Skip to content
AI-generated case briefs sourced from Kenya Law · Not legal advice
Original judgment

High Court 133 of 2017

REPUBLIC OF KENYA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KENYA AT NAKURU CRIMINAL CASE NO. 18 OF 2012 REPUBLIC....................................................STATE VERSUS SAMMY OLOSHIRO...........................ACCUSED JUDGEMENT The accused SAMMY OLOSHIRO faces a charge of MURDER CONTRARY TO SECTION 203 as read with SECTION 204 OF THE PENAL CODE. The particulars of the charged were that “On the 9th day of January, 2017 at Loita Reserve in Narok South District within Narok County murdered HIRUM MUREITHI” The accused pleaded ‘Not Guilty’ to the charge. Despite having been brought to court way back in March 2012, the accused’s trial did not commence until 10/11/2016 almost 3½ years later. Even then the prosecution only managed to avail one witness in the case. PW1 MILTON OLEKAKA told the court that he went to the scene and saw the body of a man lying in a ditch. He has no idea who killed the man as he did not witness the incident. PW1 stated that some youths told him that they had seen the perpetrators. None of these ‘youths’ was called as a witness. This therefore remains hearsay evidence which is not admissible as against the accused. No evidence was brought to prove the identity of the deceased. No evidence was adduced to prove the cause of death. The doctor who performed the autopsy did not testify. No post mortem report was produced in court. All in all the prosecution have failed dismally in establishing a prima facie case. I enter a verdict of ‘Not Guilty’ and I acquit the accused of this charge of murder. The accused it to be set at liberty forthwith unless he is otherwise lawfully held. Dated and delivered in Nakuru this 13th day of February, 2017 Mr. Olonyi for accused Mr. Chigiti for State Maureen A. Odero Judge

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.