R. v. Nyarangi Crim. Case 9- D-70; 25/11/70; Georges, C. J.

 

R. v. Nyarangi Crim. Case 9- D-70; 25/11/70; Georges, C. J.

The accused was charged with causing death by dangerous driving c/s 44A of the Traffic Ordinance Cap. 168. In reply to the charge the accused was recorded as saying “I plead quality”. He had earlier state “It was an accident”. The prosecutor stated the facts of the case but there was nothing on the record to show that the accused accepted them as true. He was convicted and the case was forwarded to the High Court for sentencing.

            Held: (1) “One ought to examine with much care a plea of “guilty” to a charge of causing death by dangerous driving. The accused may intend to do no more than to admit that he was responsible for the accident which caused the death. It is most important to obtain the admission of facts which constitute the offence.” (2) “In her remarks the Magistrate stated as follows: ‘Further, in this case the accused collided with a stationary vehicle TDM 976. Such act cannot be explained but for sheer negligence on the part of the accused’. This seems to import into the Criminal Law the doctrine of resuipsa loquitur. This would clearly be a mistake. The Republic should state the specific acts of negligence on which it depends to establish the dangerous character of the driving.” (3) Case remitted to the District Court for accused to plead afresh.