https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/9470

Republic v Kirui (Criminal Case E033 of 2022) [2026] KEHC 9470 (KLR) (30 June 2026) (Sentence) Neutral citation: [2026] KEHC 9470 (KLR) Republic of Kenya In the High Court at Kabarnet Criminal Case E033 of 2022 TM Matheka, J June 30, 2026 Between Republic Prosecution and Olivia Chepchirchir Kirui Accused Sentence 1.Olivia Chepchirchir Kirui was originally charged with 2 others on 2 counts of murder contrary to section 203 as read with section 204 of the Penal code. The particulars were that on 12/7/2022 at Chemususu Forest Koibatek Sub-County Baringo County, they jointly murdered Ivy Jerop Kemboi (Count 1) and Shanice Jebet Kemboi (Count 2) 2.They pleaded not guilty on 31/10/2022 before Hon. Chemitei J. 3.The matter was heard by Hon. Ngetich J. as she was – Mr. Mbeche appeared for Accused2 and Accused3, Ms Ashibwe for Accused1 4.By a Ruling delivered on 23/7/2025, the Judge found a Prima facie case against Accused 1 and Accused2 and ordered they be put on their defence. Ms. Kusolo appeared for Accused1. Mr. Mbeche for Accused 2 Ms Omari for state. 5.In the Judgment delivered on 11/3/2026 – Accused 2 was acquitted under section 215 of the CPC. The 1st Accused was found guilty of murder contrary to section 203 as read with section 204 of the Penal code and convicted accordingly 6.It befell on me to sentence Accused1 pursuant to section 200 as read with section 201 of the Criminal Procedure Code. 7.A pre- sentence report was filed by PACs, Koibatek dated 30/4/2026. 8.At the time of the report the Accused was 26 years old and had been in custody since the date of arrest. 9.The report indicates that the accused person committed the offence of killing the 2 children because they stood between her and their father’s attention – with whom she was living as husband and wife.It was also indicated that her family had approached the family of the deceased children to try a reconciliation but by the time of this sentence – none had been arrived at. 10.The convict also placed before court on array of certificates Certificate of compliance – the prisoner’s journey dated 12/9/2022 World Bible school certificate of completion of correspondence course 8/10/2024 Bible course certificate level 2 – lamp and light Bible Study correspondence courses – 6/10/2025 Certified life Gardener from Thrive, 5 days’ workshop on gardening – 10/5/2024 Work for Life certificate of Entrepreneurship (3months) 22/6/2023 Certificate of completion – prison Project Philip Bronze level 2 The Answer Foundation – youth Awareness Initiative mental Health Awareness program Seventh Adventist Central Rift Valley Conference Baptismal certificate 17/9/2022 Certificate of Participation Creators of Peace Circle 15/11/2024 Latter Anointing and Revival ministries international certificate of Participation 25/10/2025 Justice Defenders certificate of appreciation 23/11/2023 Justice Defenders certificate of completion Justice Defenders Paralegal course 2/5/2023 Recommendation from Linah Tarus (SP) for officer in charge Nakuru Women Prison This report in an all-inclusive report sub titled “Offender management Report” 11.It draws a picture of an inmate who came in while under a lot of stress – but through counselling – and personal effort, industry and work – developed into an inmate who learnt about herself accepted her fate, and proceeded to excel in skills for personal development, and for the assistance of others. She has gone through various rehabilitating and recreation programs, she demonstrates. Composure, patience and respect towards staff and fellow inmates. Her family did not abandon her, and continued to visit her in custody. 12.In the sentence and mitigation hearing. Ms. Omari State submitted that the accused killed 2 innocent children aged 7 and 4 years respectively and dumped the bodies in Chemususu Dam. That these children died in the hands of the person in whose care and custody they had been entrusted. The court was referred to Koi versus Republic [2025] for the proposition that the accused deserved a long sentence of 30 years 13.Ms. Kusoloh submitted that the accused person expressed deep sorrow for the offence and the tragic loss of the 2 children; that she was 1st offender – and had been in custody for 3 years, 10 months. 14.Based on the accused’s good performance in custody and the attempt by her family to reconcile with the family of the deceased – and counsel urged the court to consider a lenient sentence – a non-Custodial sentence. 15.On her part the accused told the court that she was seeking a concurrent sentence. She said: Najutia Makosa yangu. Naomba hii Korti inisamehe, nimerekebika naomba kifungo cha nje...Nikienda kwa society nitawambia Crime si poa, Watii Sheria .” 16.The issue then is – what is the appropriate sentence? 