Rex v Mawingu (Cr. App. No. 26-1936.)
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 quashed a rape conviction where the trial judge treated unsworn testimony of two boys aged ten and six as corroborative of the complainant. Following Solu wa Totu, the court held that witnesses who themselves require corroboration cannot corroborate another witness. The complainant's distress and complaint showed consistency only, not corroboration. Presence of semen indicated sexual intercourse but did not rebut the defence of consent.
Outcome
Appellant acquitted and discharged
Facts
The appellant was convicted of rape at trial. The trial judge relied on the evidence of the complainant and treated the unsworn testimony of two boys, aged ten and six, as corroborative of her account. The complainant was found crying and made a complaint. Medical evidence showed the presence of semen on her person. The appellant raised a defence of consent. The appellant was absent and unrepresented on appeal.
Issues
- Whether the unsworn testimony of two children of tender years could corroborate the complainant's evidence in a rape prosecution.
- Whether there was sufficient corroborated evidence to sustain a conviction for rape.
Orders
- Conviction quashed.
- Appellant acquitted.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (1)
- Penal Code s.128
Cases cited (2)
- Solu wa Totu v Rex (1934 EACA 183)
- Rex v Southern (22 Cr. App. R. 6)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.