19780406 TZHC Dodoma1

·•.. •·· IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA- AT OODOMA. APPELLATE JURISDICTION HIGH -eouRT CRIMINAL ·APPF:Ai No. 2si oF 1~77 • ··,. ; < •• , • . . ORIGINAL CRIMINAL CASE: ~9 .....23. OF lt:>71 .or THE DISTRICT. COURT OF DODOMA DISTRICT Kr DOOOMA • ,\'\ ! . •. ~:.-·i• ·. Ji .,;}.- . .. -".1.\.., ..... ;. . . . Be:f·dF'J .s·., R.'. }<il.h~ngwa:·• • • ~-- • • • ~ ~., • • . • ·.• .• ·Re·;#den·t Magi..a.trat~ . _-,, . . . \l • . . ·. ' . --~· P.C. S},½WEL ·AND .TWO ·O-THERS • • • • • ~- ~- . . . . . . . . }ppellants (f'r1Jiti4 .l\ceuseds) •·._i:,". y~rsus·_-: .. • .._·.- ,1 .. •'\ ·:t :' ~; . ·• -. 0 • • • • • • • • • • • • .Respo~dent ·: . ·: · foriginal r~osecutor-) .. , • .• • • • • •• . . I ·· .·charrie• I of • Obtaining money. by -f also .pre~. ~-ary-w 48-d::i°" ~ -~ .9f !t~e- Penal. CO<ie• .. ~ •• • ,1 JUDGMENT t ... · .. ·. :t -~'c_,·J • • ·- _;. ~ 1 • ' ._ • •• .. • . • • .'. . ~.::.,r : ·.: .. ..._~ ·:_; .· :en the month Df May, 1976 the Dodoma Poliee appear to . ,,., , ... _. ·. hay-~. pu·t ?1,. ;road block on eat:h of ·the· m·ain roads leading Jo the ·: .,-.'.c:apittU dnd a,t.Efo.ch bqrr.ie.r ther.e:werE'! two.or thrt~e·policemen in :,:: .'.' .thr;-:::t~· r-o~ci-~he-clock shifts.· .on the: evening of May 15 there -:- :_::~ ·' -~.o~curr~cl an incid~nt at the 'police barrier on the D.ir es Salaam . '/oo~lomn .- Ro.ad. ahout· fiv~ ,miles. from -t-hc c·apital'. 'There. at about , .: '. 5~)0 ,p.•:m•'. the car of ·P.• W.l,·. aii· ·expatria_t~ ·doctor wi th_..-,1-f;ttle ··. :. ·· ,.'kfl,~W~Gq(}C of Ki.swahil:i was·. stopped ·a·s he ·was dri•ving towards the ., ·, >· ., •• -capital being accompan~ed by P~W.2,. his ~if~. • ; . t :• - :•, • ~• • • •," • ~ • • • ,:•r• . .. )> • • . . : .'After one of the thri.:le policemen on' duty :!searching the ear withe.nit finding whatev;r ·they were looking ·for, h~ neve~thel~ss :i ord6rcd P.W.l to driv~ ·.ttH car to a• parking position on the 'side of the _ro.~.<l,. this ;app·ar8ntiy·b~cause he did ··not :nave his driving licence · .or i,<;1-::,1,1tity ca,rd: with ·nim. Thc~y would not· allow him to proceed de spit\' :.his as~urin·g them he had, a. valid· drivinq licence which he had how~v:t..,r left behind, but· in t°he ehd, they indicated a willingm,?ss to '1~~1;: i::hum proc;:eed · provid~d th_ey ,paid some ·mon,;;!y, which. the ·· cornpl 'ai.nunts understood to be · a fine:, especially as in their own country traffic of·ficcr~ often i~vy .on-the-sp6t fines against traffic offenders. Accordin0ly• he· paid them )~hs. 240/=, that , .being the on'ly .mon_ey they h_act·.on them. _They ~.e.i:-e then .allowed to · ·.-pro~•.. C!d ·but they soon bcc:ame -suspicious of the legality of· the d0m&ld. to pay, and on tlie next day or so, they _reported this inc.:h:li.:.:nt to the· Regi.onal- ]fol;ice Authorities.' They howe-ver · app~Qr to have been extrem<i:ly dilatory _in their investigations for, althoU<Jh_ . .:it should have .b,,cn a relntively task ·to check; against the re:co.t-ds "i:lt. ,t~e police st~tion in order. t'0 know which. offic?:?rS were tltM'l:· .