Regina v Manu [2015] SBHC 24; HCSI-CRC 351 of 2012 (9 April 2015)

HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS
(Mwanesalua,J)

Criminal Case No. 351 of 2012

REGINA

V

1. Cecil Manu
2. Simon Peter Delemani
3. Peter Diau
4. John Tii

Date of Hearing : 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 11th, 12th
Date of Ruling : 9th April 2015

Mrs. M.Manata and Mr. R.B.Talasasa (DPP) for the Crown
Ms. S. Karani for the First Accused
Ms. H. Blundell and Mr. G. Gray for the Second Accused
Mr. N. Galo for the Third Accused
Mr. H. Kausimae for the Fourth Accused.

RULING

Mwanesalua J:

1. This is an application by counsel for the Third Accused for a No Case to answer who is charged with the offence of murder contrary to section 200 of the Penal Code. The First, Second and the Fourth Accused who have been charged with the same offence have not made similar application.
   
2. This application was made under section 269 of the Criminal Procedure Code Act. The section states:
   

"269. (1) when the evidence of the witnesses for the prosecution has been concluded, and the statement or evidence (if any) of the accused person before the committing court has been given in evidence, the court, if it considers that there is no evidence that the accused or any one of several accused committed the offence, shall, after hearing, if necessary, any arguments which the public prosecutor or advocate for the prosecution or the defence may desire to submit, record a finding of not guilty.

(2) when the evidence of the witnesses for the prosecution has been concluded, and the statement or evidence (if any) of the accused person before the committing court has been given in evidence, the court, if it considers that there is evidence that the accused person; or any one or more of several accused persons, committed the offence, shall inform each such accused person of his right to address the court, either personally or by his advocate (if any), to give evidence on his own behalf, or to make an unsworn statement, and to call witnesses in his defence, and in all cases shall require him or his advocate (if any) to state whether it is intended to call witnesses as to the fact other than the accused person himself. Upon being informed thereof, the Judge shall record the same. If such accused person says that he does not mean to give evidence or make an unsworn statement, or adduce evidence, then the advocate for the prosecution may sum up the case against such accused person. If such accused person says that he means to give evidence or make an unsworn statement, or to adduce evidence, the court shall call upon such accused person to enter upon his defence."

3. This application is based on the first limb of section 269 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Code as set out above. The Third Accused's case in this application is that the prosecution have failed to adduce evidence of murder against him at the close of their case. His no case to answer application should thus succeed and that he be acquitted of the charge of murder at this point of the trial.
   
4. The prosecution case is that there is evidence against the Third Accused. First, they rely on the evidence of Medley Kwale. That evidence is that this witness identified the third Accused at the scene of crime on the night 21st April 2012. The scene was lit by bright street light. Medley Kwale saw the Third Accused hit Simon Fuo'o (Deceased) with a knife on the back. The knife also injured Medley Kwale's stomach. George Malogu also saw the Third Accused at the vicinity of the scene of crime. Medley Kwale saw the Third Accused later at the Magistrates Court. Medley Kwale identified the Third Accused in the dock during the prosecution case during the trial. He described the Third Accused as the Accused with big hair.
   
5. This court is mindful that " eye witness identification is liable to error, either because of inaccurate perception in the first instance or because the witness's original impression of the wrongdoer has been modified as a result of subsequent events, such as seeing the accused in police custody or being shown photographs or seeing the accused in the dock[1]". But in this case, the first identification of the Third Accused by Medley Kwale at the scene of crime was made in bright street light.
   
6. This court also looked at the Photographs (Exh.1) taken at the hospital during post-mortem of the deceased. There is a stab wound at the back side of the Deceased. Further, the medical report showed that the Deceased had stab and slash wounds on his body.
   
7. There is evidence implicating the Third Accused in the charge of murder before the Court. He will be put to his defence. The court will accordingly reject the no case to answer application made on behalf of the Third Accused. The Third Accused has a case to answer.
   

THE COURT

---

^[1] See HOMICIDE – NASH JAISIMAHA RAO p. 158