Cool Your Temper And Avoid Murder Charge
Apr 02, 2003
Ignorance of the law is no defence — this is one of the most popular principles of law commonly referred to. In the same reference, everybody in Uganda knows that murder or call it intentionally killing a person, is an offense punishable by only death.
Ignorance of the law is no defence — this is one of the most popular principles of law commonly referred to. In the same reference, everybody in Uganda knows that murder or call it intentionally killing a person, is an offense punishable by only death. It is therefore unlikely that a person will plead ignorance of the law to the charge of murder since no one can believe such a person in the first place.
According to our law (Sec.183 of the Penal Code Act), any person who with malice aforethought causes the death of another person by an unlawful act or omission is guilty of murder.
The main element here is to prove the offense of murder is as a result of malice forethought. This refers to the ill intention to cause death of another person— the knowledge that your act or omission was likely or capable of causing death.
However, the outright intended murderous acts are not centre of concern today. My concern is whether you are aware that you can be charged with murder by an act or omission, which you do, and does not cause immediate death, but causes death at a later date.
In my practice as a police officer, I have seen many people being charged with murder of even their loved ones, on whom they had inflicted injuries and such persons died of those injuries at a later date.
According to sec.189 of the Penal Code Act, “a person is deemed to have
caused death of another person, although his act is not the immediate or sole cause of death in any of the following cases:
(a) If he/she inflicts bodily injury on another person in consequence of which that person undergoes surgical or medical treatment which causes death. In this case, it is immaterial whether the treatment was proper or mistaken, if it was employed in good faith and with common knowledge and skill.
(b) If he/she inflicts bodily injury to another which would not have caused death if, the injured person had submitted to proper surgical or medical treatment or had observed proper precautions as to his/her mode of living.
(c) If by actual or threatened violence he/she causes such other person to perform an act which causes the death of such person, such act being a means of avoiding such violence which in the circumstances would appear natural to the person whose death it so caused.
(d) If by any act or omission, he/she hastened the death of a person suffering under any disease or injury, which apart from such act or omission would have caused death.â€
In other words, if a person injures another, and the injury causes death of
the other person within a period of one year and one day (sec. 191 of the Penal Code Act) then the injuring person is deemed to have caused the death of the injured person.
Sub section (c) suggests that if John threatens violence to Peter and in the process of avoiding the violence Peter gets injured say by knocking his head on to a wall, and the injury causes Peter’s death, then John will be deemed to have caused Peter’s death.
These two scenarios are major in making people wail as they are dragged to courts of law to answer murder charges. They usually plead they did not intend to kill the person in question but by the time they prove their innocence, (if at all they do), they will have spent a few years in jail.
The perfect solution therefore, is to avoid acts that may cause injury to
others. Otherwise when John hits Peter on the head in January, resulting into an injury that will cause Peter’s death in November. John will be charged with murder and may end up on the gallows the next year. Ends
According to our law (Sec.183 of the Penal Code Act), any person who with malice aforethought causes the death of another person by an unlawful act or omission is guilty of murder.
The main element here is to prove the offense of murder is as a result of malice forethought. This refers to the ill intention to cause death of another person— the knowledge that your act or omission was likely or capable of causing death.
However, the outright intended murderous acts are not centre of concern today. My concern is whether you are aware that you can be charged with murder by an act or omission, which you do, and does not cause immediate death, but causes death at a later date.
In my practice as a police officer, I have seen many people being charged with murder of even their loved ones, on whom they had inflicted injuries and such persons died of those injuries at a later date.
According to sec.189 of the Penal Code Act, “a person is deemed to have
caused death of another person, although his act is not the immediate or sole cause of death in any of the following cases:
(a) If he/she inflicts bodily injury on another person in consequence of which that person undergoes surgical or medical treatment which causes death. In this case, it is immaterial whether the treatment was proper or mistaken, if it was employed in good faith and with common knowledge and skill.
(b) If he/she inflicts bodily injury to another which would not have caused death if, the injured person had submitted to proper surgical or medical treatment or had observed proper precautions as to his/her mode of living.
(c) If by actual or threatened violence he/she causes such other person to perform an act which causes the death of such person, such act being a means of avoiding such violence which in the circumstances would appear natural to the person whose death it so caused.
(d) If by any act or omission, he/she hastened the death of a person suffering under any disease or injury, which apart from such act or omission would have caused death.â€
In other words, if a person injures another, and the injury causes death of
the other person within a period of one year and one day (sec. 191 of the Penal Code Act) then the injuring person is deemed to have caused the death of the injured person.
Sub section (c) suggests that if John threatens violence to Peter and in the process of avoiding the violence Peter gets injured say by knocking his head on to a wall, and the injury causes Peter’s death, then John will be deemed to have caused Peter’s death.
These two scenarios are major in making people wail as they are dragged to courts of law to answer murder charges. They usually plead they did not intend to kill the person in question but by the time they prove their innocence, (if at all they do), they will have spent a few years in jail.
The perfect solution therefore, is to avoid acts that may cause injury to
others. Otherwise when John hits Peter on the head in January, resulting into an injury that will cause Peter’s death in November. John will be charged with murder and may end up on the gallows the next year. Ends