Kenya Case Law

Republic v Noor

Republic v Noor [2024] KEHC 12938 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Criminal Case E011 of 2023

Judge

JN Onyiego

The court found that since the accused had challenged the voluntariness and procedural propriety of the confession statement—citing lack of proper interpretation, failure to follow confession rules, and alleged unfitness at the time of recording—the only prudent course was to conduct a trial within a trial. This would allow the court to interrogate the circumstances under which the confession was made and determine its admissibility in accordance with the Evidence Act, the Confession Rules 2009, and constitutional safeguards. The court emphasized that a confession cannot be admitted where the…

Source excerpt

• Murder Charge
• Admissibility Of Confession
• Confession Rules
• Interpretation Rights

Republic v Evans Ondieki Monyenye

Republic v Evans Ondieki Monyenye [2019] KEHC 3321 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Criminal Case 1 of 2019

Judge

EM Muchoki

The court found that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused murdered the deceased. The circumstantial evidence presented was insufficient, as key inculpatory facts such as the accused being the last person seen with the deceased, his alleged admissions, and the recovery of the murder weapon were not proved or were based on hearsay and contradictions. The alleged confession did not comply with the mandatory legal requirements and was therefore inadmissible. The prosecution did not establish a direct link between the accused and the fatal injuries suffered by t…

Source excerpt

• Murder
• Circumstantial Evidence
• Confession Rules
• Burden Of Proof
• Malice Aforethought

Peter Ngugi Kamau v Republic

Peter Ngugi Kamau v Republic [2019] KEHC 11870 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Criminal Case 57 of 2016

Judge

CJ Kendagor

The court found that the evidence obtained during the crime scene reconstruction was solicited from the accused by the investigating officer and other officers in authority, in circumstances where the confession rules applied. The process amounted to compulsory oral examination of the accused for the purpose of extracting declarations implicating him in the commission of the crime, without compliance with section 25A of the Evidence Act and the Evidence (Out of Court Confession) Rules. The court held that such evidence is inadmissible as it violated statutory provisions and the accused's righ…

Source excerpt

• Admissibility Of Evidence
• Confession Rules
• Right Against Self Incrimination
• Crime Scene Reconstruction

Republic v SKW

Republic v SKW [2019] KEHC 133 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Criminal Case 7 of 2017

The court found that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was the person who picked up the deceased from school, as the identification evidence was weak, uncorroborated, and tainted by suggestive circumstances. The court also held that the alleged confession or conduct of the accused in leading police to the crime scene was inadmissible, as it was not obtained in compliance with section 25A of the Evidence Act and the relevant Confessions Rules, thereby violating the accused's constitutional rights. In the absence of direct evidence linking the accused to t…

Source excerpt

• Murder
• Identification Evidence
• Confession Rules
• Burden Of Proof
• Child Witness
• Fair Trial Rights

Republic v Benard Kipkurui Langat

Republic v Benard Kipkurui Langat [2017] KEHC 3560 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Criminal Case 60 of 2011

Judge

JV Juma

The High Court found no prima facie murder case against the accused, holding that the prosecution evidence was hearsay and insufficient to link him to the killing.

• Murder
• Prima Facie Case
• Admissibility Of Evidence
• Hearsay
• Confession Rules
• Prima-facie-case

Republic v Simon Yele Samoyo

Republic v Simon Yele Samoyo [2017] KEHC 5447 (KLR)

Court

High Court

Case number

Criminal Case 47 of 2015

Judge

JV Juma

The court found that while the deceased died as a result of a brutal assault, there was no direct evidence linking the accused to the crime. The alleged confessions made by the accused to the deceased's mother and father were inadmissible under Section 25A of the Evidence Act, as they were not made in accordance with the statutory requirements. The hearsay evidence regarding neighbours allegedly witnessing a fight was also inadmissible, as none of those neighbours testified. The accused's disappearance from his home after the incident was considered suspicious and indicative of a guilty mind,…

Source excerpt

• Murder
• Standard Of Proof
• Admissibility Of Evidence
• Hearsay
• Confession Rules