ILESANMI OYINBO V. THE STATE(1982)

ILESANMI OYINBO V. THE STATE

In The Supreme Court of Nigeria

On Thursday, the 1st day of July, 1982

SC.74/1980

RATIO

EVIDENCE: CIRCUMSTANCIAL EVIDENCE

Admittedly there was no eyewitness to the killing, but I am in total agreement with the learned trial Judge that the circumstantial evidence such as there was was very strong and pointed irresistibly to the guilt of the appellant. PER NNAMANI, J.S.C.

JUSTICES

AYO GABRIEL IRIKEFE 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

AUGUSTINE NNAMANI Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria

MUHAMMADU LAWAL UWAIS Justice of The Supreme Court of Nigeria

Between

ILESANMI OYINBO Appellant(s)

AND

THE STATE Respondent(s)

G. IRIKEFE, J.S.C.(Delivering the Leading Judgment):  The appellant who thought that the deceased was having amorous relations with his wife, boasted freely that he would kill him one day with his matchet. The dispute was aired before the Bale (Chief) of the village in the presence of all the parties and the denial of the truth of the matter alleged both by the appellant’s wife and the deceased failed to impress the appellant. He waited for an opportunity and used it when he met the deceased alone in the farm and unarmed, dealing him several vicious matchet cuts from which the latter died. The appellant had thus made good his promise.The learned trial Judge (Abina, J.), having heard all the evidence as well as the legal defences urged on behalf of the appellant by his counsel, convicted him of murder as charged. The Court of Appeal in my view was right in dismissing this appeal and I think learned counsel before us were equally right in supporting the conviction.
I find no merit in this appeal and would dismiss it. Appeal dismissed and conviction and sentence are hereby affirmed.

M. BELLO, J.S.C.: The deceased, whom the appellant had threatened to kill because he had been suspecting him of having affair with his wife, was found in the bush with multiple matchet cuts on his hands and head and was unable to speak. He died at the spot as he was about to be taken away by his relatives. The appellant made several confessions of having killed the deceased and in one of the confessions he said he had done so in self defence. He did not give evidence at the trial and did not call any witness.

The learned trial Judge fully considered self defence and held that on the very ipse dixit of the appellant, the assertion of killing in self defence was not available in the circumstances of the case. He convicted the appellant of murder. The Court of Appeal dismissed his appeal and affirmed the conviction.

Both his learned counsel and the Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions have nothing useful to urge in favour of the appellant at the hearing of the appeal before us. I agree the appeal has no merit and I dismiss it. The conviction and sentence are re-affirmed.

C. IDIGBE, J.S.C.: ‘Simple Owoeye’ otherwise known as Owoeye Agbebi unfortunately was considered by the appellant to have been regularly committing adultery with his wife. Not only was his belief unfounded, both the wife and the deceased, in his lifetime denied in the presence of the appellant that they were secretly committing adultery; this was before the village Chief (the Bale) to whom the appellant had lodged a report against the deceased. Unsatisfied with this denial but without any iota of proof to the contrary, the appellant set upon the deceased in his farm and dealt several matchet blows on him and he died soon after the attack. Of course, the learned trial Judge had no difficulty, in the face of the evidence before him, in finding the appellant guilty of the murder of the deceased; but this was not before he had carefully considered the evidence of both the prosecution and the submissions on behalf of the appellant, who did not testify at the trial, as well as all possible legal defences in favour of the latter. Both learned counsel for the appellant and the respondent have nothing to urge in favour of the appellant whose appeal challenging the judgment of the Western State High Court (Ayinla Abina, J.), in the Federal Court of Appeal was rightly dismissed. I found nothing in the record in favour of this appeal which is completely devoid of merit; accordingly, I agree that it should be dismissed.The appeal is hereby dismissed  and the sentence of the Western State High Court in HAD/9C/74 is hereby affirmed.

A. NNAMANI, J.S.C.: Both learned counsel for the appellant and respondent have submitted that there is nothing in law that can be urged in favour of the appellant. I agree with them having carefully studied the record of proceedings. The appellant had an obsession that the deceased was having an affair with his wife, and inspite of the denials of the deceased and his (appellant’s) wife, decided to deal with him (the deceased). they met on  the road to the farm and, from the medical evidence available, the appellant made mince meat of the deceased with his matchet. Admittedly there was no eyewitness to the killing, but I am in total agreement with the learned trial Judge that the circumstantial evidence such as there was was very strong and pointed irresistibly to the guilt of the appellant. Appellant’s counsel at the trial put up several defences including lack of proof of death of the deceased, the possibility of the post mortem examination having been conducted on some other person, self defence, etc. The learned trial Judge in a lengthy and well considered judgment rightly rejected all of them. There was also a confessional statement made by the appellant which was voluntary, positive, and direct. The Federal Court of Appeal again considered all the defences open to the appellant but rejected them and affirmed the judgment of the High Court. This appeal lacks substance and I agree that it ought to be dismissed. It is hereby dismissed. The conviction and sentence passed on the appellant are affirmed.

M. L. UWAIS, J.S.C.:  The appellant confessed to killing the deceased with a matchet. His confession was duly corroborated by the evidence adduced by the prosecution. I therefore agree with both learned counsel for the appellant and the respondent that there is no merit in the appeal. I also agree with the decision of the Federal Court of Appeal that the appeal lacks substance. I will accordingly dismiss it and it is hereby dismissed. The decision of the Federal Court of Appeal is confirmed.

Appearances