19840806 TZCA Arusha

..juz I i IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF TANZANIA AT ARUSI-{A (cORAN: Mustafa,J.A., Makame, J.A. and Kisanga,JA.) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO0 50 OF 1983 B E T W E E N ALOYCE FRANCIS KIATA 0 0 0 0 0 0 , ' 0 0 0 0 0 APPELLANT A N D THE REPUBLIC '.'O 0 0 0 0 • 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 RESPONDENT (Appeal fromthe judgment of the High Court of Taflzahia at Moshi) (Mwakibee, J. dated the 21st day of Septtmber, 1983 JUDGMENT OF THE COURT • MUSTAF!J0Ao: The appellant was convicted of murder and sentenced to death. He stabbed'the deceased, who was the wife of P.W.1, and the deceased. .dJed of scptcaemia. resulting from the multiple wounds inflicted on her by the appellant. P.W,1 had accused the appellant of stealing a goat belonging to P,W.1 and the appellant was arrested, locked, up and then released. Uponhis release he met P..W.1 with whom he had a short conversation. . p,W1 said he asked the appellant, in a friendly way, if he could tell him where. the,solen goat was. The appellant said that he knew nothing of. the 'goat,. 1± was morning, about 10000 a.m. on an Easter. Sunday.. P,W.1 went on his way and shortly thereafter the appellant ran after P.W.1 and stabbed him'with 'a knife., .inuring :P.W.1. P.W.,1 ran for hisife. He ran past his house to a neighbour. d -2- It smed that the deceased heard pW1' shouts of alarm, and caine out of her house, and was trying to folldw P0W1 when the appellant caught up with he and st a bbed her to death0 The trial judge found that the appellant killed the deeased with malice aforethought and convicted him of murder0 He found no provocation., nor that the appellant was drunk or so drunk as to have been incapable of forming an intention to kill. On appeal before us 1w. shayo for the appellant attempted to argue that there was some provocation0 When it was pointed out to him that at no stage was it suggested that the deceased could have provoked the appellant, he did not press that ground0 On drunkeness the appellant himself stated in evidence that he had taken pombe that morning but that he was not drunk0 No witnesses testified that he was drunk, indeed some stat ~ d categorically that he was not. We believe that the appellant deliberately set out to kill PO11.1 in anger or in revenge for having been accused of having stolen P.W.l's goat, and in the process killed the deceased instead. We 1nojnèrjtin the appeal which we dismiss in its entirety,C V 1is 6th day of August, 1984. V A. MUSTIFA / JUSTICE OF APPEAL V. L.M. UAKA M E JUSTICE OF APPEAL V R. H KISANGA V JUSTICE OF IPPEAL I certify that this is a true copy of the original. 1 (L.A,A.KyJNDo)' VS DEPUTY REGISTRAR