REPUBLIC vs. KORLE GONNO DISTRICT MAGISTRATE GRADE I; EX PARTE AMPOMAH [1992]DLSC853

Date	1992-07-29
Suit No.
Citation No.	[1992]DLSC853

ARCHER CJ JSC

WUAKU JSC

AIKINS JSC

BAMFORD-ADDO JSC

CHARLES HAYFRON-BENJAMIN JSC

NANA AKUFO-ADDO (WITH HIM AFARI-YEBOAH) FOR THE APPELLANT.

SAM BADDOO ACTING DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS FOR THE REPUBLIC.

[1992]DLSC853
																																						<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:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">REPUBLIC<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:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">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:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;mso-bidi-font-family:&quot;Book Antiqua&quot;;
color:#00B0F0">KORLE GONNO DISTRICT MAGISTRATE GRADE I; EX PARTE AMPOMAH<o:p></o:p>[SUPREME COURT, ACCRA]<o:p></o:p>[1993-94] 2 GLR 220<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">

</div>COUNSEL:<o:p></o:p>NANA AKUFO-ADDO (WITH HIM AFARI-YEBOAH) FOR THE APPELLANT.<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">

SAM BADDOO, ACTING DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS, FOR THE
REPUBLIC. <o:p></o:p>

ARCHER CJ, WUAKU, AIKINS, BAMFORD-ADDO AND CHARLES
HAYFRON-BENJAMIN JJSC<o:p></o:p>

</div>JUDGMENT OF ARCHER CJ<o:p></o:p>The late Emmanuel Atta Ampomah was known, before his death as a
hypertensive and diabetic patient for over two decades and had been on
treatment at various hospitals for both ailments. His state of health was known
to his family and his widow, Madam Flora Ampomah, who was married to the
deceased for 30 years. On 29 January 1990 the deceased, upon admission at the
Korle Bu Teaching Hospital, died. On the same day the body was sent to the
mortuary and upon information given by a Dr Boateng, a friend of the family, a
post-mortem examination was conducted by the pathologist-in-charge of the
mortuary, Dr Simmons, who did a partial post-mortem by opening the head of the
corpse. In his police statement, Dr Simmons stated that:<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt;
margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;mso-pagination:none;border:none;mso-padding-alt:
31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">“On opening the skull I found ‘Bilateral intracerebral haemorrhage
with subarachnoid extension’ which was also seen by Dr Boateng, the technician
who assisted me and the medical students present. This finding was consistent
with hypertensive heart disease.”<o:p></o:p>One would have thought that this finding was medically and
clinically correct and the cause of death had been ascertained. However, on 9
February 1990 a brother of the deceased met Dr Simmons and expressed
dissatisfaction with the latter’s findings because he, the brother, suspected a
foul play. Dr Simmons therefore suggested a second post-mortem examination
which was conducted by Dr Felix Dodu, consultant forensic pathologist, on 14
February 1990. Dr Dodu found no marks of violence. He examined the rest of the
body, namely the heart, the pancreas, the liver, the kidneys and the partially
digested food in the stomach. In addition, no common poison was detected in
samples taken from the body.<o:p></o:p>Dr Dodu could not examine the brain tissue because it had been
removed by the earlier post-mortem examination conducted by Dr Simmons. Dr Dodu
concluded that the deceased suffered hypertensive heart disease and concluded
that “the immediate cause of death was ‘undetermined.”’ It was this finding by
Dr Dodu which generated the various steps to hold a coroner’s inquest on 10 May
1992 at the District Court Grade I, Korle Gonno, Accra.<o:p></o:p>At the commencement of the proceedings the district magistrate, as
an ex officio coroner, stated as follows: “I have carefully examined the docket
in respect of the case of: Re Emmanuel Atta Ampomah (Decd) and I have come to
the conclusion that the inquest should be held.” At this stage the coroner had
the police docket with all the reports of police investigations and the two
post-mortem reports from Dr Simmons and Dr Dodu. Dr Simmons’ report covered a
partial post-mortem of the skull, that is the brain. Whereas Dr Dodu’s report
covered the rest of the body only; but he had no opportunity to examine the
brain tissue because it had been removed and according to Dr Simmons, had been,
as usual, flushed away to prevent pungent smells and stench.<o:p></o:p>Controversy had arisen over this case simply because Dr Dodu had
stated the cause of death was “undetermined.” It is clear that what the
consultant pathologist was saying was that he could not determine the cause of
death from the rest of the body which he examined. If the expression he used is
confined to the rest of the body, there would appear to be no conflict between
his report and that of Dr Simmons who examined the skull and found the cause of
death in the brain. Both reports were available to the coroner before he
assembled the coroner’s court; and if he had indeed carefully examined the
docket, he would have concluded that an inquest was not necessary. The
impression the coroner created was that he did not examine the docket
carefully.<o:p></o:p>Under section 5(1) of the Coroners Act, 1960 (Act 18) the coroner
shall hold as soon as practicable an inquiry under the Act touching the death
of a person when he has reasonable cause to suspect that that person has died:<o:p></o:p><p class="MsoNormalCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left:.75in;mso-add-space:auto;
text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;mso-pagination:none;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo11;
border:none;mso-padding-alt:31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt 31.0pt;mso-border-shadow:yes">(a)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; “a violent or </main>