republic vs g 2573 pc pacificus so cleophance simon 2016 tzhc 2309 22 june 2016

republic vs g 2573 pc pacificus so cleophance simon 2016 tzhc 2309 22 june 2016

The court held that at the stage of a submission of no case to answer, the test is whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case, not whether the case has been proved beyond reasonable doubt. The evidence on record, including the extra-judicial confession and corroborating circumstances, was sufficient to require the accused to make a defence. The defence's arguments about gaps and suspicion were not sufficient to warrant dismissal at this stage.

Citation
republic vs g 2573 pc pacificus so cleophance simon 2016 tzhc 2309 22 june 2016
Parties
Prosecution: The Republic; Accused: G 2573 PC Pacificus s/o Cleophance Simon
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
22 June 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Ruling on Submission of No Case to Answer at Close of Prosecution's Case
Outcome
Submission of no case to answer dismissed; accused required to enter defence.
Legal Topics
Murder, Submission of No Case to Answer, Prima Facie Case, Burden of Proof
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Murder Submission of No Case to Answer Prima Facie Case Burden of Proof

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 5 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Republic

Prosecution

G 2573 PC Pacificus s/o Cleophance Simon

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Ruling on Submission of No Case to Answer at Close of Prosecution's Case

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case requiring the accused to make a defence for the charge of murder

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that at the stage of a submission of no case to answer, the test is whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case, not whether the case has been proved beyond reasonable doubt. The evidence on record, including the extra-judicial confession and corroborating circumstances, was sufficient to require the accused to make a defence. The defence's arguments about gaps and suspicion were not sufficient to warrant dismissal at this stage.

Court Disposition

Submission of no case to answer dismissed; accused required to enter defence.