that the items were actually elephant tusks whose value was Tshs. 29,100,000/= as testified by PW4.” I find that if even I am to hold that Exh. P.5, the motorcycle was not properly admitted still, I find that there is ample evidence from Abel Raphael Tangasi (Pw5), A/Insp. Gregory (Pwl), Jonas Makundi (Pw8) and Rajab Bakari Kamota (Pw2) to the extent that William was in possession of the deceased's motorcycle with Reg. No. MC 165 CPF immediately after it was robbed from the deceased. There is yet another piece of evidence of Abel Raphael Tangasi (Pw5) that the person who took the motorcycle with Reg. No. MC 165 CPF for repair gave Jonas Makundi (Pw8)'s son his mobile number so that he may be notified once the motorcycle is repaired. Abel Raphael Tangasi (Pw5) testified that he rang the owner of the motorcycle several times with no response and finally he did not reach him. He became suspicious and reported to the hamlet chairperson Mr. Daudi. The hamlet chairperson 34 advised to report and surrender the motorcycle to police. They surrendered the motorcycle to A/Insp. Gregory (Pwl). A/Insp. Gregory (Pwl) seized the motorcycle from Abel Raphael Tangasi (Pw5) on 22.10.2022 in the presence of Mr. Daudi. Inspector Lusekelo (Pw6) testified how they tracked the mobile phone number using the cyber department and found that it was being used by Medrine Frank (PwlO). Medrine Frank (PwlO) testified that cellular phone number 0657 047 644 was being used by her lover called William Piason Mwigema, a resident of Kaloleni Kiteto. She led the police from Kibaigwa to William Piason Mwigema's residence. They arrested him. William Piason Mwigema denied to know Medrine Frank (PwlO) and to have any relationship. Medrine Frank (PwlO) explained how she knew William Piason Mwigema and how they established their relationship. William Piason Mwigema tendered through Medrine Frank (PwlO) exhibit D. 1 which was Medrine Frank (PwlO)'s statement. The only difference between Medrine Frank (PwlO) and Exh. D.l was is that Medrine Frank (PwlO) did not make a reference to cellular number 0657 047 644 in her statement to police. I find the evidence of Medrine Frank (PwlO) sufficient to connect William Piason Mwigema with cellular number 0657 047 644, which William 35 Piason Mwigema allegedly gave to Jonas Makundi (Pw8)'s son so that Abel Raphael Tangasi (Pw5) may inform him when the motorcycle is repaired. There is ample evidence that William Piason Mwigema, the third accused person, was found in possess of Bakari Yasin's motorcycle shortly after Bakari Yasin disappeared and later found dead. I find that William Piason Mwigema, the third accused person, was not only in possession of Bakari Yasin's motorcycle but also, he was one who inflicted cut wounds to Bakari Yasin, which caused his death. Thus, William Piason Mwigema, the third accused person, murdered Bakari Yasin. William Piason Mwigema named the first and second accused persons as culprits. The first and second accused persons confessed before the justice of peace explaining the role each played. The first and second accused persons raised the defence of alibi. Dominick Samwel Mayega, the first accused person gave a notice to rely on the defence of alibi in compliance with section 194 of the CPA. However, the second accused person raised the defence of alibi without complying with section 194 of the CPA. He did not give a notice. I had time to consider the defence and prosecution's evidence. Dominick Samwel Mayega deposed that on 20.10.2022 they had a staff meeting to plan how to hold Form IV graduation the following day on 36 21.10.2022. Dominick Samwel Mayega's witness Michael Banga (Dw2) tendered the minutes to prove that there was a staff meeting on 20.10.2022. Unfortunately, the minutes referred to the meeting conducted on 17.10.2022 and not a meeting on 21.10.2022, which Dominick Samwel Mayega deposed that he attended. Worse still, Michael Banga (Dw2) was not a chairperson or a secretary and did not explain how he obtained the minutes. So, I attached little weight to Michael Banga (Dw2)'s evidence. It is on record that the offence was committed at night hours, thus, the fact that Dominick Samwel Mayega's during the day is useless. Dominick Samwel Mayega (Dwl) deposed that he was a teacher on duty and he worked up to 06:00Pm. Later, he supervised decorations up to 10:00Pm. There is no evidence