By Bruce Asemota
The Court of Appeal, presided over by Justices NS Wadda, BV Mahoney and A Saho-Ceesay last week overturned the death sentence imposed on one Bakary Jallow by the Basse high court to five years.
Jallow appealed against the decision of the Basse court on eight grounds.
Delivering judgment at the appeals court, Justice A Saho-Ceesay disclosed that the appellant was charged with causing the death of one Alieu Sanyang, on or about 24 July, 2020 by stabbing him with a screwdriver.
Justice Saho-Ceesay asserted that the facts leading to the appeal indicates that on that fateful day, the appellant, a driver, was operating a Mercedes Benz Sprinter vehicle enroute to Basse, and simultaneously, another vehicle, being driven by Lamin Sanyang, (father of the deceased) was proceeding in the same direction, transporting the deceased and other prosecution witnesses to Basse on their way to look for a wife for the deceased.
”It was indicated that during and after an overtaking maneuver, there were confrontation, the three occupants of Sanyang’s vehicle including the deceased, confronted the appellant, inquiring as to the reason for his alleged insults towards their father, and before they could react further, one of them stamped the appellant on his thigh, and the appellant fell on the ground, got up and in response stabbed the deceased with a screwdriver leading to his death,” Justice Saho-Ceesay said.
The judge went on to state that based on the presented evidence before the court, she is of the opinion that the appellant acted impulsively, influenced by provocation stemming from the stamp and that there was no sufficient evidence to conclusively establish that the appellant intended to kill or inflict grievous bodily harm.
The judge disclosed that in evaluating the circumstances surrounding the appellant’s action and determining that although they do not rise to the level of murder, primarily there is lack of malice afterthought.
She pointed out that the provocation experienced by the appellant undeniably diminished his capacity to maintain control, leading to a response that, although excessive and beyond what would typically be deemed reasonable, was not considered through any premeditated intent.
She disclosed that the appellant has already experienced a period of two years custody at Mile ll of which she took judicial notice and remained comparatively brief within the context of the judicial process.
She noted that the mandatory life imprisonment term, which currently represents a severe and unyielding punishment, should be reduced to a more rehabilitative period of five years.
Justice Saho-Ceesay explained that the decision to reduce the sentence was made after an in-depth examination of the various factors previously discussed with particular attention paid to the distinct circumstances surrounding the case.