·'on .ct~by at that ba'rri.:1r, no proceedings appear to, })ave b :en set in _;o.tj,:bn until a little. over orie .year latl:!r· -when the· thrt~e . . app~lio.nts in• this c:1s~:· wcrE::! broUCJht to court charged with · . . ,. ... ,, obtu.if1:ing._J:iy :f·a.ls~ pre-tences, namel'y, that, 'falsely ·pretending th<-,y h,°"d author-ity to fine tht.; -complainant fr,r not haviflg. a:. dr'i ving ,,{1i'e:...:nce;, th1JY optain•Jd t:he 240/ts from-him~-: ·,:-tt~y ~wer~ each · . ':onv;iG:t~,d_ ·as chai-..<):id \tind·_;s; ntenc-~d to._ 5 ·yearst ·1rnpriso_nnK=nt, A~airlst the· ct.:nviction qnq .-sent~nce they have· ap.,.paa-led·· :to this court" t11rough. . the l;:arnc,d · advocate, •M+:• •.... ..i -Charnb\lk'~e-~., •• . . ; ,. · ~ :--~ ... :·~ .!-~!- '·~ ~. :· ' ~- .. / :.. ~~~ __. . ... >.£.t'- . .....~~--". • 1·, ·. ,1 •.. \ -~ ·. 2 That the alleged ·incident occurred in the circumstances nurrnt-:.:d by P.W.l arid P.W.2 is not disputed, and the only issue considcr0d by the trial court was whethcir the: appellants were - ·- -- the p~rsons who were then qn duty.at that rpaq block as was claimed by the prosecution. Th~re is agreement that tht,y were all constubles involved i·n that op,.~ration and t;hat cm the relevant.:day they were supposc.:d tc take ever at that post from P.W.4 and one constable Enock at: _6.oo· p.m. ·-and guurd thc:re· ;unti•l. a.oo. a.m. on the next day. Th~1r predecessors at. that post had however to l-i°o1d on until their arrival and•; ie would a.ppe~: they were to be ferried back on the: sc.un;:; vehicle as ..,bad b,t9ught t)1e appellants. The appellants denied _th~t th~re was any•it,.cidc.nf: at ''thtJ.t ·post that -night while they were on duty and th,.'3.t,. th,=Y h,1d seen any white man th,~re. :It WuS u cru,ci-n.l.;',poi.nt /, th~~re:Etr~' ''whe'thi.r at· th~ relevant'. time they w-:;r.::: alr~ ndy., g_uai;:ding .:it thut posto. · _.. <· ._ ·::1 ~=.-~ .-~~-; -~i:':; · t . . : .... •... , ..... , . , .P.,W.,.l and PoW.2 c.ould ,not be clear precisely as to w11¢n thc.;y_~j-{;/t'·t_·~~r~. : They· s.:1id. it was· any time b2tween_ S.3~ ~;id,;.S •.le~i>,-l - /The an,o}J. . ~t,s. saiq,,:•:·0.~;.:·ti'le oth~:r hand, that they <Jdt there late, . at:·6~,4:s.,,,::J~l1i~ be_f~~-~:~/.-.although they· l~!ft the po ice station at:.S·~~JO •. · p.m. _th\:,! vc·hic-le got" a f'lc1t tyre t;U the way and it took consider& , ::·"'- 7 timu to replace the tyre, while it dropped guards at the other · ro"'ad blocks :J:>efore. finally takil'lg 'ttie·in•:·to their post •. : .Against tl1~S,''howevei;:., .'.it would .:ippcar from the complain,Jnt 1 s ·evidence and thc1t,. of .:E>. W. :(•p ~c.l,*prgyIJ\# . who· p·us"set! ··there and saw them, ~hat •· ·~J! t)t.e}f·'.2.1.C.U<.!:.,h-d;d'. up-~·~ror·,·. uhuut one .and-a-half hours •. ·. It :would, therefore, :--.:~P~.:tr they ~~re not allowed to. pro_ceed until: after 7 .oo p~-ni~.. · · · By th;:i:t time the appellants, un- their· own admission, must- , have , ...... -·-· ... ,- to.ken ovor the cc,mmand. The culprits must have been either in the shift cf the appellillltS ur in thcit of P.w.4' and Enock. P.W.4 in his E;;vid ..mct.! S'lid the app12).J.