Human Leopards

by Kenneth James Beatty

PRISONERS AWAITING TRIAL, GBANGBAMA PRISON.

The townspeople collected round the body of the murdered boy and kept saying to each other, “What is this trouble?” “What has happened?” The uncle of the boy, who had been beside him the whole time and who appeared to be very upset at seeing the body, said in reply to the questions on all sides that koribrah (leopard people) had killed him. He was taken aside by some of the accused, and the seriousness of his admission pointed out to him. He was told to say that owing to distress of mind he did not know what he was saying, that what he really meant to say was that it was a bush leopard that had killed the boy, and that he himself had seen two leopards rushing out of the town after the alarm had been raised. He was promised a sum of money if the matter was hushed up on the basis of the death being attributed to a bush leopard, but it was incidentally mentioned to him that if he did not succeed in creating this belief the town would in all probability lose another of its citizens, as their Borfima had not yet been fed, and they would, in a certain event, know where to look for a victim. The story was then circulated that it was a bush leopard that had killed the boy; and there was some confirmation of this story by the statements of some women and boys who said they saw what looked like a leopard running away after the alarm had been given. From the evidence it appeared that these people had mistaken the murderers in their dresses of leopard skins for real leopards, which are numerous in the vicinity.

About 6.30 the following morning the clerk to the District Commissioner overheard a man at the town of Gbangbama tell a friend that a bush leopard had killed some one at the town of Imperri the night before. The clerk immediately proceeded with some police or, as they are called in the Protectorate, Court Messengers to the town of Imperri, and arrived there soon after 8 a.m. They were met by the chief men of the town and taken to view the body of the boy Yagba, several of the accused being present and volunteering the information that a bush leopard had killed the deceased. The Court Messengers, as a preliminary step, took into custody all the people who occupied the house where the deceased had been killed, including the uncle of the boy. Meanwhile a vigorous search was prosecuted to find the spoor of a leopard, but none was to be found in or about the town. His uncle was then taken on one side by the clerk and Court Messengers and in view of the nature of the wounds and the fact that there were no signs of any leopard was asked to explain how the boy had come by his death.

It was clear, owing to the nature of the wounds, that no leopard had killed the boy; and, faced with this fact and his admission of the night before, he gave an account of the murder and the names of the persons concerned in it. As many of these persons as could then be found were forthwith taken into custody, the others were subsequently arrested, and after a preliminary examination before the District Commissioner all were committed for trial.

The chief testimony against the accused was that of two accomplices who had turned informers. These men confessed to being members of the Human Leopard Society and as having been present at the murders of several victims of the Society. They gave evidence to the effect that all the accused bore the mark of the Leopard Society. The mark on each of the accused was pointed out during the hearing of the case, but although there were certain peculiarities about the mark, and although its position on the person of each of the accused was in most instances approximately the same, yet, owing to the fact that the majority of them had other marks, similar in shape and colour, some doubt existed as to whether the marks pointed out were really the marks received on initiation into the Society.

After hearing the evidence, no one could doubt that a murder had been committed, and that that murder had been committed by members of the Human Leopard Society. Their plans miscarried, they were disturbed at their work by the cries of the occupants of the house; the actual murderers finished their work, but those deputed to carry away the body failed, the uninitiated in the village awakened, and saw what had happened, and it was too late to remove the body. The question then followed as to whether the persons charged were those who had actually committed or who had taken part in the murder. The evidence of the accomplices was strong, but the chief difficulty in regard to the case for the Crown was to obtain corroboration of the evidence of these accomplices. In cases of this sort where the principal men are bound together by the bonds of guilt as well as of secrecy, where the victim is provided by the head of the family, who, instead of ferreting out the crime, uses all his influence to have the matter hushed up, and where the whole people cower down in dread of the terrible vengeance threatened by the awe-inspiring Borfima, it is not to be wondered at that it is exceptional to be able to procure independent evidence. The relatives, even the mother of the victim, will not come forward willingly, and when such witnesses are forced to give evidence they will only say what they think is non-committal, and from that they will not budge. They look upon the “medicine” as being responsible, and hold the view that the members of the Society are forced into killing a victim in order to “feed” the Borfima.

In this case, however, many of the non-committal statements pieced together formed important corroborative evidence, and that, together with other evidence, satisfied the Court as to the guilt of six of the accused, who were found guilty of murder.

The sentence on four of them was publicly carried out at the town of Imperri on 18th April, 1913. The fifth and sixth, who were domestic slaves, were also found guilty of murder and sentenced to death, but the sentences, on the recommendation of the Court, were afterwards commuted by the Governor-in-Council to life imprisonment. The Lavari to the principal accused was found guilty of being an accessory after the fact to the murder and was sentenced to life imprisonment.