The Appellant was convicted of murder and sentenced to
death. His conviction was based on identification of the Appellant by PW2 and
caution repudiated statement made by the Appellant. He repudiated his statement
not only during the trial within the trial, but also during his defence. The
statement was admitted without inquiry whether it was made at all and if made
whether it was made voluntarily.
On appeal the Appellant complained that the trial High
Court judge erred in law in holding that he was adequately identified by PW2
who identified him in the dock without prior identification parade. The other
complaint was that the “weak, unreliable and uncorroborated testimony of PW1,
PW2 and PW4”, could not sustain a conviction for murder