Rex v Duloo and Others (Criminal Appeals Nos. 217, 218 and 219 of 1947)
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
The Court of Appeal dismissed appeals against murder convictions. Prosecution witnesses who failed to report the planned murder were not accomplices where their silence was induced by fear of death. A person who hired out a 'lion-man' to commit murder and watched the killing was guilty as a principal under Penal Code s.22(b). Evidence of death was sufficient where an eyewitness testified to the killing and human bones with the victim's clothing were later found.
Outcome
Convictions for murder upheld; death sentences confirmed
Facts
Three women appellants were convicted of murdering a ten to twelve year old boy named Msafiri. The third appellant, the boy's aunt, organized the murder due to the boy's rudeness and his father's failure to provide her with clothing. The first and third appellants hired a 'lion-man' from the second appellant for a cash payment to carry out the killing. The 'lion-man' was described as a human being kept and hired out to kill, under the control of his owner. Two prosecution witnesses knew of the murder plan but were threatened with death if they reported it. They witnessed the killing from a distance. The second appellant stood by watching her 'lion-man' kill the boy, then took him away after the murder was completed. Human bones of a child with flesh cut off were later found along with the victim's cloth and belt, which had a fresh knife slash.
Issues
- Whether prosecution witnesses who knew of the murder plan but failed to report it were accomplices whose evidence required corroboration.
- Whether the second appellant, who hired out the 'lion-man' and watched the killing, was guilty of murder as a principal.
- Whether there was sufficient proof that the victim was in fact killed.
Orders
- Appeals dismissed.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (1)
- Penal Code s.22(b)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.