LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CRIMINAL LAW – Joint Trial – Acquittal of Co-Accused – Effect on Other Accused
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
Where the evidence led in respect of the defence of each of the appellants was unquestionably different from that led with regard to the 4th accused ... it is erroneous and misconceived for the appellants to have relied on the Supreme Court decision in Abudu v. State because the facts and circumstances of that case are incomparable with those of the instant case.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Achike, JSC, in Ebre & Ors v. State (2001) NLC-591999(SC) at p. 13; Paras C–E.
"Where the evidence led in respect of the defence of each of the appellants was unquestionably different from that led with regard to the 4th accused ... it is erroneous and misconceived for the appellants to have relied on the Supreme Court decision in Abudu v. State because the facts and circumstances of that case are incomparable with those of the instant case."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Acquittal of a co-accused does not automatically entitle other accused persons to acquittal. Each accused’s case is considered based on the evidence against them individually. Where the evidence against each accused differs, the outcome may differ. Precedents must be applied based on comparable facts. The principle prevents mechanical application of co-accused’s acquittal to others. The court examines the evidence specific to each accused. Different defences, different evidence, or different levels of participation may lead to different verdicts. Joint trial does not mean joint outcome. Each accused must be convicted or acquitted based on the evidence applicable to them. The principle respects individualised justice.