https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kehc/2026/8967

 **REPUBLIC OF KENYA** **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NYANDARUA** **CRIMINAL CASE NO. E004 OF 2026** **REPUBLIC...........................................................................................................PROSECUTOR** **VERSUS** **LAWRENCE MAINA SHIKALO…………………………………………............** **ACCUSED** **JUDGMENT** 1. Lawrence Maina Shikalois charged with murder contrary to section 203 as read with section 204 of the Penal Code. 2. The particulars of the offence are that on the 30th day of January 2026, at Bombo village, Nyandarua West sub-county within Nyandarua County, he murdered Tabitha Wanjiru Macharia. 3. When the girl did not return home from school for a long time, her mother went out to look for her. She searched along the route to the school and asked the girl’s friend about her whereabouts. When she learned that they had parted at the gate, she asked other villagers to help with the search. Around 8 p.m., her body was found under a tree, and it appeared she had been sexually assaulted. 4. Lawrence Maina Shikalo, theaccused, denied any involvement in the offence. 5. The questions to be resolved are: a) If the accused was involved in the death of the deceased; b) Whether the charge of murder was proven against the accused. 1. The deceased was 8 years old at the time of her death. On ordinary days, the deceased used to be released from school at around 4 p.m. and would travel back home on her own. On the 30th day of January 2026, she had not arrived home by 5.45 p.m. This prompted her mother (PW1) to go looking for her. When she was not able to trace her, even after making enquiries from her husband and the deceased’s friend, she mobilized her fellow villagers to assist in the search. Her lifeless body was recovered at about 8 p.m. in Itegi’s land under a tree. 2. PC Kelvin Ochieng (PW6) arrived at the recovery scene accompanied by officers from the Nyandarua West DCI office. They observed a large crowd of the public. The deceased's body was covered with leaves and branches, with her hands tied behind her back. He noticed blood in her mouth, and her school bag, containing books, a lunch box, and a water bottle, was close by. 3. Dr Lucy Nyachae (PW1) conducted a post-mortem examination on the deceased. She observed that the victim's hands were tied behind her with uniform straps. The stockings were torn in the genital area, and her underwear contained faecal matter. There were strap marks on the neck, cyanosis indicating oxygen deprivation, and haemorrhaging in the eyes. Additional injuries noted included bruised and haemorrhaged neck muscles, haemorrhage on the lungs' surface, a complete hymen tear, and posterior vaginal injury. Faecal matter was present in the anus. She concluded that the cause of death was asphyxia resulting from strangulation. 4. Some suspects were arrested using CCTV footage, which was obtained from a home near the scene, among them the accused. Since the deceased had been sexually defiled, samples were taken from them for DNA profiling. The other suspects were not found to be connected to the contact and defilement of the deceased, but the accused was. 5. Polycarp Lutta (PW2) indicated that the deceased's sweater (item I) had a mixed DNA profile of Lawrence Maina (the accused) and Tabitha Wanjiru Macharia, the deceased. The DNA profile from the seminal fluid and spermatozoa found in the high vaginal swab matched that of the accused. 6. PC Godfrey Meroka (PW7) testified that, after reviewing CCTV footage from a nearby residence where the deceased's body was recovered, it was observed that the accused passed by around 6 p.m. This footage was admitted as court evidence (Exhibit 5). 7. Lawrence Maina Shikalo, the accused, claimed an alibi. He called his father (DW2), who supported his claim. When an accused presents an alibi, they do not bear the burden of proving its truth. This principle was affirmed in the case of **Kiarie vs Republic [1984] KLR**, where the Court of Appeal stated: ***An alibi raises a specific defence, and an accused person who puts forward an alibi as an answer to a charge does not, in law, thereby assume any burden of proving that answer, and it is sufficient if an alibi introduces into the mind of a court a doubt that is not unreasonable.*** 1. The finding of the DNA profile of the accused on the sweater of the deceased and from the high vaginal swab taken from the deceased, displaces the alibi defence of the accused. 2. I therefore conclude that the prosecution has established that the accused defiled the deceased and was responsible for her death. 3. To secure a murder conviction on the basis of the available evidence, the prosecution must prove the presence of malice aforethought. According to **Black’s Law Dictionary, 10th Edition**, malice aforethought is defined as: ***The requisite mental state for common-law murder, encompassing any one of the following (1) the intent to kill (2) the intent to inflict grievous bodily harm (3) extremely reckless difference to the value of human life (the so-called “abandoned and malignant heart”), or (4) the intent to commit a dangerous felony (which leads to culpability under the felony-murder rule).*** 1. Section 206 of the Penal Code gives instances when malice aforethought may be proved. It provides: ***Malice aforethought shall be deemed to be established by evidence proving any one or more of the following circumstances—*** ***(a) an intention to cause the death of or to do grievous harm to any person, whether that person is the person actually killed or not;*** ***(b) knowledge that the act or omission causing death will probably cause the death of or grievous harm to some person, whether that person is the person actually killed or not, although such knowledge is accompanied by indifference whether death or grievous bodily harm is caused or not, or by a wish that it may not be caused;*** ***(c) an intent to commit a felony;*** ***(d) an intention by the act or omission to facilitate the flight or escape from custody of any person who has committed or attempted to commit a felony.*** 1. After reviewing all the evidence presented by the prosecution, it clearly proves the accused's guilt in the murder case. I find him guilty and therefore convict him of murder. 2. This is one of the rare instances in this region where the case has been investigated and prosecuted swiftly, and the investigators have thoroughly covered all bases. The investigative team deserves commendation for addressing issues diligently without leaving anything to chance. **Delivered and signed at Nyandarua, this 25th day of June 2026.** **KIARIE WAWERU KIARIE** **JUDGE**