NASSOR MNZAVAS

Sebastian Gilbert v. R. (1970) HCD 281

Crim. App. 209-M-70; 23/7/70; Mnzavas, Ag, J.

The appellant was charged with and convicted of unlawfully causing grievous harm c/s 255 of the Penal Code and was sentenced to 3 years imprisonment. The facts alleged that he had punched, pulled and kicked the complainant fracturing her rib and rendering her unconscious for 3 days. When the charge was read out to him the appellant said - “It is true I injured her unlawfully”. This was entered as a plea of guilty. The appellant was recorded as having said – “Facts are correct” after the facts were presented by the prosecution. The issues raised on appeal were: (1) whether the words of pleas as recorded amounted to a plea of guilty of an offence under section 225 of the Penal Code; (2) If not, whether the position was remedied by the facts stated by the prosecution and admitted by the accused and whether these do constitute an offence under section 225 of the Penal Code.

            Held: 

(1) “The appellant is charged with a special category of assault i.e. assault which has caused the complainant grievous harm. His plea of ‘It is true I injured her unlawfully’ can only be interpreted to mean that the appellant admitted having unlawfully assaulted the complainant and causing her to suffer some injury. The appellant did not, from the above words, admit to have caused the complainant a specified type of injury leave alone grievous bodily harm. Her plea was clearly equivocal”. 

(2) “The next question I have to decide is whether the facts as adduced by the appellant constitute the offence of assault causing grievous harm under section 225 of the Penal Code. if they do, does this necessarily remedy the equivocal plea? As I have already stated above the appellant admitted that h assaulted the complainant who fell down …. Grievous harm is defined under section 5 of the Penal Code as ‘any harm which amounts to a maim or dangerous harm, or seriously or permanently injures health or which is likely to injure health, or which extends to permanent disfigurement, or to any permanent or serious injury to any external or internal organ, member or sense’ are the facts in this case compatible with the above definition? ….. “As the definition of grievous harm shows, a harm to be classified as grievous ‘it must amount to a maim or amount to a dangerous harm or’ …… in the present case the facts which were admitted by the appellant show that the complainant, over and above sustaining fracture of her right 8^th rib,She remained unconscious for 3 days and remained in hospital for a total of 28 days. The attack clearly endangered her life and in my view amounts to dangerous harm and the therefore within the definition of grievous harm. The facts clearly constitute an offence under section 225 of the Penal Code” (3) “It is not for the medical officer to decide whether the harm s grievous harm. This is the duty of the court.” 

(4) The appellant having admitted the facts the final question to be decided is whether admission of the facts remedies the equivocal plea of guilty. In Paul s/o Mathias vs. R. [1970] H.C.D. 209 Georges, C.J. when dealing with the question whether accused’s plea was unequivocal said: Quite often an equivocal plea ….. can be remedied by a full statement of all the facts needed to constitute the offence, and an admission by the accused person that these facts are true. [See also R. v. bison s/o Mwanga 2 T.L.R. 31]……. “From the above authorities, and having found that the appellant admitted the facts which constitute the offence: I find that the equivocal plea of guilty to causing grievous harm was remedied by the facts”. 

(5) Appeal dismissed.