THE REPUBLIC v. JONAS FORDWOUR

JUDGEMENT

The accused person herein is charged with Publication of obscene material contrary to

section 280 of the Criminal Offences Act 1960, (Act 29) and Emotional Abuse contrary to

section 1(b)(iv) of the Domestic Violence Act 732 of 2007.

He pleaded not guilty to both charges and so the prosecution assumed the burden to

prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.

FACTS OF THE CASE

The facts in support of the charges are that the complainant is a teacher and resides at

Safokrom while the accused is an evangelist and resides at Ketan a suburb of Sekondi.

The complainant and the accused person were in a relationship for about 7 years. The

relationship got sour for lack of trust and the complainant threatened to break up with

the accused. During the relationship, the complainant engaged the accused and he

created a Facebook account for her. As a result, the accused became familiar with her

username and password. On 25/04/2020 the complainant went to the accused and told

him she could no longer be in the relationship. The accused then demanded to have his

final sex or take monetary compensation from the complainant else he will defame her.

The complainant refused the demand of the accused and left. That same day the

accused logged into the complainant’s Facebook account and posted a secretly recorded

sexual intercourse he had with her in his room. The video went viral on social media

and persons who had access to viewing it started calling the complainant and

prompting her about the video. The accused also sent said video to the complainant via

WhatsApp. On 26/04/2020, the complainant reported the matter at the Sekondi Police

station and the accused was arrested. An investigation cautioned statement was

obtained from him and after investigations, the accused was charged with the offence

and put before this honourable court.

It is trite that in criminal prosecutions it is the prosecution that carries the burden to

prove the guilt of the accused person beyond reasonable doubt. The accused has no

such burden to prove his innocence. All he needs to do is to raise a doubt in the case of the prosecution. This is expressed in section 11(2) of the Evidence Act 1975, NRCD 323

which provides that:

“In a criminal action, the burden of producing evidence when it is on the

prosecution as to any fact which is essential to guilt requires the prosecution to

produce sufficient evidence so that on all the evidence a reasonable mind