~Ql1,t_$..:....h,~d rE~lj,ev1.-,d them by ,.oo p.m. but h-2 cu.uld ·not say what m,3.de him th 9 t sure considering the long ··lapse ·of tim;::; of more than c;nc year.· ·on'.e··factor ·does howevet:, .. se,pp_~.a.r:_.,· . d1;_7:cisivu of which shift; there is genera·1 agreement that the shift of -'P.W~4 ·comprised tw~ mdn on1f;·-anl11 th.J.t of the appelLmts. thrc-~e __ guards. P~-W~i and··P.Wo2··are cle.u.r they .saw thr<:?e po•licemen. . That b:~iw.f·so, · there :·b2ing no .s~g~estion. that· two.:shifts spoke to th,:i · cunipi'arn:ants during the· relevant ·period,· the· ·only shift· thnt dc0.lt,\r:irth them was th at. of• the appell.:mts. Accordingly, I am-respectfully ia: agr ..,ei:n,:mt with. the· It: arncd resident. magistrate. in:,;h;i_s: judgm~nt. that· the complainu.rits we.1:~ -stopped, searched and .. ; ' int4rro,:J~tcd by-'the· appclL:11:ts• shi·ft.- . ,··. I;-'• on the basis c,f this finding· and ~aving regard· to the ,;; :."Jevidcnc:./ thnt~the coniplainnnts understood ·the, culprits to be levyil-'ii( a 1fine, the: lower· court proceeded to- convict of obtaining by' f.ti.ls6 ·prct¢rice. · · It- howe_ver seems to have ·b.een ubl.:i:.vious of . . .·. aria .0.t''two·ottif!r i:nport;mt ccnside.rati,cns • . First+Y~t. ··:f~iorder to convict of s-µch offence. th\:!re had :·:to =bu 0v:i:dcncl3 . before the • c.oi.irt · that the . appeilo.nts fraudulently . rcpr0s-:.'.i-').t\)d that. th~y l}~d authority to levy. a, fine for P.W.l not haVfhg .'u driving 1·i~ent:e en him, and that _-they .did not in. fact · . hn.vc such auth ot-i t{. .. The:re wc1s· howev,~r . nc./:e,vidence led to show · thG·'nplJc.::H.unts lacked:-~uthcrity tuYlevy·-a firie in those circumstances, andiii; is,pEfrt.inent :t:b point 0ut! t:itut, umfer ~--95 of the Road . '.rruf£ic .Act/ a pol,ic~· officer can, for of;fences specified b'y th0,-~ . . . Minist ..,,:r·, punish a traffic offender;:by imposing a. fine. There is, -of coursC!, • .a procedure' ·l.:lid de.Mn· for.: lev.yihg -~uch fine, . which does . -not cJ.p~i,s& tc ~.;h,~v~,rb.e(~n. followed· at Lil-1 in. this case·,: but it is •·do\Jbtfui ~{' ·:5U<t,h)i.9n-c0mplinnce is nec·essarily proof that the police offic,.;r, to his- knowledge., !'lad no authori·ty summarily to · f;inc.: . th-::i" 0·ffe_nd~r. ospoa@i1ly if. 1:~e ·fermer. deetl .Qot·it,,6ppen t• ·'ljf:t:' an i:·oi'ricer' ~q·g.ularly -assigned· to traffic duties,. who ~s apt to ·be-'.. ~i. , more coriv,~rsant,.with thC legislatt.oii th';;,~· a ·ccnst,'lbl~.-·i.:n . .flbe i1fH:.d .. Fo.i:;ce .-Uiiiti ,as \o{e;e the i3ppE;!llants~ 'T~.Y ...;er~ how~v~~ ably'; ·: .. · . J~. . . , -' .f, ~ . .• . •' : t,. •.:• .: .. O .:,; • •,~f: •P• ~ :,: j,. ~ ••- . . ~;~_ -, ..