Appellants charged with murder in High Court but convicted of assault with intent to cause grievous bodily harm and sentenced each to fifteen years imprisonment;

Appellants making application for bail pending appeal to the high Court - application refused;

Appellants appealing against High Court decision but failing to show material change of circumstances as required by Rule 12(5) of Court of Appeal Rules 2006 or otherwise showing they are entitled to bail on any other basis – Appeal dismissed

Criminal Procedure – Leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal – Appeal already noted – Application for release on bail pending determination of application for leave to appeal.

The right to a fair trial is central in any reputable criminal justice system and recognized in the Constitution of Lesotho. Bias on the part of a court, or a reasonable apprehension of bias, can be fatal for a fair trial. A judicial officer who presided in bail proceedings is not automatically disqualified from presiding in the subsequent criminal trial. However, real caution is called for, because the reasons for the granting or refusal of bail could result in a reasonable apprehension of bias. In this case the appellants failed to show cause for real bias or a reasonable apprehension thereof.

Criminal law – Fraud – elements of - what constitutes misrepresentation.

Money laundering - whether proof of predicate offence required- incidence of burden of proof in money laundering - reverse onus - presumption of innocence- impact of – international approach – evidential burden-whether applicable under laws of Lesotho

Expert opinion evidence- what is- admissibility of - whether relevance necessarily qualifies admission of – approach by the court.

Right to remain silent – impact thereof in finding of fact – circumstantial evidence – whether inference of guilt permissible from silence.

CASE SUMMARY:  Criminal law: murder- common purpose- change of plea of not guilty to murder charge to plea of guilty to lesser charge of assault not charged, in medias res-applicable principles examined, when such may be allowed- accused ultimately found guilty of assault common.

CASE SUMMARY:  Criminal law- accused charged with the crime of murder- pleads private defence after initially being the aggressor- situations where the defence can successfully be raised after the accused was the initial aggressor, articulated- Held in this case though being initially the aggressor, the accused was entitled to defend himself when the deceased exceeded the bounds of self- defence- Accused accordingly acquitted of murder.

Summary: Criminal Law- Murder- whether inadequacy of medical treatment can constitute novus actus interveniens-

SUMMARY

CRIMINAL LAW: murder- accused charged with murder- circumstantial evidence against A1- approach to it- approach to evaluating evidence-youth as a mitigating factor

Introduction

[1]     This is an application for leave to appeal an interlocutory ruling     dismissing an application for recusal brought against me in the main trial. The applicants are currently standing trial for murder and other charges arising from the events which occurred between 2014 and 2015.

 [2]    The judgment dismissing the recusal application was delivered on 21 January 2020. The parties indicated that they would proceed with the trial on 23 January 2020. On that day, the applicants’ legal practitioners intimated that they had instructions to seek leave to appeal against the judgment of 21 January 2020.

[3]     The applicants, accused 4, 6 and 8, in the main criminal trial, seek an order in the following terms:

(i) That the applicants be granted leave to appeal the decision of His   Lordship, C Hungwe AJ, refusing to recuse himself in CRI/T/0004/18.  

(ii) That the proceedings in CRI/T/0004/18 be suspended pending a determination of the said appeal in the event that leave is granted.