to prove what happened after he finished supervising decorations. There is evidence that the deceased was hired at night when Rajab Bakari Kamota (Pw2), a motorcyclist, had already stopped working and parked his motorcycle. There was evidence that Dominick Samwel Mayega (Dwl) did not commit the offence as he attended the graduation ceremonies on 22.10.2022. It is on record that the offence was committed at night and before midnight as the prosecution proved that at midnight the third accused person was ready with the deceased's motorcycle at Jonas Makundi (Pw8)'s place. For that reason, Dominick Samwel Mayega 37 (Dwl) had time to go back to his residence and attend the ceremonies without any difficulties. I considered the evidence that Dominick Samwel Mayega (Dwl) and Majaliwa Mgasa (Dw3) knew William Piason Mwigema (Dw4) on 11.10.2022 when he rode them from Kiteto bus stand to Lessoit. I did not find the evidence true though, I alive of the fact the accused person had no duty to prove his evidence. Majaliwa Mgasa (Dw3) deposed that William Piason Mwigema (Dw4) spent a night at his place. The following morning, as he had no money to the amount due as fare, Majaliwa Mgasa (Dw3) took William Piason Mwigema (Dw4) to Dominick Samwel Mayega (Dwl)'s work place. Majaliwa Mgasa (Dw3) left William Piason Mwigema (Dw4) at Dominick Samwel Mayega (Dwl)'s place and went to hospital. William Piason Mwigema (Dw4)'s evidence was that as Majaliwa Mgasa (Dw3) had no money to pay the remaining fare, he led him to Dominick Samwel Mayega (Dwl)'s place. Dominick Samwel Mayega (Dwl) told William Piason Mwigema (Dw4) to wait for him at the centre. Thus, Majaliwa Mgasa (Dw3) led William Piason Mwigema (Dw4) to the centre where he left him to wait for Dominick Samwel Mayega (Dwl). Majaliwa Mgasa (Dw3) gave contradictory account William Piason Mwigema (Dw4) which raised doubt if William Piason Mwigema (Dw4) gave a ride to 38 Dominick Samwel Mayega (Dwl) and Majaliwa Mgasa (Dw3) on 11.10.2022 as alleged. All in all, Dominick Samwel Mayega (Dwl) attended the graduation ceremony during the day on 22.10.2022, that does not prove that he did not commit the offence on the previous night. I therefore, do not find that Dominick Samwel Mayega's defence of alibi raised a reasonable doubt to the prosecution's case. As to Majaliwa Mgaza (Dw3)'s defence of alibi, I find that it was too weak to raise a reasonable doubt. Majaliwa Mgaza (Dw3) did not follow the procedure under section 194 of the CPA or call evidence to establish that he was at his home place on 21.10.2022 during night hours. It should be kept in mind that the accused persons in this case, had no duty to prove their innocence but it was the prosecution's duty to prove them guilty and to do that beyond reasonable doubt. In the end, I find that the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that Dominick Samwel Mayega, Majaliwa Mgaza @ Meja and William Piason @ Mwigema, the accused persons, murdered Bakari s/o Yasini. I find Dominick Samwel Mayega, Majaliwa Mgaza @ Meja and William Piason @ Mwigema, the accused persons, guilty of the offence of murder and 39 convict them of that offence contrary to sections 196 and 197 of the Penal Code, [Cap. 16 R.E. 2022], I order accordingly. Dated at Babati this 9th day of August, 2024. J. R. Kahyoza Judge SENTENCE The Dominick Samwel Mayega, Majaliwa Mgaza @ Meja and William Piason @ Mwigema, the accused persons have been convicted with the offence of murder under sections 196 and 197 of the Penal Code, [Cap. 16 R.E. 2022]. The sentence for offence of murder is that Dominick Samwel Mayega, Majaliwa Mgaza @ Meja and William Piason @ Mwigema, must suffer death by hanging. I accordingly, sentence Dominick Samwel Mayega, Majaliwa Mgaza @ Meja and William Piason @ Mwigema, the accused persons, to suffer death by hanging under sections 196 & 197 of the Penal Code [Cap 16 R.E 2022] read together with section 322 of the Criminal Procedure Act, [Cap. 20 R. E. 2022]. 40 Court: Judgment delivered in the presence of the accused persons, Mr. Masanja advocate for the second accused person and holding Mr. Kong'oke's brief for the first accused person, Mr Festo advocate for the third accused person and Ms. Rose Kayumbo, State attorney for Republic. Right of appeal after lodging a notice of intention td appeal within 30 days explained. J. R. Kahyoza, J. 9.08.2024 41