Appellant killed the deceased by striking him on the back of his neck with a cutlass. At his trial for murder before a judge and two assessors, he raised the defence of insanity, but was found guilty and sentenced to death. He appealed. Held, dismissing the appeal, that the appeal had no substance. The court said, obiter, that in cases where insanity is likely to be raised as a defence a medical report on the mental condition of the accused should be made available to the defence. Cases referred to: Rex v. Abramovitch (1912) 7 Cr.App.R. 145; Rex v. Oliver Smith (1910) 6 Cr.App.R. 19. Claudius Doe-Smith for the appellant. Nicholas E. Browne-Marke (Acting Solicitor-General) for the respondent.

DoVE-EDWIN J.A. The appellant was found guilty of murder and sentenced to death on April 3, 1962, on a unanimous opinion of the two assessors who tried him and with which the trial judge agreed. The facts were that whilst deceased was waiting for a tax receipt to be made for him in favour of appellant, appellant came from behind him and struck him on the back of his neck with a " cutlass " which caused the injury from which he died. The defence of appellant was that he had been threatened by deceased, whom he said was planning to kill him and, to use his own words, " to free myself I went and took a matchet and stabbed him at his verandah on his shoulder." The learned trial judge in his summing-up to the assessors left the defence of insanity quite rightly to the assessors. On the evidence the assessors rejected the defence of insanity. Learned counsel for appellant said that at the time appellant committed the offence he was suffering from some delusion, and quoted the case of Rex v. Abramovitch (1912) 7 Cr.App.R. 145. In our view, on the evidence, this appeal has no substance and must be dismissed; but, we feel, however, that in cases such as this where insanity is likely to be put up as a defence, a medical report on the mental condition of the accused should be made available to the defence and it will then be up to the defence to use it or reject it. In other words, as it was mentioned in the case of Rex v. Oliver Smith (1910) 6 Cr.App.R. 19, "it is not proper for the Crown to call evidence of insanity, but that any evidence in the possession of the Crown should be placed at the disposal of the prisoner's counsel to be used by him if he thought fit." The appeal is dismissed.