-~ 3 ,, ~ \ reprGsc:nted by an agvccat~_ ,cinct th.e :'·ab:siri~~ cf prosecution evi<..kmc.:; ·cle;:irly tD. the ~ff~ct that th~y · had no authority to levy a fine. and they_ were aWarl! of this, has not. in my judgment ·1.· ~-~,-:asiuned any injustice o J; have, unly raised the' point to remind that_, in a crimlnril case,; :s.av~ -.~her€.! th~· onus;:.9f proof is PY legisl.atiun·.:put ·un the· defenb,:, ~very ,ingredient of the .cf:rcrice: has t0 be a.:trictly provE'id.. by ·the ·prosc'c:µtL.m at ' ..... ,. the cutset and _it sht:uld nL..t.,be .ief·ti~op,m_ to' .specul.i.tiun .or. to be s~pplied ·.by the d.efenc<:~... tr{ 'this ,case; prosc:~utiun evid_cnce · ·w;is w,anti.og · nut Lnly.. ,:1.'s' to \..iljeJh~r tJ1c appell.:-:nts were empowered . . tc,. levy . a. fine ( . but · a.lsu ·:with reg urd to. ··whcth.:)r they acccunted :fc.ir. the rne:ney"'. . ;' ,:_ of'_greater: dnc,·/rn~ i1owever~.- i~: what int~rr .rctution cught !)rt.periy t0 be fiut \,n the ,beh;ivli.,ur and conduct r.,f the app~lL:irits a~ attribute'd to ·thorn by th~ .. ci;rnplaih,:ints? · To MSWer the quostic:n ·it wculd be ·necessary ·tc, ~~·state their :ev;i.clence · ,in groab:fr _qetail. .. · · · · · .The?y fcund cth•!r vehid.es· hc1ving ,b·,•.~n stoppe:d by the '.:. appf~liunts at" th~· read block, -:m,.1 ac:c0rdi_pg t<;-•P.w.i, ;:it thu beginninJ the~e · was Uhly L•ne appc~lla.nt tqlking .. to thorn, ond e1s ·..· imol;'<=-.? vehicles came an~ we~e s,topped- ·one. ·of_ :the ,.,t_hcr two curnc . - f9rth to ~a1.k' tc: them· in' pl~ce of th~ fi_rst. cne • . The 'n.cc?unt uf P.W~2 · is ,t.c, -~~--.~me·. eff~c.t:,·o . To be ~xact,-. 0 she s.-1id, sc,:i fnr as ia reievaht::,1..,fKi:t ·. ·. ";;",:, ,·· ., • • ·4,,. . . :· • • .•... " . . .:..o<l;l'e man came to·.:ask :for' the driv:2r•s ric.::ncu. He. was a. Sb ut-loc,kil,lgd.;VE~rs,.n; ,he was in police uniforrno ••~. Wij.~:~i;.al:k:;.ng · ~n .lth¥lid swahil,i -: after .10 minutes as we· did net have any identifi~ation, he orL!~n. u. us to i,iark: the•:.car 'be,;;;idf the; read.· . I th"ught he rne:ntioned . . ' . .I • - ' ' . abc.,ut. sending· us tc• prisun and _to c_c-urt, So wo ~_v)t sc-~ed • . -He tock away th·e keyso ; We ,wa!tcd ·in the.: -c;m- fc.r about ½·.an hour~- .. Then ,another -different ufficial cai;ne~ My husband G,?C.pl 9 .inE-id, his·· f¥ in the,·· rccfi: n, · )'le fllt'tl"le.t:' expl .iin:~d 'th~ .f at:_t ()f '·tile. liq-;mce Cdru.1<..>t bo helpe,d; and asked (if),~:he was tP _pay ,a fine. · Aft,r;t:(,, scmet,i.me canon i.usinde· came .irr\;,,b;i.te. car.:- :w'::?·stc.i:,-iJee'.l him" and gave''.~irp a letter. to rir. Bern~~lus. to'.;inf=C:.rrn · him we were stranJed. . ' . .. ., ,, :. ::;,-:.;~: t'.!l } ) ' ~-'' . . . . r·.... . -.. -~ . . , Time ~as passing, we got ·:·llJc;;~e~ scared. One cf ' • •• • ' ~ • • • p • .. the· three c-ame a"; ain clncl'~' o ...: ·•~l'.'e-1 IT'V ··hu$b nn.d · ot•~ r--£ the Ccj,t' .... o • • He then carne-·back '"Cd::ab,_ £or ·shs. 5/= ,I <]aV," him khs. 10/r=o He cnrne. back to announce it was shs. 300/=:: -; 3 j'-:.. that···he ha,i misunderstc.od, I. had o:r:ily sh:S·. 