CHARACTER
EVIDENCE.
This is a term used in law of evidence to describe any
testimony or document submitted 4 purpose of proving that a person acted in a
particular way on a particular way on a particular occasion based on character
or disposition of that person. Three factors typically determine admissibility
of c.e;
a) Purpose of character evidence-
b) Form which c.e is offered
c) Type of proceeding, civil or criminal in which c.e is
offered.
Character evidence is thus admissible and proves substantive
issues that arise in types of lawsuits. Its offered in three forms
a)
Opinion
b)
Reputation on evidence
c)
Evidence on specific instances of conduct.
Cases
on character evidence
David
kariukiwachira v r 20006 klr
Appellant charged with attempted murder
contrary to section 220(a) of the penal code.
Alleged that on24th June 2002 at Mwiki d
attempted unlawfully to cause death to Margret wambuikago by pouring on her
body sulphuric acid.
MagistrateMr.r.n. kimingi convicted appellant
4 offence of grievous harm contrary to sec 234 penal code. He sentenced him for
25 years imprisonment.
Accusedappealed. His grounds were as follows:
a)
Evidence against him from complainant was
unreliable.
b)
Evidence of witness 5 was mere here say thus
unreliable.
c)
Evidence of bad character given by complainant
and p.w.5 was not proved,
Facts
Complainant had lived with appellant as man and wife.
Relationship started in 1994 until1997 when appellant left for another woman.
In January 2000 they resumed their cohabitation and appellant would visit the
complainant in her house as he wished. The two later had problems and the
complainant reported this to the central police station.
Prior to the incident on issue, appellant had poured
paraffin to the complainant and threatened to set her ablaze. In another
incident, he had locked the plaintiff in her house and stayed with the keys for
a week trying to force her not to leave him. After the sulphur incident, she
was taken to Kenyatta hospital and was admitted for a year.
Held
The case was relevant since it was res getae. There was evidence
of actusreus on appellant on the issue. Complainant’s frame of mind was
inconsistent with a person with a person wishing to commit suicide as appellant
had claimed as she was actually moving her things out of the plaintiff’s house
to her parents. In contrast appellant had conducted himself as someone who was
insecure and had been violent prior to this incident.
Judge found complainants claims supported strongly by appellants
conduct of escaping from scene after the crime. He was sentenced to life imprisonment.
Mohamed Hassan
Osman v r (c.a) 2007
Appellant was appealing a death sentence imposed by a senior
magistrate in Mombasa in 1999 due to robbery with violence. He was mainly convicted
by principle witness no. 8 who knew the appellant prior to the accident. The
witness saw him come out of the bank immediately after the robbery brandishing
a pistol on his left hand and a bag full of money on his shoulder. On sighting
the witness, the appellant winked and told him “kauka” meaning keep silent. He
wore a black suit and a white shirt.
Appellant defended himself by saying that prior to the incident;
they had gotten into a fight with the witness who then had a grudge to settle
which was denied by the plaintiff. The witness when cross examined said that “he
knew the appellant very well and that he was a criminal and people feared him
because of that”
The judge said that “we agree that evidence of an accused
person s previous bad character is inadmissible unless the accused himself has
put his own character in issue. From the
record, it was the accused himself who asked the appellant who asked witness 8
questions which led to answers touching on his character. Magistrate should
have, but did not caution the appellant from asking such questions. It was
unjust for appellant to complain about the issue when it was on his own
volition thus was brought by himself”
;
As a student of law i found it informative
ReplyDelete