site logo
Skip to case content
Case Digest

CHIEF SAIPEREMOR PRIYE AMAREMOR V. THE STATE (2014)

Supreme Court of Nigeria

Coram
  • Mahmud Mohammed JSC
  • John Afolabi Fabiyi JSC
  • Mary Ukaego Peter-Odili JSC
  • Musa Dattijo Muhammad JSC
  • Kudirat Motonmori Olatokunbo Kekere-Ekun JSC
Parties

Appellant:

  • Chief Saiperemor Priye Amaremor

Respondent:

  • The State
Suit number
SC.376/2010
Delivered on

Background

This case involves Chief Saiperemor Priye Amaremor, an armourer with the National Intelligence Agency, who was convicted of murder under section 319 of the Criminal Code, applicable in Bayelsa State. On 24 November 2001, while attending a family funeral, Amaremor was alleged to have shot the deceased, Chief Tuomor Obiri, with his service pistol—a Beretta firearm. The circumstances surrounding the shooting included claims of accidental discharge, which the appellant argued as his defense.

Issues

The key issues for determination were:

  1. Whether the defense of accident was valid under section 24 of the Criminal Code.
  2. Whether the prosecution established the essential elements of murder and the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that:

  1. The defense of accident posited by the appellant was not applicable as the evidence showed deliberate action in shooting the deceased.
  2. All essential elements of murder, including the intentional act that resulted in the death of the deceased, were proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

Court Findings

The court found that:

  1. Eyewitness testimonies corroborated that the appellant intentionally shot the deceased after firing two warning shots into the air.
  2. The circumstances surrounding the shooting and the shouting of the deceased confirmed that it was an intentional act, contradicting the appellant's claim of an accident.
The court also ruled that the inconsistencies in the appellant's testimonies weakened his defense.

Conclusion

The appeal by Chief Amaremor was dismissed. The Supreme Court agreed with the concurrent findings of the trial court and the Court of Appeal, affirming that the appellant's actions resulted in murder as defined by law. The appellant did not successfully demonstrate that the action was accidental, nor did he establish any reasonable doubt regarding his guilt.

Significance

This case underscores the importance of clear evidential standards in criminal prosecutions, particularly in establishing the elements of intent and accident. The ruling reaffirms that comprehensive evidence is crucial to determining guilt in murder charges, and highlights the court's deference to trial judges on matters of witness credibility and evaluation of testimony.

Counsel

Counsel:

  • Aham Eke Ejelam - for the Appellant.
  • Chief Francis F. Egele, Hon. Attorney-General, Bayelsa State - for the Respondent.