240/= which ·· I gave to him. I saw him giye _the rnc,nay to cn0 of.:·, . the ·thr.ee officials.a They were· all together. I w.::is · · of the idea it was a fineo I saw cne of them writing ct,.wn nurnbe;r ·c;f the car and name in a no:t;e bc-ok •. 11 • The versicn of her husband is essentially tc th'" sa~ effe·ct. AS ti~ what ma.de him pay he had this to say: • I,. ~ •• fl • • ~One ,(c,f· thc-im returned tc the car. ancl ih:form-~tl Ob us tha.t if Wt; ~c:il_ii. pri" we wculd · proc(,ed with th.:1 1 juurney •••••• I iias net surprised as in .iNeth..:;rlnnds we PilY tc:; the. Traf;f ic Police for such mirfor off()nce ..... 11 · He then <Jt)t the shs. 240/;,,,o From there he" c,;n"i::inued: : V •· ••• '!' • o·. : I CJ ave. the;· money, and then they, wrct:0 in the bo0klet that I gave shs.; 240/=o Th(::!y di'--l·hc;t <Jive me any receipt. · -Th!=! thra:e were. tugl::!th~·,: when· I gave ,.,./4 _. ~ thf~ shs •. 240/~~ .;;ht=reafter · I was b..ld I would procGed an_d that next time (we~k) even if I did not have :a:.dri_viri<) licence :t w·c,uld just pass wi th0ut w;;,rry,. II _ ._ · As candidly admittecr---bj''-1:he· ccmp~ai~-ants, t.hoir kfiowleJrJ_b of kisw:3:hili was t<..,c,: scanty to claim ·to hc1v0 undcr- sto,,id clearly what th(~ appelLmts tc..ld · er demanded -of them, and they .c nly get the impressiun that they, were being asked tu pay a fin.:;. But is that in fact what was demanded cf th2m1 I have grav0 d<. ubts if· it was. If th,.: in~enticn on the part of th~ appellunts had been tc levy a:,.fi.ri,1 they wculd net probably haV<i:! w;:isted SC, much cf thr:?ir cwn' t,i.me and that cf· the complainants; they w0uld have__ indic-ab~d thGir in·tcmtion almost at th.:: outset, c3:nd ·thi-s ·in ·n firm, unarnbigu,,us and unmistakable languarJ•:::. Instencl, however, the appc_llants, or scme of th(~m, appear to have delibernt~ly and ,successfully instilled fear in th1~m o.nd then ca:p;italised un it to <Jet the. ml'nG·y.· 'I'hr3.t;- b;> -my mind, wc1s in:t~nd"'d_ t:c;:· _s,-licit the ccmpla.in·-mts into bribing tiv..:m. 'rhat ;this.,was·tne int.~ntic.n·s-:ems :tc fit in w~·11 with':thc ,:;.ppe:llnnts·• ' acc~ptance c...f shs. 240/c:: instead ·r,f 'sh~.·. 300/c:: - {f0r a fino is net n{,:r'mally. the subj12ct ; f a bargain)·~·\mct the fact tint in th0 end th,.::y·. assured them thP.y cc,uld ,in fub..1r:~ ,puss _then: frce:ly ·a \md unmoleste~i wheth- -r er n,;t they. :fr\i). licence. It s,,~ms to me then that the appellants. did·· .not repre~~nt::;th~y wer.::: _imposin<J n fin€:! when they. rece_ivo~d tne lllC-J:lGY-'·b~t-. i,atjl~r .that th8y wcntc::d a bribe· frcm them sc th~~ they,_ might 'forbecr tc, detain PaWol .and_ t_:·\ke fur"th•.~r .act.frn ·acjainst him fer not hnvin 1J his licence; intact., -. This is an c,fftmce- ,~f: si cr:.mpL-.::tely differcmt ch<1ro.ctcr ·frcm th:1t of th(). 6ffGnce 0ivin0 ri~~~ tr_ this appcul ::md this ce,urt .c:/:lllti ni .. t lawfully ·s\.·-stitutc_ a c,.nvid:i.:..n of ccrruption. · · The.p~ is, in any case, one ~t'10; difficulty. As will have. b;·_;c'ri nciteq .