The deceased was a houseboy to the wife of appellant’s brother.

It seems to me that there are some issues that were common ground between the prosecution and the defence in the trial court. The first matter is that there was a fight or struggle between the appellant and the deceased. In his testimony the star prosecution witness, Isa Haruna, said at page 7 of the record:

Under cross-examination, the same witness said at page 8 of the record of proceedings,

The appellant in his statement to the Police, Exhibit II said of the encounter,

The other matter which was not contested was that it was the act of the appellant that caused the death of the deceased. Isa Haruna, in his testimony to which I made reference said further,

The appellant in Exhibit 2, his statement to the Police said,

The learned trial Chief Judge in his judgment stabbed as follows:-

The medical report which was tendered as Exhibit 1 at p. 38 of the record reads as follows:-

The only matter which appears to have been serious dispute between the prosecution and the defence was the question of the weapon used by the appellant –was it a knife or a bottle

Infact before he made his findings on this issue, the learned trial Chief Judge identified this controversy when in his judgment he said –

The question of what weapon was actually used assume some importance, first, because it may well affect one or two of the defences which were canvassed on behalf of the appellant. But second, and much more important, it could be relevant to the second issue for determination as postulated by appellant’s counsel i.e. whether in all the circumstances of this case, the case put up by the prosecution could be said to have been established without lingering doubt, or in more familiar parlance beyond all reasonable doubt?

The trial court believed the evidence of P.W. 3 as being consistent with the medical report and disbelieved the accused. The accused was convicted and sentenced to death. The Court of appeal also dismissed the appellant’s appeal.