MUONWEM & ORS V. THE QUEEN

• Pages: 72-74

72



NIGERIAN SUPREME COURT CASES [1963] N.S.C.C.

MUONWEM & ORS V. THE QUEEN

5

PATRICK NWAFOR MUONWEM

& 4 ORS.

V

THE QUEEN

APPELLANTS

RESPONDENT

SUIT NO. FSC 43

1

/

1

962

10

FEDERAL SUPREME

BREI I,

TAYLOR,

COKER,

15th February, 1963.

COURT.

Ag. C.J.F.

F.J.

Ag. F.J.

15

Criminal Law - Murder - Criminal Code, s.8 - Criminal Law - Concerted assault

- Death of victim - Conviction of all accused for murder.



20

ISSUE:

1. Where one of several accused persons strangled a person, can the other

accused persons who joined him in assaulting the deceased, be convicted of

the murder?



25

FACTS:

The appellants in concert assaulted a police officer; beat him severely, one with

a baton and others with their hands; they threw his body, apparently lifeless, into

the river. The post mortem showed bruises on his head, chest and knee; the tra-

chea was severely bruised and the thyroid cartilage broken; the doctor's opinion



30

was that death was caused by Manual Strangulation.

The trial Judge applied section 8 of the Criminal Code, which provides that -

"When two or more persons form a common intention to prosecute an unlaw-

ful purpose in conjunction with one another, and in the prosecution of that pur-



35

pose an offence is committed of such a nature that its commission was a

probable consequence of the prosecution of such purpose, each of them is

deemed to have committed the offence."

The main argument on appeal was that if one strangled the deceased, the cir-

cumstances were not such as to make them all guilty. The evidence was that the

1st appellant called on the others to join him in the attack - which they did.

HELD:

Where a number of persons join in an unlawful assault it is a question of fact

in the particular case whether death was a probable consequence; here the cir-

cumstances indicated a concerted assault of such violence as to justify the find-

ing that there was a common intention at least to do grievous harm and that death

was a probable consequence of the prosecution of that intention.

[As to

collateral acts,

see 11 HALSBURY'S LAWS (4th Edition) 37 para 46.]

CASE REFERRED TO IN JUDGMENT:

1. R.

v. Ofor and Ofor

(1955) 15 W.A.C.A. 4.

40

45

50