Res gestae
This means facts forming part of a transaction. In law a transaction is defined as a combination of facts which are connected to each other in such a way that they may be referred to by way of a single word e.g. tort, crime, wrong, contract or in such a way that they may be said to constitute the fact which is under enquiry by the court[1]. From the fact of the case where at inception, the appellant and accomplice shot one Ouma. After Caroline raising an alarm they were pursued by people and one constable police Kennedy on duty ordered them to stop, they defied the order and went ahead to confront a motorist by the name Rashid and pulled him out of the car, resulted to a fire exchange where by the man behind the steer wheel was fatally injured and the appellant shot on the buttock and later fell down. From the unfolding events, the third man fired back and injured one of the people who were pursuing them. The above series of events prove existence of the doctrine of res gestae because one can see how the transaction can be connected from one scenario to the other without any lapse of time.
In the case of R v PremjiKurji[2] where Ss.6 & 7 and the issue of Res Gestae is discussed in relation to a charge of murder, the deceased had been killed with a dagger and evidence was admitted at the trial of the fact that just prior to the death of the deceased, the accused person had assaulted the deceased’s brother with a dagger and had uttered threats against the deceased.
On appeal, the accused person argued that this was evidence of the commission of a separate offence and therefore inadmissible. The court rejected his argument and upheld the decision of the Lower Court.
The Court said inter alia; “If this wounding had taken place in a different part of Zanzibar and were not connected with murder the objection would be well founded but here the two occurrences are so closely connected that the wounding part the deceased’s brother must be regarded as part of the Res Gestae on the trial of the appellant for the murder of the deceased.”
Facts, which fall in this relationship, will be deemed to be relevant, despite the fact that that may not have been relevant if they stood on their own. Res Gestae is statutorily provided forunder section 6 and it provides that facts which form part of Res Gestae will be relevant and admissible despite the fact that they may have occurred at a place or at a time different from the place or time of occurrence in issue.
Under section 6 facts which may be admissible as part of the Res Gestae may be categorized into three
- Facts that are contemporaneous to the fact in issue.
- Facts that explain the fact in issue.
- Facts that have been admitted. By Caroline picking out the appellant positively after admitting or testifying the appellant was in did the one left behind when the other two entered the ouma’s office it proves to be relevant and admissible.
In determining whether a fact is admissible as forming part of Res Gestae the court will consider the lapse in time between the fact in issue and the other fact which is said to be part of Res Gestae, if the time lapse is so great then the court may reject that fact as being inadmissible.
In conclusion, it’s my opinion that the matter was resolved in favour of the respondent because as discussed above all the evidence placed channels liability towards the appellant from the beginning of the matter to the identification where by all the witnesses who testified positively identifies the appellant as the core accused. In addition the burden of proof as place in the question links all the facts and evidence to the appellant therefore the chances of escaping liability are equivalent to almost nil.
