[2003] KEHC 268 (KLR)
The court found that the 1st accused had contradicted himself in material aspects of his evidence regarding the alleged beatings and coercion. The prosecution, through Inspector Makokha's testimony, established that the statement was recorded in accordance with the Judges' rules and that the accused voluntarily gave...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2003] KEHC 268 (KLR)
- Parties
- Applicant: Republic; Defendant: Samuel Muiruri Mwangi; Defendant: Robert Hunja Njamba
- Court
- High Court
- Court Station
- High Court at Nairobi (Milimani Law Courts)
- Jurisdiction
- Kenya
- Case Number
- ? 51 of 2002
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Case / Ruling on Admissibility of Statement Under Inquiry (trial Within Trial)
- Outcome
- statement under inquiry admitted in evidence
- Legal Topics
- Admissibility of Confessions, Voluntariness of Statements, Trial Within Trial, Evidence Law
- 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
Samuel Muiruri Mwangi
Defendant
Robert Hunja Njamba
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Case / Ruling on Admissibility of Statement Under Inquiry (trial Within Trial)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the statement under inquiry by the 1st accused was made voluntarily and is admissible in evidence.
- 2 Whether allegations of police brutality and coercion rendered the statement inadmissible.
Ratio Decidendi
The court found that the 1st accused had contradicted himself in material aspects of his evidence regarding the alleged beatings and coercion. The prosecution, through Inspector Makokha's testimony, established that the statement was recorded in accordance with the Judges' rules and that the accused voluntarily gave the statement. The court was satisfied that the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt that the statement was voluntary and that the details contained in the statement could not have been known to the police officers. Consequently, the court ruled that the statement was admissible in evidence.
Court Disposition
statement under inquiry admitted in evidence
Orders
- The statement under inquiry dated 29th December, 2001 is admitted in evidence.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
15 paragraphs
REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAIROBI H.C. CRIMINAL CASE NO. 51 OF 2002
REPUBLIC …………………………………………… PROSECUTOR
V E R S U S
SAMUEL MUIRURI MWANGI
ROBERT HUNJA NJAMBA ………………………….ACCUSED
R U L I N G
The 1st Accused objected to the production of statement under inquiry dated 29th December, 2001 on grounds that he has never made any such statement voluntarily and was never a party to its contents, and that after he was subjected to serious beatings by Police officers including Inspector Makokha he only signed some papers.
The prosecution called Inspector Makokha who deponed that on 29th December, 2001 he was instructed by O.C.S. Lari Police Post to record a statement under inquiry from a suspect (now the 1 st Accused) who was alleged to have committed an offence of murder. He stated all the procedures be stipulated under Judges’ rules, which he adopted before and after the 1st Accused voluntarily gave statement. He emphasized that 1st Accused chose to state his statement which he recorded and read back. He denied that the 1st accused was beaten as alleged or put up by the Defence Counsel. He also stated that he was not the investigating officer although he agreed he was O.C. (Crime) in Lari Police Post.
The 1st Accused this time gave an unsworn statement and specifically stated that from 17th December, 2001 the day after his arrest he was beaten by five officers (he did not name any) after every three days with batons and whips and that they were asking him to accept that he had killed the deceased. At the end of the year he was taken to a clinic and the doctor did not take any heed of his complaints of beatings. He also said that on 2nd January, 2002 he signed some papers when he was ‘explained ’ that he had to sign them whether he wanted or not. On 3rd January, 2002 he was taken to the court and when Magistrate asked him whether he wanted to say anything, he responded that he would say, what he wanted to, before the High Court.
The 1st Accused had during trial within trial given sworn testimony and I must state he has contradicted himself in all relevant aspects of his evidence, especially the complaint of beatings. Thus I must find that the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that the statement was voluntary as prescribed under the law. I also add here that the details in the statement made could not be within the knowledge of police officers.
I therefore direct that the statement be admitted in evidence.
Dated and delivered at Nairobi this 19th day of June,
2003.
K. H. RAWAl
JUDGE.