Recent Posts

6/recent/ticker-posts

Halidi s/o Athumani v. R., Crim. App. 106-D-67; 12/4/67; Biron, J.



Halidi s/o Athumani v. R., Crim. App. 106-D-67; 12/4/67; Biron, J.

Accused was convicted, along with another, of stealing. Complainant allegedly saw the co-accused standing outside her hut with a bundle of her clothing, and saw the accused inside the hut. Both men ran off, but the co-accused was caught. Accused passed by shortly afterward, and complainant identified him as the second thief. The co-accused, who did not appeal his conviction, stated that the accused had told him that the hut belonged to his brother-in law, and that it would be proper to take the clothing.

Held: (1) The statement of one accused which implicates another is admissible only if it incriminates the speaker as well. Where, as here, the statement is self-exculpatory, it cannot be admitted. (2) The conviction, resting otherwise on complainant unreliable identification of accused, was quashed.

Post a Comment

0 Comments