[2015] KEHC 3079 (KLR)
The court found that the only evidence linking the accused to the murder was his alleged confession. After a trial within a trial, the confession was ruled inadmissible. With no direct or circumstantial evidence remaining, the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case against the accused. The court held...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2015] KEHC 3079 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Walter Kibet Kapsegei
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Kitale
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- Criminal Case 20 of 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on No Case to Answer
- Outcome
- acquittal
- Judges
- J Karanja
- Legal Topics
- Murder, Confession Evidence, Prima Facie Case, Acquittal, Criminal Procedure
- 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
Walter Kibet Kapsegei
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on No Case to Answer
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution established a prima facie case against the accused for the offence of murder.
- 2 Whether the accused's confession was admissible as evidence.
- 3 Whether there was sufficient evidence to require the accused to make a defence.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the only evidence linking the accused to the murder was his alleged confession. After a trial within a trial, the confession was ruled inadmissible. With no direct or circumstantial evidence remaining, the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case against the accused. The court held that calling upon the accused to make a defence would be improper, as it would require him to fill gaps in the prosecution's case. Accordingly, the accused was acquitted under Section 210 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Court Disposition
acquittal
Orders
- The accused is acquitted under Section 210 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
19 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT KITALE
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 20 OF 2011
REPUBLIC …................................................................PROSEC UTOR
VERSUS
KIBET KAPSENGEI …......................................................... ACCUSED
R U L I N G
1. The accused, Walter Kibet Kapsegei, was charged with murder, contrary to S. 203 read with S. 204 of the Penal code, In that on 18th October 2007 at Cheptumbelio Farm in Kisawai Location, Trans-Nzoia County, jointly with another not before court, murdered Joseph Rubia Chemengich.
2. The case for the prosecution was that the deceased was husband to Joan Chesang Mochumu(PW1), and the Chief of Kisawai Location. Prior to the material 18th October 2007, he expressed fear for his life and was cautioned by his mother not to return to a meeting (Baraza) on his own. He nonetheless went to the meeting but did not return home. It was later reported that he had been killed.
3. James Bitai Naibei(PW2) and Humphrey Chemengich (PW3), identified the body of the deceased for Post Mortem purposes. They indicated that he was murdered at a farm belonging to one M/S Kamau by being shot with a firearm.
C.I.P Henry Ndzuma (PW4), was on the 3rd October 2011, requested to record a confession on the murder from the accused who presented himself at Cheranganyi Police Station and owed himself up.
4. In the confession , the accused indicated that he was a member of the Sabaot Land Defence Force (SLDF) and that he and others ambushed and killed the deceased since he was responsible for giving information to the authorities about the group.
Sgt David Makau (PW5) opened an investigations file on the material 18th October 2007, after receiving the report that the deceased had been shot dead. Years later, the accused presented himself and confessed to the murder saying that it was prompted by a land dispute. He was eventually charged with the present offence.
5. From all the foregoing evidence, it was clear that neither direct nor circumstantial evidence was availed to link the accused to the murder of the deceased. The only evidence against him was his alleged confession to the murder. However, the confession (PMFI – 1) was after a trial within a trial found to be inadmissable meaning that there wasn't even a scintilla of evidence remaining against the accused.
6. A prima -facie case being one in which a reasonable court directing its mind to the law and evidence before it may convict if no explanation is offered by the defence, it would follow that the evidence adduced herein against the accused was insufficient for purpose of establishing the necessary ingredients of the charge against the accused and hence, a prima – facie case.
7. It is therefore the finding of this court that the accused has no case to answer and calling upon him to make his defence would be tantamount to asking him to fill the gaps left wide upon by the prosecution. Accordingly, he is acquitted by dint of S.210 of the Criminal Procedure code.
J. R. KARANJA
JUDGE
( Read and Signed this 1st day of July 2015)