JOHNSON UTIE V. THE STATE(1982)

JOHNSON UTIE V. THE STATE

In The Supreme Court of Nigeria

On Thursday, the 27th day of May, 1982

SC.77/1980

JUSTICES

GEORGE SODEINDE SOWEMIMO Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria

MOHAMMED BELLO Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria

CHUKWUNWEIKE IDIGBE Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria

ANTHONY NNAEMEZIE ANIAGOLU Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria

ANDREWS OTUTU OBASEKI Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria

Between

JOHNSON UTIE Appellant(s)

AND

THE STATE Respondent(s)

S. SOWEMIMO, J.S.C.(Delivering the Leading Judgment): The deceased in this case was a young girl who had gone out on the material date to fetch water. According to the appellant, he had been accused for putting the young girl in family way. He met the young girl on her way from the stream and in the view of her father he, the appellant inflicted several fatal matchet cuts on the girl. He ran into the bush and when caught made a confessional statement of having committed the offence of murder. He was tried in the High Court of Ondo State, convicted of the offence of murder and sentenced to death. He appealed, first to the Western State Court of Appeal as well as the Federal Court of Appeal, Ibadan and both appeals were dismissed. Before us, learned counsel for the appellant had nothing useful to urge in favour of the appellant. Having perused the records myself, I have come to the conclusion that it lacked any merits. The judgment of the Federal Court of Appeal is affirmed and the conviction for murder and sentence of death is hereby upheld.M. L. BELLO, J.S.C.: The appellant was convicted of the murder of one Beatrice Richard whom he had battered to death with a matchet. The Court of Appeal dismissed his appeal against the conviction. At the hearing of the appeal before us, learned counsel have nothing useful to urge in his favour. There was one eye-witness to the battering of the poor girl. In his statement to the police, the appellant stated that he had decided to kill the girl because people had been falsely accusing him of having caused her pregnancy and for that reason he waylaid her and battered her with his matchet. His defence at the trial was denial. I agree there is no merit in the appeal and it should be dismissed. The conviction and sentence are affirmed.
C. IDIGBE, J.S.C.: This is a ‘cold-blooded’ murder of the deceased by the appellant apparently for no reason other than that- as stated by the appellant – people who lived with him in a camp accused him (perhaps, unjustifiably – for he did not himself say so in his evidence) of having sexual intercourse with the deceased who was expecting a baby at the time of her death for another member of the camp, named Richard. As the deceased was returning from the riverside one evening, the appellant emerged from his place of hiding and asked the deceased if it was he who put her in a family way; the deceased in reply said he was not responsible for her pregnancy. The appellant then attacked her with a matchet, dealt several blows on her and she died later. The learned trial Judge having reviewed the facts of the case and the possibility of a defence of provocation, which in fact was not raised on behalf of the appellant, found him guilty of the charge of murder. His appeal to the Federal Court of Appeal was dismissed. After carefully considering the evidence on record and the judgments of both the High Court and the Federal Court of Appeal, I found nothing in favour of the appellant whose appeal completely lacks merit. I agree, therefore, that this appeal should be, and is hereby dismissed.

A. O. OBASEKI, J.S.C.: This is an appeal against the decision of the Federal Court of Appeal affirming the decision of the Western State Court of Appeal affirming the conviction for murder and sentence of death passed on the appellant. The facts are that the appellant matcheted Beatrice Richards to death on the 4th day of February, 1973 in the full view of her father P.W. 1. The evidence of P.W.1 Emezubi Odanike was accepted by the trial Judge along with the evidence of the extra judicial confession but the extra judicial oral confession and the confessional statement Exhibit a were rejected as inadmissible by the Federal Court of Appeal. In view of the cogency of the evidence of P.W.1 together with the corroboration afforded by the other evidence, i.e. testimony of P.W.2 and P.W.3, the remaining evidence was found sufficient to support the conviction and the conviction was upheld. The defence of provocation which does not arise in the circumstances was considered and properly rejected by the learned trial Judge. From the evidence on record and the detailed consideration given to them by the courts below, I agree with counsel’s view that there is nothing that can be usefully urged in his favour. I do not find any merit in this appeal and I hereby dismiss it and affirm the decision of the Federal Court of Appeal and the conviction and sentence of death passed on the appellant.

A. N. ANIAGOLU, J.S.C.: I agree with counsel that there is nothing to urge in favour of the appellant who unjustifiably set upon the deceased woman with a matchet and literally cut her into bits, because, as he alleged, he was wrongfully being accused of having put her in a family way. I am unable to see the rationale of the appellant killing the lady. Possibly, he thought it necessary to get her out of the way, so that she, being the object in respect of which the accusation against him was levelled, there would be nobody alive in respect of whom an accusing finger could be pointed at him. The lady offered no provocation; she was going to the stream to fetch water and the appellant laid ambush and cut her, as stated, with a matchet. Although the appellant made a confessional statement the next day when he was brought to the police station, yet in court, about two years after, he denied everything denied killing the lady; denied living in the washerman camp, Ute Camp, Owo, and denied even knowing the deceased lady. The appellant had become wiser by the day, and these denials were but an afterthought when the weight of his deed had sufficiently properly dawned upon him. After going through the record I am completely satisfied that the appellant was rightly convicted and that this appeal is entirely without merit. It is accordingly hereby dismissed.

Appearances