This was an appeal against conviction for fraudulent conversion under s 20(1)(iv)(a) of the Larceny Act 1916. The Supreme Court reviewed the key ingredients of the offence of fraudulent conversion and found that a person’s acts may provide evidence of fraudulent and dishonest intent. In this case, the trial judge’s failure to make a specific finding of fraudulent intent did not result in a miscarriage of justice. Reported by Victoria Strasser-King and Anthony P Kinnear.
Read, print or share the full version: Kenny v The State
If you would like to provide editorial, case reporting or technical support to help us accelerate the publication of the Sierra Leone Law Reports, please contact us at ruleoflawpublishing@gmail.com