Rex v Samo (Criminal Appeal No. 162 of 1948)
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
Where a trial Judge comes to a contrary finding on facts to the unanimous opinion of assessors, it is good practice for the Judge to state in the judgment reasons for the disagreement. The Judge is under no obligation to accept the assessors' opinions and bears sole responsibility for the factual findings. The appeal was dismissed as the conviction was supported by evidence the trial Judge was entitled to accept.
Outcome
Conviction and sentence upheld
Facts
The appellant was convicted of unlawfully attempting to strike one Kiguna with an arrow with intent to maim, disfigure, disable, do grievous harm, or resist lawful arrest. He was sentenced to three years' imprisonment with hard labour. At trial, two assessors held that the appellant did not fire the arrow. The trial Judge accepted the prosecution's consistent evidence and rejected the defence evidence after observing the witnesses' demeanour. The Judge made no reference in the judgment to the assessors' contrary opinions.
Issues
- Whether the trial Judge was required to discuss the opinions of Assessors when reaching a contrary finding on the facts.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (1)
- Tanganyika Penal Code s.222(2)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.