REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT EMBU Criminal Appeal 09 of 2009 DOMINIC KITHI MUNYIRI……………………………………………APPELLANT VERSUS REPUBLIC……………………………………………………………..RESPONDENT JUDGMENT This appeal arises out of the conviction and sentence of S.M Mokua S.R.M Siakago in Criminal Case No. 29 of 2009. The appellant Dominic Kithi Munyiri intimated on the date of plea that he could not communicate using normal language. The learned trial Magistrate without conducting any inquiry to find out what was wrong with the Accused, or why he could not talk normally ordered that a sign language interpreter be availed. This was done and the record shows that one Njoki- a sign interpreter assisted to interpret. The matter was heard and the Accused was convicted and sentenced to 10 years imprisonment. He had been charged with the offence of “prostituting” a person with mental disabilities. The record does not actually indicate that PW1 had any mental disabilities. She was treated like any normal witness and for anybody who did not see her, it is impossible to tell what kind of disabilities she had. I agree with counsel for the appellant that medical evidence should have been adduced to establish that the complainant suffered mental disabilities. It was also important for the magistrate to establish why the appellant could not communicate in court normally-more so if he had even recorded a statement with the police. My finding therefore is that this appeal was rightly conceded. I allow the same, quash the conviction and set aside the sentence imposed by the learned trial magistrate. W. KARANJA JUDGE Delivered, signed and dated at Embu this 22nd day of April 2010. In presence of:-Appellant and Ms Matiru for state
A note on accuracy. These pages are generated automatically from our AI-written case briefs and have not been checked by a lawyer. Case titles and citations come from Kenya Law; the counts, topics, propositions and “treatment” labels are derived from the briefs and can be incomplete or wrong. Use them as a research aid and always read the original judgment before relying on anything here. This is not legal advice.