[2017] KEHC 1450 (KLR)
The court found that although the charge was reduced from murder to manslaughter, the circumstances were grave, involving the unlawful killing of a sibling with a lethal weapon. The court considered the lack of remorse, absence of reconciliation efforts, and the severe psychological trauma inflicted on the family,...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2017] KEHC 1450 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Honster Kisanya Edagwa
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kajiado
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 39 of 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Verdict and Sentencing
- Outcome
- convicted and sentenced
- Judges
- DB Nyakundi
- Legal Topics
- Manslaughter, Sentencing Principles, Victim Impact Statements, Mitigation and Aggravation
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Republic
Applicant
Honster Kisanya Edagwa
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Verdict and Sentencing
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the accused is guilty of manslaughter as opposed to murder.
- 2 What is the appropriate sentence for the offence of manslaughter in the circumstances of this case.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that although the charge was reduced from murder to manslaughter, the circumstances were grave, involving the unlawful killing of a sibling with a lethal weapon. The court considered the lack of remorse, absence of reconciliation efforts, and the severe psychological trauma inflicted on the family, as evidenced by the victim impact statement. The court also noted the risk of retaliatory violence if the accused were released. While acknowledging the accused's status as a first offender and the period spent in remand, the court determined that these mitigating factors were outweighed by the aggravating circumstances. The court exercised its discretion to impose a severe...
Court Disposition
convicted and sentenced
Orders
- The accused is sentenced to 40 years imprisonment for the offence of manslaughter.
- The period of slightly over 2½ years spent in remand custody is factored as a discount in sentencing.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
28 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KAJIADO
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 39 OF 2015
REPUBLIC ……….……………………………..PROSECUTOR
VERSUS
HONSTER KISANYA EDAGWA…………………....ACCUSED
REMARKS AND VERDICT
Honster Edagwa you were initially charged with the offence of murder contrary to section 203 which later on consideration by this court was substituted with that of manslaughter contrary to section 202 as read with section 205 of the Penal Code.
The deceased Paul Edagwa was your own brother born and brought up by your father who has given the victim impact statement. The emotional statement depicts the psychological trauma the death has caused the entire family. According to your father there will be no room for mediation between you and themselves. This is as a result of them considering your act as heinous and which they are not ready to forgive. In your father’s statement in the event you secure your freedom, you will meet the same punishment of death like your bother Paul because the family is still traumatized.
This court has also taken into account the mitigation by the defence counsel Mr. Chege. The submissions by Mr. Chege that you regret the offence has been dislodged by the statement made by your own father. What that means no efforts from your side to make attempts to reconcile with your family or seek forgiveness. I also note that you are a first offender as from the submissions by Mr. Akula for state. I have also perused the pre-sentence report and the contents as captured by the probation officer.
This case though reduced to manslaughter still remains to be one of the serious offences in our penal code. The legislature presented a maximum sentence of life imprisonment in the event of a conviction. However the courts are left with some level of discretion to impose a term of imprisonment in place of life imprisonment depending on specific circumstances of each case. In this case the right to life of your brother is fundamental and protected by our constitution. He therefore deserved to live normally like any other citizens without premature death occasioned by unlawful act by his fellow sibling.
As expressed by your father in his impact statement his untimely death has left a gap in their lives including breakdown of family relationship. There is no evidence to the effect that you were not in a fit mental status when you committed this unlawful and dangerous act against your own brother. This court was not privy of any evidence suggesting of heavy alcohol consumption or drugs which could have impaired your judgement on the material day.
The defence counsel Mr. Chege submitted that you regret the offence. However an appraisal of the pre-sentence report and the victim impact statement from your own father shows that you still live in self-defence. It further shows no contrition or that the death of your brother has moved you in anyway. The submissions on mitigation by your counsel Mr. Chege to me are nothing out of the ordinary. This being a crime committed within the family set up could have enlisted a mediation between yourself and entire family. That is not the case in these circumstances prevailing up to this stage. This death is bound to remain and have a left thing emotional effect to the family.
While listening to the victim impact statement by your father it reveals deep seated traumatic experience which has serious effect on your own safety in the event an opportunity presents itself. Because of such a situation this court cannot shirt its eyes to such an eventuality of another member of the same family being killed on a revenge mission.
I think and do hold the view that the circumstances of the case call for severe custodial sentence. This to me will achieve the following:
To deter and refrain the victims of this offence in carrying out their revenge mission of retaliating attack against your life. I believe that during your imprisonment period the family would find favour with you to commence a mediation process aimed at rehabilitating you back to the community. Secondly, this death was avoidable save for your unlawful act of causing grievous harm which resulted in death. It is useful to note that the notion penalty is to punish crime with a view to emphasize in reforming and rehabilitating the offender. In passing sentence this court aims at holding you accountable and responsible of your actions. This killing was committed through the use of a lethal weapon which to me was heinous, cruel and senseless to say the least.
All these aggravating factors outweigh any mitigation in your favour. I also take judicial notice that you have been in remand custody slightly over 2½ years. I will factor this period on a discount as i pass sentence for this offence of which you have been found guilty and convicted.
For all these reasons i have come to a decision that you be sentenced to long custodial sentence in prison. I therefore impose a sentence of 40 years imprisonment. The statutory surcharge and prerogative of mercy applies to your case.
14 days right of appeal explained.
Dated, signed and delivered in open court at Kajiado on 23rd August, 2017
............................
R. NYAKUNDI
JUDGE
In the presence of:
Mr. Chege for Mr. Wakla for the accused person
Mr. Akula for Director of Public Prosecutions
Mateli Court Assistant
Accused present