Criminal Appeal No

IN THE COURT OF APFEAL OP TANZANIA AT IIGSYA ( COPAH; NYALALI, .. G. J . ; iiAKAIS. J .A . AND OI'lAft. J .A . \ CRII-IIHAL AFP3 AL HO. 36 OP 1984 BETMEEN ANYEmSYE MMAKISIKBA...............................APPELLANT AMD -SHE. REPUBLI C. . ; . . RESPONDENT (A pp eal from th e c o n v ic t io n o f th e High Court o f T an zan ia at Kbeya) (Chua, J .) d a ted th e 29th day o f Kay, 1984) in C rim in al S e ss io n s Ca s e No. 28 o f I9S0 JUDGMENT OP THE COURT HAKAME, J .A . : ANYELWISIEIMSA, th e appellants in t h i s c a s e , was found G u ilt y o f murder by th e I lijli Court s i t t i n g at Kbcya* Ho was c o n v ic ta d and c o n se q u e n tly sen ten ed to s u f f e r d e a th by h an gin g. !;r. Tukvr.jf'ba, le a rn e d a d v o c a te , h as appeared b e fo re us to appeal from th t d e c is io n , w h ile Mr, K apinga, le a rn e d S ta te A tto rn e y , has sup ported th e c '-n v lo tio n on b e h a lf o f th e R e p u b lic . Hr. Tukunjoba f i l e d th r e e grounds o f ap p eal but d u rin g th e h e a rin g he s a id he was abandoning th e f i r s t ground, th e one re g a rd in g drunkenness.. That l e f t h in w ith two grounds but i n f a c t ho pursued o n ly one - w hether th e c ircu m sta n ces T-rcrc fa v o u r a b le f o r th e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f h is c l i e n t as th e m urderer o f a p erson c a l l e d ISAYI M'*AIiiJvUL*i, th e d eceased i n t h i s ease. Hr. Tukunjcba has urged t h a t th e r e was v i r t u a l l y o n ly th e testim o n y o f P . 1-1.2 to go b y. P.M . 2 t o l d th e t r i a l co u rt th a t wLjji he he-jrd th e c i y !,&nyelv-Jisyo kwa n i n i unaniua” ’lid he wont out .and heard th e a p p e lla n t, r e p ly t h a t ho would k i l l th e d eceased b ccau sa th e d eceased was ra a u cin g th e a p / 'o lla n t ’ s w if e , he, r V J .2 , p le a d ed w ith th e a p p e lla n t to le a v e th e d e ce a se d a lo n e . P.VI.4 who a ls o s a id ho heard th e c r y d id n et cay th a t he; a l s 1 heard I V ! . 2 p le a d in g w ith th e a s s a i l a n t . • I!r. T u kcijc'-c. a ls o su b m itted th a t t h e r e was ne evidence- to support ? . : : . 2* 3 c o n tc a ti^ n t h a t he saw th e a p p e lln r.t h id in g a cpoar ..ft or ae had. a t-a c -.c d ^ jc e a se d w ith i t . P.M .6 Dot * S g t „ Ila j o r ±22 L, who went to th e scen e, s a id t h a t he wan shown th e p la c e uhero th e weapon uced hoa. a l l e g e d l y ocen h i i ' on but ho d^c /p • 2 - not fin d i t , Mr. Tukunjoba f u r t h e r com plained. t h a t t h e l o o m e d t r i a l ju d g e e r r e d i n h o ld in g th a t th e i n j u r i e s o b s e rv e d b y th e d o c t o r who co n d u cte d th e postm ortem ex a m in a tion gave crod eiioa t o P .W .2* b c la im t h a t ho saw w hich p a r t o f th e d e c e a s e d ^ b ody was ■a t ta c k e d . Mr, T u k u n job a 's c o n t e n t io n i s th a t th a t p a r t i c u l a r w itn o s s v a s around in th e m orning so he c o u ld have n o t i c e d t h o tTOund th e n . I n se e k in g t o su p p ort th e c o n v i c t i o n M r, K apinga drew ou r a t t e n t io n t o th e f a c t t h a t P.IJ.2 w ould have se e n t h in g s c l e a r l y as th e r e was a b r ig h t m o o n lig h t . He co n ce d e d , how ever, t h a t