LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CRIMINAL LAW – Defence of Accident – Burden on Accused Displaced by Clear Evidence of Intent
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
The defence of accidental discharge is rebutted by clear evidence that the shooting was willed, deliberate, and intentional. The trial court's findings of fact on this issue are binding on appeal.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Iguh, JSC, in Oguonzee v. State (1998) NLC-1311997(SC) at pp. 7–8; Paras B–D.
"The appellant’s defence of accidental discharge was carefully considered by both courts below and rejected on very clear evidence before the court… there was no doubt whatever from the findings of fact of the learned trial Judge as affirmed by the court below that the shooting of the deceased by the appellant was willed, deliberate and intentional."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
The defence of accident is rebutted by evidence of intent. The accused bears the evidential burden of raising accident. The prosecution must prove intent. The principle applies to all criminal cases. The trial court’s findings on intent are binding unless perverse. The court will examine the circumstances of the shooting. The rule prevents the use of accident as a sham defence. The accused’s conduct before and after the act is relevant. The principle protects against unjustified acquittals.
