SULEIMAINI
The prosecution failed to prove the charge beyond reasonable doubt as there was insufficient evidence that the respondent had knowledge the ram was stolen, and discrepancies existed in the identification of the stolen animal. The doctrine of recent possession was wrongly invoked by the trial court, and the burden of proof was improperly shifted to the accused.
Source excerpt
- Stealing animals
- Burden of proof
- Recent possession
- Mens rea
- Contradictory evidence