|
Citation
|
Judgment date
|
| September 2024 |
|
|
Accused acquitted: material variance in charged location and insufficient evidence of possession/control defeated prosecution.
Criminal law — narcotics trafficking — variance between information and evidence as to place of offence — material discrepancy fatal if unamended; proof of trafficking requires evidence of possession, control or other act; adverse inference where prosecution omits available key witnesses or material exhibits (CCTV, keys).
|
20 September 2024 |
|
Court convicted accused of conspiracy and participation in terrorist meetings but acquitted them of recruitment and financing counts.
Criminal law – Terrorism offences – conspiracy to commit terrorist acts; participation in meetings relating to terrorism. Evidence – Admissibility and weight of cautioned statements; trial‑within‑trial procedure and corroboration by independent witnesses. Evidence – Insufficiency of proof for recruitment and terrorist financing where no traceable transactions or weapons recovered. Procedure – Alibi defence must be notified; failure to cross‑examine weakens defence case. Sentencing – concurrent lengthy terms with credit for pre‑trial detention; juvenile treated by probation.
|
20 September 2024 |
|
Chemist's report and adequate chain of custody proved the accused's trafficking; seeds excluded so second count fails.
Drug offences – trafficking in cannabis sativa – Gov’t chemist report admissible and conclusive under statute – chain of custody assessed and upheld despite personnel change – seeds excluded from definition of cannabis; only leaves sustain conviction – evidential weight of police testimony.
|
13 September 2024 |
|
Acquittal where prosecution failed to prove forgery, uttering, money laundering and organised crime due to evidentiary gaps.
Criminal law – Forgery: proof requires showing a false document made with intent to defraud; contradictions and missing documentary proof fatally undermine such charges; Uttering false documents depends on proved falsity; Money laundering convictions require a proved predicate offence and proof of illicit proceeds; Failure to call material witnesses and to produce key documents permits adverse inferences; Prosecutorial discretion may attract criticism where charging decisions create apparent double standards; Caution when convicting on co-accused/interest-driven testimony.
|
13 September 2024 |
|
|
11 September 2024 |
|
Court granted POCA-based restraint orders over cash and vehicle as tainted proceeds and instrumentality of alleged illegal mineral trading.
Proceeds of Crime Act — s38(1) restraint orders; s39(3) pre-conviction conditions (reasonable grounds and tainted property); alleged proceeds and instrumentalities of illegal mineral trading; interim preservation — deposit into Special Interim Management Account; prohibition on transfer and custody of vehicle.
|
2 September 2024 |