Joseph v Chief of Police

• Jurisdiction: Antigua and Barbuda
• Court: Court of Appeal (Antigua and Barbuda)
• Judge: Cecil Lewis, J.A.
• Judgment Date: 23 October 1970
• Neutral Citation: AG 1970 CA 30
• Docket Number: Magis. Crim. Appeal NO. 9 of 1970
• Date: 23 October 1970

Court of Appeal

Lewis, C.J. Cecil Lewis, J.A.; Gordon, J.A.

Magis. Crim. Appeal NO. 9 of 1970

Joseph

and

Chief of Police

Appearances:

Miss F.M. Lake for Appellant

D. Cenac (Legal Assistant) for Respondent

Criminal law - Appeal against conviction — Unlawful wounding

Cecil Lewis, J.A.

1 On the 22nd July, 1970, the appellant was convicted of the offence of wounding Amoriah Lapps contrary to section 54, Cap. 77 of the Revised Edition of the Laws of Antigua. She was discharged conditionally on her entering into a recognisance in the sum of $48.00 to be of good behaviour and to appear before the court for conviction and sentence when called upon at any time within the period of six months alter the said order.

2 The facts out of which this appeal arose are that Amoriah Lapps was at Johnson's Point on the 5th of April, 1970. There were three girls standing in the roadway and as he walked along he called out to one of them thinking she was his niece but she did not reply. The appellant who was one of the girls “jumped out” as he said, made a remark to him and then abused him. He went home for his wife, spoke to her and they both came back where they met the appellant. She was standing in the street. The appellant used certain abusive words to Amoriah Lapps and his wife and then she came towards Amoriah Lapps. He began to step backwards and as he reached the sidewalk he slipped down in the gutter. As this happened the appellant came down on him and bit him on one of his ears. It was a comparatively severe bite because he had to be taken to hospital and seven stitches were inserted in the wound. The appellant does not deny biting the man Amoriah Lapps, but he said he first had assaulted her. He had first called herself and her friends nasty little whores, then he touched her on her breast and then struck her. She used rather-significant language in describing the assault. She said

“I received a slap from Sam. When I turned around I saw him coming to hit me another slap

There was nobody else there who could have slapped me.”

3 This is rather peculiar as it gives the impression that the appellant was uncertain if it was the man Lapps who had struck her. But be that as it may, when she saw him coming back again as though he was going to hit her a second time she held on to him and they had a fight. The appellant alleged that during the course of the fight Amoriah Lapps threw her down and was on top of her,...