Kamugisha v Uganda (Criminal Appeal 60 of 2001)

The full judgment

Read the complete, verbatim text of this judgment.

Holding

The Supreme Court dismissed the appellant's second appeal against his conviction for the murder of a three-month-old child. The sole ground was that the conviction rested on circumstantial evidence that did not irresistibly point to guilt. The Court held there was ample circumstantial evidence — the appellant's exclusive proximity to the child, the post-mortem findings of asphyxia and cervical fractures, his silence and false account that the child had been sick, and his motive arising from not being the child's father — which irresistibly proved his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The conviction was accordingly upheld.

Facts

The appellant was convicted at the High Court, Fort Portal, of the murder of Alinda, a three-month-old child, on 24 August 1997. On the morning in question the child's mother (PW2) left the child sleeping in bed while the appellant was outside. The appellant told her to go and fetch brooms. When PW2 was about 100 metres from the house she heard the child crying, rushed back, and found the child dying. The appellant was back inside, lying on his bed. When asked what had happened, the appellant kept quiet and went outside; he later told those who gathered that the child had been sick. Dr. John Ruhweza, who conducted the post-mortem, found scratches on the child's neck and testified that the child died of asphyxia and fracture of the third and fourth cervical bones. The appellant was not the father of the child, and there had been acrimony between him and the mother for that reason, prompting the local LC1 Chairman to intervene; the trial court found this gave the appellant a motive to kill.

Issues

1. Whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding the appellant's conviction for murder where it was based on circumstantial evidence that, the appellant argued, did not irresistibly point to his guilt.

Orders

• Appeal dismissed.

Key headnotes