VAN LARE J.A.
At the close of the arguments on the 27th February last, we allowed this appeal. We now give our reasons.
The appellant was convicted by Murphy J., sitting with assessors at Assizes holden at Kumasi, of the offence of manslaughter, and was sentenced to eighteen months imprisonment with hard labour. At the trial, the sole defence set up by the appellant was that, in inflicting the wounds that caused the death of the deceased, he acted in self-defence.
Each of the three assessors accepted the defence and expressed the opinion that the prisoner was not guilty. The learned trial-Judge, however, did not conform with the opinion of the assessors, as he was of the opinion that the appellant’s “actions were a form of revenge, and went a great deal farther than was necessary in self-defence, having regard to the fact that the deceased was on the ground, and to the number of wounds inflicted.”
As opposed to provocation (which is a plea in mitigation) self-defence is a plea of justifi…