Wakilii

Rex v Lusota (Criminal Appeal No. 205 of 1940)

East African Court of Appeal · [1941] EACA 25 · 1941 Appeal Allowed — Acquittal Entered AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Criminal appeal from conviction for murder by the High Court of Uganda
Decision
Appellant acquitted and directed to be set at liberty

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

A statement admitting only kicking the deceased while attributing the fatal knife attack to a co-accused is not a confession of murder. A confession must admit the offence or substantially all facts constituting it; admission of a gravely incriminating fact alone is insufficient. A statement containing exculpatory matter negating the offence cannot be a confession. Such a statement cannot be used against a co-accused where it exculpates the maker and throws blame on the other person.

Outcome

Appellant acquitted and directed to be set at liberty

Facts

The appellant was convicted of murder. The prosecution case rested primarily on a statement the appellant made to Mr. Sharp. In that statement, the appellant admitted catching hold of the deceased's legs and kicking him. However, the statement also described how a co-accused named Nyanzio pushed and struck the deceased, causing him to fall, and how another co-accused named Semewo caught the deceased by the chin and mouth and cut his throat with a knife, causing death. The appellant's statement indicated he took the knife afterwards and threw it in the lake. The appellant appealed his conviction.

Issues

  1. Whether a statement admitting kicking the deceased but attributing the fatal act to a co-accused constitutes a confession of murder.
  2. Whether a statement that exculpates the maker and inculpates a co-accused can be used as evidence against that co-accused.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed.
  • Appellant acquitted.
  • Appellant directed to be set at liberty.

Rules and key headnotes

Evidence — Confession — Definition and Requirements
No statement that contains exculpatory matter can amount to a confession if the exculpatory statement is of some fact which if true would negative the offence alleged to be confessed. A confession must either admit in terms the offence or at any rate substantially all the facts which constitute the offence. An admission of a gravely incriminating fact is not of itself a confession.
Evidence — Confession — Use Against Co-Accused
A statement which exculpates the maker and throws the whole blame for causing death on another person cannot be considered as evidence against that other person on the basis that it is a confession by the maker of the statement.
Criminal Law — Murder — Elements of Confession
A statement admitting only that the accused kicked the deceased, while attributing the fatal act of cutting the throat with a knife to a co-accused, does not constitute a confession of murder as it does not admit substantially all the facts constituting the offence.

Legislation cited (1)

Cases cited (2)

  • Pakala Narayan Swami v The King-Emperor (18 Patna L.R. 234)
  • Rex v Ndambia wa Wanderu ([1937] 1 EACA 27)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

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

Rex v Lusota (Criminal Appeal No. 205 of 1940) [1941] EACA 25 (1 January 1941)
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.