Patrick Olufemi Kolawole Ogedengbe V. The State (2014)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

MUSA DATTIJO MUHAMMAD, J.S.C.

This is an appeal against the judgment of the Lagos Division of the Court of Appeal, hereinafter referred to as the lower court, affirming the judgment of the Lagos State High Court, hereinafter referred to as the trial court, convicting the appellant and one Olatinwo Nurudeen Bright for the offences of conspiracy to commit murder and murder contrary to Sections 324 and 319 (1) respectively of the Criminal Code Law Cap 32 Laws of Lagos State. The judgment of the trial court was delivered on the 12th February, 2004 while that of the lower court being appealed against was delivered on 9th March, 2010.

The appeal is predicated on a Notice dated and filed on 6th January, 2012 containing seven grounds. The facts of the case that brought about the appeal are briefly stated herein under.

It is respondent’s case that sometime in September, 2009, the appellant, a driver to Navy Captain Yetunde Peters, who is now deceased, conspired with one Olatinwo Nurudeen Bright and murdered the said Navy Captain Yetunde Peters. Though there was no eye witness to the fact of the murder, it is asserted that the appellant and his co-conspirator, DW2, had murdered and wrapped the deceased in a rug, conveyed the corpse in the boot of her car and dumped same in the Adeniji Adele Area part of the Lagos Lagoon. Appellant’s conviction draws largely from Exhibit ‘C’, his confessional statement which admission in evidence the appellant stoutly objected to but failed.

The appellant contended that PW5, ASP Ajibola Osayemen, the investigating Police Officer, had forced him to write his statement. Having admitted the appellant’s statement in evidence and found it to be confessional, the trial court convicted the appellant for the two count charge. The instant appeal is sequel to the dismissal of appellant’s unmeritorious appeal by the lower court.

At the hearing of the appeal, parties adopted and relied on their respective briefs, earlier filed and exchanged, as their arguments for or against the appeal. The three issues the appellant considers to have arisen for determination of his appeal read:-

(a) Whether the trial and indeed the lower courts were both right in convicting and sentencing the appellant primarily on the uncorroborated and retracted confessional statement (EXHIBIT C) of the Appellant.

(b) Whether the prosecution proved the necessary ingredient(s) of the offences of conspiracy and murder against the appellant beyond reasonable doubt as required by the law.

(c) Whether the failure on the part of the prosecution to call witnesses to circumstantially link the Appellant with the murder of the deceased did not amount to a gross miscarriage of justice.

The two issues distilled by the respondent as calling for determination in the appeal are:-

(a) Whether the lower courts were right in relying on the confessional statement of the Appellant (Exhibit C) having been held to have been voluntarily made and admissible in evidence.

(b) Whether the Prosecution/Respondent proved the necessary ingredients of the offences of conspiracy and murder against the Appellant beyond reasonable doubt.

It is my considered view that the resolution of appellant’s first two issues will adequately and justly determine the appeal. After all, it is the quality of evidence rather than the number of witnesses the respondent called to prove its case that counts. The two issues the respondent formulated for the determination of the appeal, it needs to be pointed out, are not dissimilar to the two appellant’s issues preferred for the determination of the appeal.

Now, whether or not the statement the trial court relied upon to convict the appellant and the lower court further invoked to affirm the conviction is confessional is a question of fact.