Jumanne Juma v. R., (P. C) Crim. App. 206-M-68, 17/6/68. Seaton J.
Accused were convicted of being in possession of moshi [Cap. 77, s. 36(2)]. Police witnesses established that a search had uncovered implements and vessels associated with moshi, and also established the arrest, the Identification of accused and “ all the other requisites to sustain a conviction ….. except what the liquor was.”
Held: The prosecution bears the burden of showing that the substance found is in fact moshi. “Attached to every Police Station in this country are usually one or two officers who, by virtue of their experience, are qualified to identify this liquor by sight and smell, it not by taste. They should so state when called to give evidence for the prosecution. “ Convictions quashed.
%20(10).png)
%20(28).png)
 Crim. App. 206-M-68, 17/6/68. Seaton J.){kind=link}
0 Comments
PLACE YOUR COMMENT HERE
WARNING: DO NOT USE ABUSIVE LANGUAGE BECAUSE IT IS AGAINST THE LAW.
THE COMMENTS OF OUR READERS IS NOT OUR RESPONSIBILITY.