ENNIN vs. THE REPUBLIC [1976]DLCA384

Date	1976-02-17
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1976]DLCA384

APALOO J.A

ARCHER J.A

FRANCOIS J.A.

DR. A. SAWYERR FOR THE APPELLANT.

D. K. AFREH CHIEF STATE ATTORNEY FOR THE REPUBLIC.

[1976]DLCA384
																																						<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" >ENNIN <o:p></o:p>vs. <o:p></o:p>THE REPUBLIC<o:p></o:p>&nbsp;[COURT
OF APPEAL, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>[1976] 1 GLR 326<o:p></o:p><div style="mso-element:para-border-div;border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.5pt;
padding:0in 0in 0in 0in">

DATE:
17 FEBRUARY, 1976.<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">

DR. A. SAWYERR FOR THE APPELLANT.<o:p></o:p>

D. K. AFREH, CHIEF STATE ATTORNEY, FOR THE
REPUBLIC.<o:p></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">

APALOO, ARCHER AND FRANCOIS JJ.A.<o:p></o:p>

</div><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>JUDGMENT OF APALOO J. A.<o:p></o:p>Apaloo J.
A. delivered the judgment of the court. On 30 April 1974, the appellant was
convicted by the High Court presided over by Azu Crabbe C.J. sitting with a
jury of the murder of his wife Stella Appah and was sentenced to death. The
appellant is a young man in his early twenties. He has some talent for music.
Some time in 1971, his musical talent was noticed by a Mr. P.S.K. Ampadu. The
latter is the leader of a band called the African Brothers International Band.
He is married to a lady by the name of Paulina Ampadu. The band leader employed
the appellant as a vocalist in his band and in time, he became a drummer.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>The
evidence shows that Ampadu took a liking to the appellant and in addition to
giving him employment, accommodated him in his own house. It seems that while
living with his employer, the appellant met and fell in love with Mrs. Ampadu’s
younger sister Stella. She was in 1972 aged 17 years and had only just left
school. Stella seemed to have reciprocated the appellant’s attentions and both
were desirous of getting married. The appellant made his intentions known to
Stella’s father, a Mr. E.K. Appah and asked for her hand in marriage. He was
unwilling, presumably because Stella was much too young and also because Stella
had told him she wanted to further her education. As his mind misgave him about
the wisdom of the marriage, he temporised and said he would think it over.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>In view
of the cruel fate that befell Stella a year afterwards, and judging by
hindsight, Mr. Appah’s initial reluctance was right and he should have denied
his consent to the marriage. Although Stella was herself interested in the
union, the evidence as a whole shows that she would not have turned against her
father’s wishes on this issue. The appellant’s employer, Mr. Ampadu, however
spoke out for the appellant and assured Stella’s father of the appellant’s
suitability as a prospective son-in-law. The appellant himself said Mr. Ampadu
“guaranteed the marriage.” He, in course of time, withdrew his “guarantee” and
the sequel of it is the sad story of Stella’s end.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Some time
in 1973, there were some monetary differences between Ampadu and the appellant.
The appellant himself said he defrauded his master. The latter reacted to this
quite firmly. Not only did he dispense with the appellant’s services, but he
gave him in custody to the police. Ampadu also went to Stella’s father and
withdrew any further support of the union between the appellant and Stella.
Although there was no formal divorce, both the appellant and Stella considered
the marriage was almost at an end. Stella seemed to have been indifferent to
this state of affairs but not the appellant. He took it deeply to heart. When
the appellant regained his liberty from police custody, he seemed to have made
contact with his wife. He said, and one can only have his word for it, Stella
admitted an act of infidelity to him. He also felt that Stella’s love for him
had waned. They had, of course, ceased to share the same roof. Stella appears
to have continued to live with her sister, Mrs. Ampadu.<o:p></o:p><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p>Some time
in the afternoon of 26 October, 1973, the appellant seems to have persuaded
Stella to go with him to a town called Mankessim. It is the former’s home-town.
The object of the trip, according to the appellant, was for them to be separated
according to the rites of a juju which had joined them. The appellant said
although Stella was absent when the “fetish joinder” took place, it was
necessary for her to be present for the fetish to disjoin them inasmuch as they
had virtually been divorced. Otherwise, evil would befall her. Stella seems to
have believed this story but the appellant later confessed it to be false.<o:p></o:p>