Wakilii

Rex v Chui, Mpambi, Ugaa, Mwekwa and Jambi (Criminal Appeals Nos. 264, 265, 266, 267 and 268 of 1947 (Consolidated))

East African Court of Appeal · [1948] EACA 12 · 1948 Appeals Partly Allowed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Consolidated criminal appeals from murder convictions in the High Court of Tanganyika
Decision
Convictions of three appellants quashed and death sentences set aside; convictions of two appellants upheld

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

In a 'lion man' murder case where the actual killer was not apprehended, the Court held that accomplice evidence of presence and active participation can sustain conviction if corroborated by direct or circumstantial evidence linking accused to the crime. Where accomplice evidence shows accused merely fetched the perpetrator and were spectators, conviction is unsafe absent more positive evidence of participation. A keeper who releases a 'lion man' for money knowing the purpose is murder is a principal offender under section 22(b) or (d), but the evidence must be clear and corroborated if from an accomplice.

Outcome

Convictions of three appellants quashed and death sentences set aside; convictions of two appellants upheld

Facts

In September 1946, a woman named Chambi was murdered by a 'lion man' (a person dressed in monkey skins armed with knives) who tore her to pieces in the bush. Parts of the body were recovered and identified by the deceased's uncle. The actual perpetrator was never apprehended. The deceased's four-year-old daughter disappeared after the killing. The child was wearing a necklace of twenty-one cent pieces and bangles. The necklace was subsequently found by police in the fifth appellant's house and the child was seen in the houses of both the second and fifth appellants. Five persons were convicted of murder in the High Court of Tanganyika. The evidence against them came mainly from two accomplices who stated that the second and fifth appellants held the deceased while the 'lion man' killed her, that the third and fourth appellants were in the party that fetched the 'lion man' and were spectators, and that the first appellant was the 'lion man' keeper who released the killer after receiving payment of 30 shillings.

Issues

  1. Whether there was sufficient evidence to sustain convictions of the accused as principal offenders where the actual perpetrator of the murder was not apprehended.
  2. Whether uncorroborated evidence of accomplices was sufficient to establish that accused were present at the killing and took an active part in it.
  3. Whether a keeper of a 'lion man' who releases him for money with knowledge that he is being hired to kill another is a principal offender under section 22 of the Tanganyika Penal Code.

Orders

  • Appeals of second and fifth appellants dismissed.
  • Appeals of first, third and fourth appellants allowed.
  • Convictions of first, third and fourth appellants quashed.
  • Sentences of death passed on first, third and fourth appellants set aside.

Rules and key headnotes

Evidence — Accomplice Evidence — Corroboration — Sufficiency of Direct or Circumstantial Evidence
Where evidence that accused were present at a killing and took an active part in it is that of accomplices only, other evidence of a direct or circumstantial character linking the accused with the crime can be sufficient corroboration to justify conviction.
Criminal Law — Murder — Principal Offenders — Spectators and Fetchers
If the evidence of accomplices establishes only that accused helped to fetch the perpetrator of a crime and were spectators at the killing, in the absence of more positive evidence of participation it is unsafe to convict as they may have been actuated by motives of fear or curiosity.
Criminal Law — Murder — Principal Offenders — Keeper of Perpetrator
A keeper of a 'lion man' who releases him for money received with the knowledge that he is being hired for the purpose of killing another is a principal offender to the crime of murder within the meaning of section 22(b) or (d) of the Tanganyika Penal Code.
Evidence — Accomplice Evidence — Corroboration — Standard Required for Keeper
Where a keeper is alleged to be a principal offender to murder, the evidence against him must be clear and unmistakable, and if derived from an accomplice it must be corroborated on some material particular.

Legislation cited (3)

  • Tanganyika Penal Code s.22
  • Tanganyika Penal Code s.22(b)
  • Tanganyika Penal Code s.22(d)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Rex v Chui, Mpambi, Ugaa, Mwekwa and Jambi (Criminal Appeals Nos. 264, 265, 266, 267 and 268 of 1947 (Consolidated)) [1948] EACA 12 (1 January 1948)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.