Try asking the following...
JUDGMENT
JUDGEMENT
INTRODUCTION
The accused person was arraigned before this Court on 18th November 2023 charged with the
offence of Cruelty to Animals: Contrary to Section 303 of the Criminal Offences Act, 1960 (Act
PLEA OF THE ACCUSED PERSONS
The Accused pleaded not guilty after the charge as stated in the charge sheet had been read to him
in Mampruli language, the language of his choice.
BURDEN OF PROOF
It is settled in law that the burden of proof is heavily on the prosecution to prove its case beyond a
reasonable doubt against the accused in accordance with Article 19(1) and (2) (c) of the 1992
Constitution of the Republic of Ghana which stipulates that:
19. Fair Trial
“1. A person charged with a criminal offence shall be given a fair hearing within a reasonable time
by a court.
2. A person charged with a criminal offence shall
c. be presumed to be innocent until he is proved or has pleaded guilty;”
In the case of Woolmington v DPP [1935] UKHL, stating the judgement for a unanimous Court,
Viscount Sankey made his famous “Golden Thread” speech that:
“throughout the web of the English criminal law one golden thread is always to be seen, that is the
duty of the prosecution to prove the prisoner’s guilt subject to what I have already said as to the
defence of insanity and subject also to any statutory exceptions…No matter what the charge or where
the trial, the principle that the prosecution must prove the guilt of the prisoner is part of the common
law of England and no attempt to whittle it down can be entertained.”
Lord Denning J (as he then was) in the case of Miller v Minister of Pensions [1947]
2 All ER 372 at 373 in respect of proof beyond reasonable doubt stated that “It need not reach
certainty, but it must carry a high degree of probability. Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not mean proof
beyond the shadow of a doubt. The law would fail to protect the community if it admitted fanciful possibilities
to deflect the course of justice”.
He further stated in the same case that “If the evidence is so strong against a man as to leave only a remote
possibility in his favour which can be dismissed with the sentence ‘of course it is possible, but not in the least
probable, the case is proved beyond reasonable doubt”.
Sections 11(1), (2) and (3), 13(1) and (2) and 15 (1) of the Evidence Act, 1975 (N.R.C.D. 323) have
well settled the evidential and the persuasive burden that the law casts on Prosecution in a criminal
matter.