- 5.
have been caused either by pinching, biting or scraping with a sharp instrument,
and the age of the injuries was placed between 1 and 2 weeks.
The accused did not give evidence or the general issue before the jury
and he was convicted of the offence as charged. It appears to me that the jury
by their verdict disbelieved the statements of the accused that at the time he
stabbed the deceased, he was so intoxicated that he did not form the
necessary intention to kill the deceased or that he was provoked into doing so.
It is also significant in this verdict that the inference had been drawn that the
deceased was stabbed while he was tied up and not after death as was stated by the
accused. It seems to me that it would have taken more than a few minutes for the
accused in his condition, if what he says in the statement to be true, to have
found the coil of wire with which to bind the deceased's limbs and to have dore
so in the way it was done.
For these reasons, I agree with the jury's verdict and although the
motive for the killing is not clear, nevertheless it could have sprung out
of the request which the deceased had made to the accused that the latter move
out of the hut to make way for somebody else.
I see no mitigating factor in his favour and should Your Excellency
take a merciful view I would suggest a sentence of 20 years' imprisonment,
I have the honour to be
Your Excellency's most obedient servant
hrtmiths
(A. Garcia )
Judge of the High Court