IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE GAMBIA HOLDEN AT BANJUL

Furthermore, it is contended on behalf of the 2 nd Accused that I be
wary of Exhibit ‘Q’ since it proceeded from a co-accused, and there is
no corroboration. I did not find a reply by the Prosecution to this
serious point of law raised by the defence. While I agree with the
defence that a confession of one accused implicating the other is
inadmissible against that other accused except he adopts it, I do not
agree that corroboration would safe that fundamental defect as
contended by Counsel.
See S.32(2) of the Evidence Act 1994. I reject part 2 of Exhibit Q
or Additional Statement of the 1 st Accused as it is designed only to
implicate the 2 nd Accused person.
In EDEM AKPAN AKPO & ANOR VS THE STATE (1994)1 ALL NLR 369
an accessory after the fact is said to be one helping the culprit to
escape punishment. I find no iota of evidence in Proof of this Count.
Exhibit ‘H’ cloth of the 2 nd Accused has no nexus to the commission
of the offence. This is more especially when it is realize that the
Exhibit ‘H’ was not even described in Exhibit ‘Q’. In the light of the
above, I find Count 2 not proved and the 2 nd Accused is acquitted
and discharged.
For the 1 st Accused I find evidence overwhelming that he
unintentionally killed Miss Amie Bah his girlfriend and find him guilty
of Manslaughter.