CaseLaw
Sowemimo V. State (2004) CLR 4(k) (SC)
Judgement delivered on April 23rd 2004
Brief
Facts
The prosecution in its case had stated that the 1st Appellant/Cross Respondent's son one Ayo Ola Sowemimo had stolen a sum of N310,000.00 belonging to his father and escaped. The deceased's connection with the theft of the money was that Otunba Sowemimo had said that Tunde Oredipe was given a sum of N80,000.00 out of the money stolen. In spite of the effort by one Omolara Samuel to warn Tunde of the presence of the Appellants who were looking for him, he Tunde voluntarily went to them to supposedly clear himself. Sometime later when no one could see Tunde again, Omolara Samuel, the parents of Tunde and his sister went to the house of the 1st Appellant where they saw Tunde with his hands and feet tied and was being beaten mercilessly by the Appellants with plastic hose-pipe, electric cable and horse-tail. Omolara said that he warned the 1st Appellant that Tunde was not of strong health and therefore if they continued to beat him, he Tunde might die. The parents of the deceased also corroborated the evidence of PW1 on how he was being mercilessly beaten and went further to state that in the morning following the beating which took place at about midnight previously, the body of Tunde was seen in the mortuary.
PW4, a medical practitioner who did the post mortem examination,. According to him, the examination revealed a well nourished, healthy looking male adult with multiple and extensive abrasions over his body but with no internal injury or bleeding. PW4 testified that his findings were consistent with physical violence and that the cause of death was neurogenic shock, due to traumatic external injury on the body resulting in the stoppage of the sympathetic nervous system. This according to him led to reduced cardiac output, hypotension and lack of oxygen in the heart and the brain. He also testified that the injuries could not have been self-inflicted.
The 2nd Appellant whose appeal is still on course apart from denying the accusation of being one of those who murdered the deceased set up a defence of alibi - claiming that he was never present on the date the act was perpetrated at Ilorin but rather he was at Ijebu-Ode. The 1st Appellant denied killing the deceased but rather said that it was the beating he had from the crowd who lynched him that was responsible for his death.
At the end of the trial, the learned trial Judge found the Appellants responsible for the murder of the deceased person and rejected the 2nd Appellant's defence of alibi. The Appellants were therefore convicted and sentenced to death by hanging. Being dissatisfied with the Judgment, they appealed to the Court of Appeal, which reduced the conviction of murder to that of manslaughter and sentenced the 1st Appellant to 10 years imprisonment with hard labour. The second and third Appellants were each sentenced to 7 years imprisonment with hard labour.
Dissatisfied, the Appellants further appealed to the Supreme Court while the Respondents Cross-appealed.