17.Murder hukumu death 18.From the Judgment I gathered that when the Judge convicted the accused - the records says).The victims herein are minors aged 4 and 7 years. They were strangled; and their bodies disposed of in a dam and a nearby thicket. There is no doubt that the manner of killing and disposal thereafter clearly demonstrates an intention to cause death.The deliberate concealment of the bodies and the false reports made by the accused further demonstrate consciousness of guilt…” 19.I have perused the accused persons defence. She denied the charges. She said her confession was obtained through treachery by the Police, and that her parents were tricked to sign her confession because they had been told she would be released. 20.The statement to the PACs Officer that she got rid of the children so as to give the 2nd accused’s full attention does not sit well with her defence. Which is the truth? 21.All along the accused gave inconsistence reports on how the children died – and even at this stage – she does not come forth as being forthright. 22.How I wish that she would have treated those innocent children with the calmness, patience, thoughtfulness and kindness she has accorded her colleagues and staff at the prison. They were children. Very young children. They could not have provoked her. She had a loving home and caring parents. She could have gone back home instead of killing innocent children to keep a man who she claims also beat her. Hindsight is always so wise! 23.The Judiciary Sentencing Policy Guidelines 2023 say the following about Murder.5.2.2.The harm caused by such an offence is immeasurable. The sentence is not a measure of the value placed on the life of the victim. Therefore, the assessment of aggravating and mitigating features relating to the offence focusses on culpability. However, the victims’ family may wish to make a statement to the court about the impact of the offence.5.2.3.In addition to the generic features contained in the GATS, features particularly relevant to murder may include but are not limited to:5.2.4.Aggravating Factors in Murder Cases:i.A significant degree of planning or premeditation.ii.The mental or physical suffering inflicted upon the victim before death. Factors such as the type of weapon used, torture or inhuman or degrading treatment prior to death will be relevant.iii.The use of duress or threats to enable the offence to take place. The fact that the victim was providing a public service or performing a public duty.vi.Multiple victims or multiple perpetrators.vii.Where the offence involved an abuse of trust. The relationship between the victim and the accused should be carefully considered.viii.....ix.A history of assaults, threats, or coercion upon the same victim.x.Absence of self-defence or provocation.xi....xii.Proven abduction or kidnapping of the victim before the murder was committed.xiii...xiv.Concealing, destroying, or dismembering the body.xv....5.2.5.Mitigating features relating to murder might include:i.Lack of premeditation.ii.The offender suffered from a mental disorder or mental disability which lowered his degree of blame.iii.In a case of joint enterprise, the role the offender played may be lower than his co-accused.iv.That the offender was provoked.v.That the offender acted to any extent in self-defence or in fear of violence.vi.The age of the offender. 24.From the foregoing none of the mitigating factor apply to the convict. If anything, the aggravating factors stand out. 25.That said it is not in doubt that the accused person committed the offence and there is no doubt she has tried to improve on herself post the offence. 26.However 2 innocent children died a senseless death, their lives snuffed out by the person to whose care they were entrusted, for something they had nothing to do about. 27.The court of appeal in Koi V Republic [2025] KECA 1633 KLR“The crime was committed with deliberate planning, malice, and intent to kill resulting in the deceased’s death by strangulation, which was clearly linked to the appellant. The trial Judge Correctly exercised his discretion in imposing a 30 years prison term, and there is no ground to interfere with the sentence,,,,,,, ” 28.The offence is more heinous in this case because these were children of tender years defenseless, innocent oblivious of the issues going on between the accused and their parents. They did not deserve to die. 29.I have taken into account that the accused has been in custody since the date of arrest – she is sentenced to 35 years imprisonment on each count. Sentences to run concurrently. 30.Right of appeal 14 days SENTENCE RULING DATED SIGNED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY IN KABARNET THIS 30TH JUNE 2026.MUMBUA T MATHEKAJUDGECA Momanyi/ GladysAccused present Ms. Omari for stateMs. Busoloh for the accused