JUDGMENT OF TAYLOR J.
This is a straightforward case and although in the view I take of the law, the facts in detail are not necessary for a decision, a very brief narration or summary of the said facts may be helpful in order to set the case in its proper perspective. Perhaps the best synopsis of the facts which accords with the evidence is what the senior state attorney, [p.93] Mr. Kaleo Bio, who presented the case, gave as facts to the court and it is as follows:
"The complainant is a legal practitioner. At about 10 a.m. on 11 April 1973, the first accused was driving a car from the Liberation Circle towards Kaneshie. The two other accused persons were in the car with him. The complainant was also in his car driving in the same direction. When the two cars reached an intersection they grazed each other. The first accused got out of his car and the complainant also got down. Both of them started blaming each other for the accident. In the course of the altercation that ensued the first accused hit the complainant. The complainant hit back. The second accused came out of the first accused's car and also hit the complainant. The two accused persons started beating the complainant. At this stage the third accused who is the watchman of the first and second accused persons joined them and they beat up the complainant mercilessly. They throw him on the ground and stamped on all over his body and made a complete mess of his face. They then threw him in the gutter and left him there. Severe injuries were inflicted on the complainant as a result of the incident."
There can be no doubt whatsoever that on these facts the complainant was assaulted and injured by the appellants and even though the complainant made a half-hearted attempt to fight back, the fight was so unequal and the beating and the injury inflicted so unnecessary that barring any legal impediments I am unable to see any legal defence which the appellants can put forward. In such a frame of mind it is difficult to be calm in the course of the argument. It is a bad case on the facts.
In their counsel, however, was a one time Attorney-General in the Government of our first Republic, Alhaji Kwaw Swanzy, an astute and brilliant advocate whose amazing industry and undaunted zeal brought to light certain hidden legal irregularities only discoverable by the application of a strange blend of a Sherlock Holmes' mentality with a curious appreciation of detail, a professional dedication to legality, and
