THE STATE v. TENE DAGARTI

JUDGMENT OF VAN LARE J.S.C.

Van Lare J.S.C. delivered the judgment of the court. [His lordship referred to the facts and continued:] The prisoner has appealed to this court against his conviction and the substance of the arguments addressed before us was whether there was an intent to kill in support of the conviction for murder, the main point alleged being that the act of the prisoner can in the circumstances amount to manslaughter only. An attempt was made to introduce the question of provocation which we dismissed in the absence of what our law regards as extenuating circumstances and matters which [p.226] in law amount to such provocation as to reduce murder to manslaughter. Our attention was attracted by section 251(4) of Cap. 91, whereby the law regards.

"a violent assault and battery committed in view or presence of the accused person upon his or her wife, husband, child, or parent, or upon any other person being in the presence and in the care or charge of the accused person"

as a matter which may amount to an extreme provocation to reduce the offence of murder to manslaughter. As we were satisfied that the violent assault and battery was not committed by the deceased upon one belonging to the class of persons named in the section, and further that as the assault and battery in question was not committed in the presence of the prisoner the section would not avail him to reduce his offence to one of manslaughter.

It was also strongly submitted that on the case as a whole it cannot be safely concluded that by his act the prisoner had a murderous intent or intentionally caused the death of the deceased, although it cannot be denied that he caused the death of the deceased. Such argument leads to a consideration of the provisions of the law relating to intent.

The question put forward was that, as in this case the prisoner was filled not necessarily with intent to revenge death but with intent to cause grievous bodily harm only, although death ensued, was it murder or manslaughter? We are of opinion that on the authorities the answer to the question is that it is murder and not manslaughter. The test is an objective one, and not a subjective one; that is, what a reasonable man would contemplate as the probable result of his acts, and not what the prisoner in fact contemplated as the probable result. The point is what would a reasonable man contemplate to be probable result if he struck a person on the side of the chest with a cudgel. This que