Foster-Sutton, P. This was an application for leave to appeal on questions of fact, but we treated it as an appeal and assigned counsel to argue the case for the applicant.
The applicant was charged with having, on or about the 24th day of December, 1952, murdered one Abidemi Bello. The case came for trial before Gregg, J., and a jury. After a detailed and careful summing-up by the learned trial Judge the jury brought in a unanimous verdict of guilty of murder.
The facts of the case are fully set out in the summing-up. It is therefore sufficient to say that there was ample evidence to justify the jury coming to the conclusion that the deceased met his death as a result of a knife wound in the abdomen, inflicted by the applicant.
There was evidence, however, that the stabbing took place during a fight between the deceased and the applicant. The trial Judge correctly directed the jury as to the law relatinng to provocation, and it is clear from the summing-up that he held the view, which he strongly conveyed to the jury, that a verdict of manslaughter could properly be returned by them. In spite of this indication the jury, as I have already said, returned a unanimous verdict of guilty of murder.
Before we, as a Court of Appeal, would be justified in interfering with the verdict of the jury in this case we should have to be satisfied that the verdict is unreasonable or cannot be supported by the evidence. It is not enough that we might feel that we would have come to a different conclusion. If there was evidence to support the conviction for murder the application must be refused.
In our view it cannot be said that the verdict is unreasonable, nor that it cannot be supported by the evidence. In these circumstances we have no alternative but to refuse this application.
Application refused.