Rex v Lopua and Another (Criminal Appeals Nos. 84 and 85 of 1941)
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
Held that where a crowd assaulted the deceased and one appellant held him while another twisted his neck causing death, the appellant who held the deceased could not be convicted of murder unless it was established that he was identified with the killer's purpose. The evidence showed he was holding the deceased for others to beat him with thin sticks, not for the neck-twisting. The twisting was not part of the common purpose of beating. Appeal of Lomur allowed; appeal of Enok dismissed.
Outcome
First appellant's conviction upheld; second appellant acquitted and discharged
Facts
A crowd of people set upon the deceased, Ekipor Akut, without sudden provocation and assaulted him. During the assault, the appellant Lomur held the deceased while others beat him with thin sticks. The appellant Enok then caught hold of the deceased and twisted his head until his face was looking backwards, dislocating his neck and causing death. Both appellants were convicted of murder in the Supreme Court of Kenya. The evidence showed that Lomur was holding the deceased for the purpose of enabling others to beat him, and that no one helped Enok twist the neck. The appellants were members of the Turkana tribe.
Issues
- Whether the appellant Lomur could be convicted of murder when he was holding the deceased while another appellant twisted the deceased's neck, absent proof that he was identified with that appellant's purpose to kill.
Orders
- Appeal of the first accused, Enok Achila, dismissed.
- Appeal of the second accused, Lomur s/o Lopua, allowed.
- Second accused directed to be set at liberty.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (1)
- Penal Code s.21(b)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.