£rem the .Ccif\plain:m"t 's eviJence which I ho.V(; qu.oted obove; there· were cth.ir_ vehicies · arriving at th,:1t post whi.5=!1- n.:.c-eded to be stupped anci::'st~.&ched.. That• meunt the c,;mp-la.1.n'uht cculd.--not be;· b.nd were ·not, attended thrOU']hcut th8 time· they· were there, .md in f uct, wht~n they were attC;;ndcd except for cne occasicn, (nly rme of them a~ li,":time app:~ars to "have b,,en able to ct·o s0·. Le-eking at the -(~vJdc,rice, thcre:fore, the ·ctemnnd Wu.S m'1de c.;n ,P.W.1 by dj_e c:f themo ··-Was ;i;t thGn to be •ttriltuted -tc ·the. ether tw0, as .well-,. as havin,g hJ<;J i:l'. ccmmon ..... -~ntent with: him,·· The immediate. W)~wer might_-_be in thu uffirmativE.: ,_ •' ·11avi"n'J· 1Q miad tb9 evi<,.lence tha·f-th~Y. were all prf:!sent when the •.. rtlpney W«J.S received by ·c..ne. cf them, ··assuming this is n ccrtuinty but a closer loc;k at the. evi-dence might also su:Jgest i t wculd net be sufe to cc.:-nclude sc. The appellant who stoppt.:d, se'archt;q and hnd the car p,u-ked may nc..t necessarily ho.v,, hntchecl- up anythin<J _fraudulent _at th 1t time. The p,-~·rs, n whc ne:xt sroke to P.W.l _i_~:. likely t,.:, .b~ the en<-= wh<.i m<1de the dtiman.J. Thi~ - /one pers'-n cculJ have b•:eri_(.i the thr(,e, includin'] th:1.t app.jllt1nt who first met and c,rdercd th<.'-! C( mplninants 'tc, park. That pcrscn then recs=ived the muney and ·aIJt,enred t<; jot s~ch ,!='·f---cci1:ot in his notebl ;.k,: this .in the presenc~~ .:,f _. thti cth~r two. It C()Uld not be ascertained, I think, if the L1tb~r, <::r one cf_ thGm, ho.c1 collaburat•2d with the rf.::Ceiv(fr. c...r bl~el). made· 'a"Wcµ=-e of t_h-..! o£f(mce he w c1 9 .- cc. mmi t 1::i_ilCJ. Cl<:),~:rly ~ the cJffence of ccrruption was· c,:,rqrtJitb.::cl, but . ~there. wculd be a lin<J("ri~<J .ctd.ibt :fn the enc.l if iii ---th.ti tl1rct= appe:llnnts· coll abcrated in .its c~.mmissic,ri~ .. ··' I have alr·;.;;~~1y f, und it unlikely that th\;; uIJl",:::11.:mts received the mUriey <..,n the, pretext they were levyirt_<J 2. fin<'", but that did. n0t exclude the p0ssibL.i ty · cf th3t c.rie, or ti-11:,se: two, '_ of th,,~m. thut l.mly saw (.-n,) (.;f them receiving. the mc•n<2y iULl hncl had no · · par:t- in . the fraud, tu think th:,t the m,:.-ney w,1s bE,ing <Ji w:n oth12r than. c1s a bribe. We wc.uld then end up in totnl failure to so.y which _shculd be c, nvicted t:·f c,·rruµtich ,-md Whit:h cf c.btninin(J, ',; .." ~ ~~~~1-t~~"-'-'~'::->~/.:t:~"t-;, .... _. 1 .~-.:~~"'-·~..-.v~i.;1f~-4'.:i .~;~1~.~--:r-~ f ._ "l~;.;;, . . . . . . f:"t, .... !: •ii,''. ··.·-~ :, \;_;; l'·/ :--~;,._ s - ~&~ a distinction cculd proporly bQ ~ade. The ap1x~llnnts, er some of them, may be lucky, but for the reascns I have. attempted to give, I find it unsaf~ to uphold the ct~nvicticns. They are acccrdingly set aside toge th :r with the sentence imposed en each occu.sed. They shcul.d br.i r,.;,~ase<l f'rc..;m <:ustody unless they are otherwise lnWfully t)Q.l.<l, P .M. JONATHAN JUDGE