RICHARD KWABENA ASIAMAH v. REPUBLIC
November 4, 2020
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
- DOTSE, JSC (PRESIDING)
- PWAMANG, JSC
- TORKORNOO (MRS.), JSC
- HONYENUGA, JSC
- PROF. MENSA-BONSU (MRS.), JSC
Areas of Law
- Criminal Law and Procedure
- Evidence Law
November 4, 2020
SUPREME COURT
GHANA
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The Supreme Court of Ghana, per Torkornoo JSC, dismissed Richard Kwabena Asiamah’s further appeal from his conspiracy conviction arising out of a sophisticated land-sale fraud. The fraud was orchestrated around a walled plot at Airport Residential Area, leveraging Lands Commission records and a power of attorney wielded by Leticia Acquah, and personation by Ruby Wotordzor as “Theresah Enninful.” The complainant, Ernest Ofori Sarpong, caused UT Bank to pay $1,650,000 into the supposed owner’s account and $350,000 to Acquah; $650,000 was traced to Seth Kwapong. The Court affirmed that Act 29’s elements of conspiracy and false pretences were proved through corroborated testimonies and documentary exhibits (Exh. B and Exh. C), found Asiamah’s estate-agent defense uncorroborated and implausible, applied the Evidence Act’s burden-shifting rules after a prima facie case was made, and upheld the High Court and Court of Appeal decisions.
TORKORNOO (MRS.), JSC:-
In her book ‘Murder on the Orient Express’, Agatha Christie (1934) tells the story of how the famous fictional detective Hercule Poirot discovered that all of the twelve passengers on board of the Orient Express train, though at first glance unrelated, were co-conspirators in the plot to murder the thirteenth passenger.
In a case reminiscent of this fictional tale by the famous Agatha Christie, the appellant was one of four persons charged with two offences. Though only four people were charged, the facts of the case revealed several people involved in the transaction that led to the crime prosecuted, apart from several people in the shadows of the crime whose roles were not identified.
The appellant was charged with the offence of conspiracy to defraud by false pretences contrary to Section 23 (1) and 131 (1) of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960, Act 29. The particulars of offence was that in the month of January 2014, the Appellant acted together with the other charged persons with a common purpose to commit the crime of defrauding by false pretences. Two of the other persons he was charged with were charged with the offence of defrauding by false pretences contrary to Section 131 (1) of Act 29.
The facts as borne out by the charge sheet and the undisputed evidence from the trial are that one Leticia Acquah, (Acquah) the first accused person and an officer at the Lands Commission informed the complainant, Mr. Ernest Ofori Sarpong, that there was a parcel of land for sale at Airport Residential Area and she had a power of attorney to sell the land on behalf of the owner.
The owner was said to be one Theresa Duncan Enninful. Together with his brother, the complainant decided to purchase the land. Acquah gave what she presented to be a copy of the indenture on the land to the complainant and negotiated with him to sell the land to him at $2.7 million. A contract of sale was drawn up in the name of Theresa Duncan Enninful and Osei Kwame. Accounts were also opened with UT Bank, the bankers of the Complainant, for Acquah and the alleged owner of the land, Theresa Duncan Enninful, to enable payment.
The complainant visited the site of a plot of land at the Airport Residential Area, which was supposed to be the site described in the indenture, with Acquah. The land was walled and gated with a padlock. Acquah handed over the key to the padlock on the gate to the complainant, and he instructed his bankers UT Bank to pay $1,650,000 into