R vs. KWADWO MENSAH [1959]DLSC2045

Date	1959-09-28
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1959]DLSC2045

VAN LARE J.A. AS C.J.

GRANVILLE SHARP J.A.

OLLENNU J.

[1959]DLSC2045
																																						<div class="restriction-wrapper">
														<div class="container-lg">
															<div class="row">
																<div class="col-md-12 restricted-content">
																	<div class="restricted-content-img-wrapper">
																		<div class="lock-icon bounce-7">
																			<img class=""
																				src="https://www.dennislawgh.com/dl-assets/dl-images/lock-content.png"
																				alt="Subscription based content">
																		</div>
																	</div>
																	 
																		<a href="https://www.dennislawgh.com/login"
																		class="btn btn-primary btn-lg"
																		style="font-family: 'open sans'; text-transform: capitalize; border-radius: 8px"> 
																		Login to Read Full Case </a>
																	 
																	
																</div>
															</div>
														</div>
													</div>
													<main id="main" class="content" style="min-height: 60rem" ><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:
115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;mso-fareast-font-family:Times;
mso-bidi-font-family:Times;color:#548DD4;mso-themecolor:text2;mso-themetint:
153">R <o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:
115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;mso-fareast-font-family:Times;
mso-bidi-font-family:Times;color:#548DD4;mso-themecolor:text2;mso-themetint:
153">vs. <o:p></o:p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;line-height:
115%;font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;mso-fareast-font-family:Times;
mso-bidi-font-family:Times;color:#548DD4;mso-themecolor:text2;mso-themetint:
153">KWADWO MENSAH<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[COURT OF APPEAL]<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[1959] GLR 309<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in">

DATE:
28TH SEPTEMBER, 1959.<o:p></o:p>

</div>COUNSEL:&nbsp;&nbsp; <o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

<o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>

</div>CORAM:
<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

VAN LARE J.A. AS C.J., GRANVILLE SHARP
J.A. AND OLLENNU J.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF GRANVILLE SHARP J.A.<o:p></o:p>This
appellant was convicted by a jury before Simpson J., sitting at Accra on the
23rd April, 1959, for the murder of one Kwabena Ahunu at Okrakwadjo on the 14th
December, 1958.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
appellant raised as a defence the issue of the state of his mind at the
material time, and he accompanied this with a complete denial that he was even
in the village at the time when Ahunu was killed. As to this latter contention,
it is so contrary to the evidence that learned Counsel for the appellant made
no point of it at the hearing of the appeal before us. There can be no doubt
whatever that it was the appellant who killed Ahunu. The real contest between
the Crown and the appellant was upon the issue of his alleged insanity, and
upon this the facts placed before the jury were, apart from medical evidence,
as follows (his lordship stated the facts, and proceeded:—)<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
killing in this case appears to have been entirely motiveless. No witness knew
of any previous association or quarrel between the appellant and his victim.
The appellant in evidence denied ever knowing such a person. He was not a very
satisfactory witness, and though persisting in his denials as to his presence
in the village or as to his having killed anyone, he appeared to wish that his
questioning under cross-examination should be brought to an early end.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
picture is of a man who had apparently run amok. At the preliminary hearing
before the Magistrate the appellant was, as the learned Judge said later at the
trial, “suspected of being not entirely normal,” and it was this that persuaded
the learned Judge to adjourn the trial, so that the appellant might be examined
by a Psychiatrist. He was examined accordingly. The Psychiatrist, Dr. E. F.
Forster, who later gave evidence, said in examination-in-chief that after a
45-minute examination of the appellant he thought that he was then trying to
feign madness, in order to escape from responsibility for the crime with which
he was being charged. The witness then, after describing what are known to be
the general symptoms of various forms of insanity (including epilepsy) gave it
as his opinion that the appellant might have been temporarily insane at the
time of the attack upon the deceased. He said again when cross-examined,
“Having examined the accused, and heard his evidence, I would say it is
possible that he may have been mentally disturbed.” He added that a delusion
directed against a particular person does not change and become directed
against another person, and he concluded by ruling out the possibility of the
appellant’s being an epileptic.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>It is not
the function of a medical witness to decide the issue of insanity. Such an
issue is an issue of fact, and it is therefore for the jury to decide it after
consideration of all the circumstances disclosed to them, including the nature
of the evidence of experts (or an expert) in mental diseases. In our view,
however, it is of extreme importance that the jury should be fully, clearly and
carefully directed upon such an issue, so that they may be able to bring to its
consideration analytical, clear and impartial minds.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>With this
in view, the learned Judge read to the jur</main>