1. The offender herein was initially charged with murder contrary to Section 203 as read with 204 of the penal code. He later entered into a plea bargain agreement with prosecution and the charges were reduced to manslaughter contrary to Section 202 as read with 205 of the penal code. He pleaded guilty to manslaughter and he was accordingly convicted.
2. This case is now coming up for sentencing. The court called for a pre-sentence report from the probation and after Care department and it has emerged from the same that the offender is the father to the deceased.
3. It has emerged that on the material day , the offender found deceased smoking a cigarette and asked for the same but deceased refused and the offender got annoyed went to the house an returned with a knife and stabbed deceased with it
4. The report indicates the offender is a family man and the community members and his family have not issue with his release . His wife termed the death as accidental . He has good community ties .
5. Defence Counsel submitted that the offender is remorseful, he is a married with 5 children and a first offender. It was submitted that the offender entered into a plea bargain agreement and save the time of this court due to his and he prays for a non- custodial sentence and promised not to re-offend. . Counsel further asked this court to take cognizance that he has been in custody for about 2 years and that the family is willing to receive him back home . Prosecution also supported the submission that he is a first offender .
6. The Supreme Court in the Muruatetu case set down the following factors to be considered in sentencing in murder trials;
a) Age of the offender.
b) Being a first offender.
c) Whether the offender pleaded guilty.
d) Character and record of the offender.
e) Commission of the offence in response to gender-based violence.
f) Remorsefulness of the offender.
g) The possibility of reform and social re-adaptation of the offender.
h) Any other factor that the court considers relevant.
7. I have considered the age of the offender nature of the offence, its circumstances, the pre-sentence report, mitigation, submissions, the remand period of about 22 months, the fact that he is remorseful and the sentiments of the family of deceased to deceased
6. From the probation report, the community and the family of deceased have no issue with him . Though the wife told this court that the death was an accident but I note that after arguing with deceased over a roll of cigarette the offender went to the house and got the weapon which he used to inflict the fatal injuries . I agree with defence counsel that the offender deserves leniency for entering into a plea bargain agreement and saved the precious judicial time of the court and expedited the determination of the case.
8. I find that a non- custodial sentence is not appropriate herein as an innocent life was lost herein for no good reason . I proceed to sentence the offender to 7 years imprisonment . The same to run from 11.4.23 when he was first remanded till completion in full .
Delivered virtually via teams platform on this 6th day of March 2025 in the presence of :
The offender
Mr Magara Counsel for the offender
Mr Koima for prosecution
Mr Oigo – Court Assistant
2. This case is now coming up for sentencing. The court called for a pre-sentence report from the probation and after Care department and it has emerged from the same that the offender is the father to the deceased.
3. It has emerged that on the material day , the offender found deceased smoking a cigarette and asked for the same but deceased refused and the offender got annoyed went to the house an returned with a knife and stabbed deceased with it
4. The report indicates the offender is a family man and the community members and his family have not issue with his release . His wife termed the death as accidental . He has good community ties .
5. Defence Counsel submitted that the offender is remorseful, he is a married with 5 children and a first offender. It was submitted that the offender entered into a plea bargain agreement and save the time of this court due to his and he prays for a non- custodial sentence and promised not to re-offend. . Counsel further asked this court to take cognizance that he has been in custody for about 2 years and that the family is willing to receive him back home . Prosecution also supported the submission that he is a first offender .
6. The Supreme Court in the Muruatetu case set down the following factors to be considered in sentencing in murder trials;
a) Age of the offender.
b) Being a first offender.
c) Whether the offender pleaded guilty.
d) Character and record of the offender.
e) Commission of the offence in response to gender-based violence.
f) Remorsefulness of the offender.
g) The possibility of reform and social re-adaptation of the offender.
h) Any other factor that the court considers relevant.
7. I have considered the age of the offender nature of the offence, its circumstances, the pre-sentence report, mitigation, submissions, the remand period of about 22 months, the fact that he is remorseful and the sentiments of the family of deceased to deceased
6. From the probation report, the community and the family of deceased have no issue with him . Though the wife told this court that the death was an accident but I note that after arguing with deceased over a roll of cigarette the offender went to the house and got the weapon which he used to inflict the fatal injuries . I agree with defence counsel that the offender deserves leniency for entering into a plea bargain agreement and saved the precious judicial time of the court and expedited the determination of the case.
8. I find that a non- custodial sentence is not appropriate herein as an innocent life was lost herein for no good reason . I proceed to sentence the offender to 7 years imprisonment . The same to run from 11.4.23 when he was first remanded till completion in full .
Delivered virtually via teams platform on this 6th day of March 2025 in the presence of :
The offender
Mr Magara Counsel for the offender
Mr Koima for prosecution
Mr Oigo – Court Assistant