P.W,2*3’ a s s e r tio n , t h a t he saw t h e a p p e lla n t *s h id ir ^ th e sp e a r was n ot c o r r o b o r a t e d by th e e v id e n c e o f t h e P o l i c e O f f i c e r who went t o th e s c e n e . He how ever u rg ed us t o c o n s id e r t h a t n o t o n ly P . VI.2, but a ls o P.W .3 and P.W .4 as w e l l , s a id th a t th e y h e a rd t h e D e c e a s e d 's c r i o s im p l i c a t i n g Any elw i sy e fc and th e a p p e lla n t -wcvs t h e o n ly p e r s o n g o in g by t h t name in th e v i l l a g e * ]/ix« K apinga a l s o • p o in t e d out t h a t , t h e same e v e n in g , p r i o r t o th e a lle g e d n s s rtu lt, P .W .l A1IYEGULIL3 KJAIKAlilLA, had seen th e a p p e lla n t g ra b b in g and s la p p in g th e d e c e a s e d , at th o a p p e l l a n t 's h ou se, s a y in g th a t th o dccor-c~d was rjafrfcinc f r e s h w ith th e a p p e l l a n t 's w i f e . According t o the lo o m e d t r i a l j u d ^ tho sta r Ti,ut>3cv.iion w itn ess, P.W .2, "did not appear to be in t e llig e n t and appeared to have UaA.o»-4&o q u estion o f alarm” . The learned judge f e l t 'that the testimony, o f a w itness needed corrob ora tion and he found such coxroboi*’t i o a in tlie fa o to r s complained against by Mr, Tukunjoba* T Jo r e s p e c t i f u l l y agree w ith the learn ed t r i a l judge th t tno whole ca se depends m ainly on the ev id en ce o f P.tJ.2 and, in view o f the lea rn ed ju d g e*s assessment o f the w itn e s s , h is ovid en cc r e q u ir e s e th e r evid en ce t o support i t . The lea rn ed judge found P« J«2 t o have? l i o d on -the Q uestion as t o whether he sounded an alarm, >tfe th in k t h is i s sig n ifio?jn .i ’because i f he had sounded an alarm end p eo p le came in response ho w ju ld have, t o l d them what he s a id he had w itn e s s e d . Ho d id not do m at and t n i s threw doubt on th e v e r a c it y o f h is claim * St ie /.itn o s a w*lP g oes away t o s le e p a f t e r he had a lle g e d ly seen tne a~5..,ul.< ot.d th e same one who c o n s p ic io u s ly p r e v a r ic a t e d on in c r i;.:in ,-b :.^ c —d o that tho a p p e lla n t had o f f e r e d him a b r ib e so as not t o d i s c l o s e u..~ i n c i d e n t , - 3 - P . F.2 made a n oth er v e r y im portan t a s s e r t i o n , th a t th e same n ig h t he went to a c e l l le a d e r , one EJ&KIBHIGA !it o in form him th a t th e a ccu sod had k i l l e d . On t h e same n ig h t I went t o th e P o l i c e ” , presum ably t o make a s i m i l a r r e p o r t . No w it n e s s has come fo r w a rd t o su p p o rt him on t h i s . The o n ly !fw ak ibin ga who t e s t i f i e d was P .W .4 Mwakyoma Ilw akibinga, who d id n o t t a l k o f any r e p o r t made t o him by P .U .2 th a t m a t e r ia l n ig h t . A c co rd in g t o P .W .4 he o n ly h e rr d th e c r y "A n yelw isye Unaniua" and, "when s t o o d out ( s i c . ) I d i d not h ea r th e v o i c e any m ore. I re tu rn e d t o my house and s l e p t . . . . " and n o t o n ly t h a t , on th e f o l l o w i n g day P .W .4 wont away t o c u l t i v a t e and i t was o n ly a f t e r com ing back home th a t he le a r n t th a t t iiO L^OCOclSGd had b een k i l l e d * The o n ly P o l i c e O f f i c e r who t e s t i f i e d was ?."