Isaac Enabuzor v. The State (2022)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report – SUPREME COURT

AUGIE, J.S.C. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This appealcenters on the evaluation of the evidence adduced by the prosecutionat the trial of the appellant, who was the second accused, and oneHenry Ikponmwonsa. The two of them were arraigned before theEdo State High Court on a 2-count charge of conspiracy to murderand the murder, in fact, of one “William Ehigie”, who is thedeceased.

They both pleaded not guilty, and at their trial, the Prosecutioncalled nine witnesses, including two Investigating Police Officersfrom Iguelaba Police Station (PW3) and State C.I.D. (PW4). Twostatements made by the appellant at the two stations were admittedin evidence as exhibit C and exhibit E respectively after the trialcourt conducted two trial-within-trials because the defence counselobjected to their admissibility when the statements were beingtendered in evidence.

PW3, Bassey Etemta, also said that he took a photographerwith a video camera to the scene, and the photographs (andnegatives) of the body of the deceased were admitted in evidence asexhibits A, A1. Rufus Ekosulele, the said Photographer, testified asPW5. He identified exhibits A & A1, and the video recording of theappellant’s confession that was played in open court was admittedthrough him as exhibit G.

The gun used in killing the deceased was admitted as exhibit F,and a report of the post-mortem carried out on the deceased’s body,was admitted as exhibit H through PW7, John Owie, a MedicalDoctor. In his judgment, the learned trial Judge, Imadebelo, J.,observed that:

Exhibits B & D and exhibits C & E, confessionalstatements of 1st and 2nd accused persons were tested.The confessional statements were corroborated by theevidence led by prosecution witness and exhibit G, thevideo recording. The 1st and 2nd accused persons hadthe opportunity to commit the crime. The confessionalstatements are consistent with facts, which have beenascertained and have been proven. The facts containedtherein so far as can be tested are true.

In the said judgment delivered on 7/4/2014, he concluded asfollows:

Having considered the totality of the evidence adduced before me, I have come to the irresistible conclusion that the 1st and 2nd accused persons murdered the deceasedin cold blood. I find as fact that William Ehigie [m]is dead and that he died from injuries caused by theintentional and voluntary act of the 1st and 2nd accusedpersons. I am satisfied that the 1st and 2nd accusedpersons deliberately and intentionally murdered thedeceased with a gun, exhibit F. In the result, arisingfrom the foregoing analysis, I hold that the prosecutionhas proved the guilt of the 1st and 2nd accused personsbeyond reasonable doubt, In the circumstances, I findthe 1st accused person, Henry Ikpomwonsa and the2nd accused person, Isaac Enabuzor (m), guilty of themurder of William Ehigie and I hereby convictaccordingly.

The appellant was sentenced to death, and he filed an appeal atthe Court of Appeal, wherein he complained inter alia that the trialcourt convicted him of the said offences – “against the weight ofevidence”, but in its Judgment delivered on 6/6/2017, the Court ofAppeal held –

Upon a thorough examination of the evidence before thetrial court and the judgment of the trial court, I find nobasis to disturb the decision of the trial court because thecrimes leveled against the appellant were proved beyondreasonable doubt; the trial court properly evaluated theevidence before it and arrived at the right conclusions. Inthis case, the appellant’s confessional statement – exhibit.C is sufficient to ground the appellant’s conviction, asdemonstrated in the judgment of the trial court and inthis judgment. A confessional statement, which is direct,positive, and voluntary, as exhibit C, is sufficient to sustaina conviction – – The voluntary confessional statement wascorroborated by other pieces of evidence tendered by therespondent. The appeal, therefore, lacks merit and it ishereby dismissed. The judgment of the trial court in chargeNo. HAB/9C/2008, on 07/04/2014, is hereby affirmed.

Further aggrieved, the appellant filed a notice of appeal in thiscourt, which contains two grounds of appeal, and he formulated asole issue for determination in his brief of argument –

“whether Court of Appeal was right in holding that thetotality of the evidence adduced by the Prosecutionproved the [appellant’s] guilt beyond reasonable doubt”.

The respondent also formulated one issue for determination;that is:

Whether the learned Justices of the Court of Appealwere right in affirming the decision of the trial courtthat the prosecution proved the offences of conspiracyto murder and murder against the appellant beyondreasonable doubt.