Republic v Lepirkine (Criminal Case E006 of 2025) [2025] KEMC 80 (KLR)
The bottom line
#A Kenyan court confirmed that verbally threatening to kill someone is itself a crime, even without physical violence, and staying silent won't save you.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Whether uttering a death threat while armed constitutes the offence of threatening to kill under section 223(1) of the Penal Code
The accused was guilty as charged; the offence is completed by the utterance of the threat, and here it was compounded by being made while armed with a Maasai sword and in the presence of witnesses.
The court adopted the reasoning in Kennedy Kigen Leting v Republic, where Murithi J. held that the offence is committed by uttering, though it may go beyond mere verbal threat where accompanied by overt acts. Three prosecution witnesses, including the complainant and her daughter who witnessed the threats, gave direct evidence. The accused's election to remain silent after being found with a case to answer created no reasonable doubt.
Effect of the accused's silence after the court found he had a case to answer
The accused's silence created no reasonable doubt in the court's mind and did not displace the direct evidence against him.
After the prosecution closed its case, the court ruled the accused had a case to answer. He opted for silence rather than giving evidence. The court treated the unchallenged, direct testimony of PW1, PW2 and PW3 as sufficient, holding that his silence did not generate any reasonable doubt, and proceeded to convict under section 215 of the CPC as read with section 179 CPC.
Legal principles established
#- The utterance of a threat to kill, without lawful excuse, completes the offence of threatening to kill under section 223(1) of the Penal Code; overt acts of arming oneself aggravate but are not necessary to constitute the offence.
Court orders
#- 1.The accused was convicted as charged under section 223(1) of the Penal Code
- 2.Conviction recorded under section 215 of the CPC as read with section 179 of the CPC
- 3.Right of appeal within 14 days communicated
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Original criminal jurisdiction over an offence contrary to section 223(1) of the Penal Code
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Republic v Lepirkine (Criminal Case E006 of 2025) [2025] KEMC 80 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2025). Criminal Case No E006 of 2025. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/kemc/2025/80/eng@2025-04-09
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.