•».6, a c c o r d in g t o whom i t was n ot u n t i l a f t e r he had g o t t o th o v i l l a g e th..„t he g o t in fo r m a t io n im p li c a t i n g th e a p p e lla n t and h i s b r o t h e r . Such was th e . p e rform a n ce o f t h i s p i v o t a l w itn e s s who, we agroQ ^w ith Hr. Tuk’.m jo b a , was a l s o n ot c o r r o b o r a t e d on th e o t h e r matt ergs r e f e r r e d t o by Mr. T uku n joba. It i s a ls o n otew orth y th a t a c c o r d in g t o P.w .3» too o n ly h ea rd th o v i c t i m 's c r i e s , and no more’jl and i t i s t o be n o te d th a t it i s t h i s p e r s o n , whoso house a c c o r d in g t o P.W .2 was n e a re r to h is h ou se th e n th e a p p e l l a n t 's house t o P.W .2 *e , t h a t P.W .2 d id n ot b o th e r to awaken. That lo a v e s us w ith o n ly tw o^ oth er p o s s i b l e f a c t o r s f o r co& sidtw action , nam ely t h e e v id e n c e o f P .;7 .1 ,^ % id th e c r y i m p lic a t in g A n y e lw isy o . The le a r n e d t r i a , l ju d g e w a s ^ p f i s f i e d t h a t P .W .l 's a ccou n t o f an. i n c i v i l e n c o u n te r betw een t h e a p p e lla n t end th e d e ce a se d , a t th e a p p e l l a n t 's hou se e a r l i e r th e saMG e v e n in g , h e lp s t o show th,..t P .*f.2 *e r i u i y i s s u b s t a n t ia lly tr u e . 'J o are n ot so s u r e : Q uite a p art from t h 5 f a c t th a t t h e l o c a l e o f th e a l le g e d f a t a l a s s a u lt was not r e a l l y e s t a b lis h e d t o be t h e same as th e one t e s t i f i e d to by P .W .l, th o p r o g r e s s o f th o p a rt o f th o a s s a u li^ /re c o u n te d by P .M .l d oes n o t b ear ou t ?.'■ (.2 , fo x ', a oo;-r;lin g to P . U . l , th e a p p e l l a n t 's b r o t h e r , one J on a s, t r i e d t o put a s to p t c th e a s s a u lt and i t was Jonas who knock ed down th e d e ce a s e d f o r th e a p p e lla n t to sp ear. It i s d i f f i c u l t t o r e l y on F .v r .l 's t e s tim o n y t o o.-.rr-'bo ’ a te i'.W .2 fs . As f o r th e c r i e s , t h e r e i s in d eed e v i le n ce th a t th o a p p e lla n t $ras t h e o n ly A n y elw isy e in th o v i l l a g e but t h a t , s tc r d i: r-i-viie, i s in ou r v ie w n o t s t r o n g enough t o im p lic a t e th e a p p e lla n t i n th e circu m stan ctf# * The p a r t i c u l a r c r y m ight h a /e r e l a t e d t o th e a s s a u lt PAI»1 s a id he w it n e s s e d , w hich was not p rov ed t o be th e same one -which p r o g r e s s e d t o t h o f a t a l b lo w . I t i s p o s s i b l e th t some P r o s e c u t io n w it n e s s e s h o ld b a c k some t r u t h . Tho second a s s e s s o r , who a d v is e d th a t tho appellant */as nut g u i l t y , has our sympathy f o r not b e l i e v i n g th e w it n e s s e s . Uc do ir>-fc th in k it s?i*o t o u ph old th e t r i a l c o u r t ’ s d e c i s i o n . Jo have t o a!Llow th e appeal. VJc t h e r e f o r e quash th e convicticn, Sv/t a s id e th~ rs.jilt o n c e , and o r d e r th e a p p e l l a n t 's im ediatc rol&asc unless he i s o i] .10r : ri s o l a w f u l l y h e ld , DATED at riBIiYA th is 10th day o t July, Y) O5. P. L. NYALALI CIU^F JUSTICE L. M. IIAIiAME JUSTIC-5 OF AIJ^AL A. to. A. 0;'. d , JUSTICE OF AP ;.;AI, ■\ I c e r t i f y th a t t h i s i s a tru e o f th o