SENTENCE
1. The accused person in this matter was tried for the offence of Murder contrary to section203 as read with 204 of the Penal Code.
2. At the close of the trial this court found the accused person guilty of the offense of Manslaughter contrary to Section 202 as read with 205 of the Penal code.
3. The court called for a pre-sentence report which was prepared and submitted to court on the 11 th November 2025.
4. The offence of Manslaughter attracts a life imprisonment sentence.
5. However, life imprisonment being the most severe sentence would ordinarily be imposed on the most aggravated Manslaughter cases.
6. The court retains the discretion to impose a lesser sentence depending on the circumstances of each case.
7. The pre-sentence report in respect of the accused is not favorable for she is said not to have shown remorse over the incident when she was interviewed.
8. The deceased’s family also is yet to come to terms with the killing of their kin.
9. This court invited the defense counsel to mitigate on behalf of the accused but he requested the court to also allow the accused a moment to communicate with the court directly.
10. The accused indicated to the court that the reason why the presentence report is not favorable is because the probation officer had demanded a bribe to prepare a favorable report which her family could not raise.
11. This court understood the accused to be urging the court to disregard the report on that basis.
12. The court closely observed the accused throughout as she spoke, smiling as though there was nothing of importance that she was telling the court. I therefore dismissed the allegation as an attempt by the accused to draw from this court by besmirching the character of the probation officer.
13. Counsel for the accused submitted that the accused was remorseful and that she had delivered herself of a baby a week before.
14. The accused was said to be taking of three other minors.
15. The defense counsel urged this court to consider that this was a case of domestic violence which could as well have resulted in the accused person’s death.
16. Counsel for the accused pleaded for a non-custodial sentence while prosecution strongly urged the court to consider imposing a custodial sentence.
17. The prosecution and the defense did not suggest any sentence that each one of them would have considered reasonable.
18. This court shall therefore exercise its discretion on the matter of sentence considering the totality of the circumstances.
19. The deceased died a painful death. The accused person stabbed the deceased right into the left side of the chest. The stab landed on the heart and the left ventricle sustained a cut which penetrated to the right ventricle.
20. The injuries speak to the degree of force employed by the accused. She may have been assaulted or even angry at the deceased but did she have to go for the heart?
21. The action of the accused was reckless and dangerous. She ought to have known that a stab on the chest would endanger the life of the deceased.
22. This court is not without mercy but the accused does not appear remorseful at all. She kept denying the commission of the offence and the pre-sentence report shows that she has kept blaming the deceased for what happened. The accused therefore does not merit a non- custodial sentence.
23. She needs time at the prisons to reflect on the sanctity of human life. She also needs to know that certain actions have consequences. The deceased did not injure her in the course of the scuffle thus the stabbing was unnecessary.
24. The sentencing guidelines in this country precisely set out the goals of sentencing as retribution, denunciation, community protection, rehabilitation, restorative justice and reintegration. Not forgetting deterrence. See Republic vs Mariko (Criminal Case E001 0f 2025) {2025} KEHC 17245(KLR) .
25. The facts of this matter and the lack of remorse on the part of the accused leads this court to the conclusion that a deterrent custodial sentence is called for. The accused person is hereby sentenced to serve 10 years imprisonment to be computed from the date of arrest but shall exclude the period she was out on bail.
26. The accused has a right of appeal within 14 days.
27. The pre-sentence report has alluded to the matter of the minors who have been under custody and care of the accused. This court has taken note of the representations and declares the children to be children in need of care and protection under Section 144 of the Children’s Act, and directs that Ms Mercy Kanyangi Senior Probation Officer or any other probation officer based at the Milimani law courts shall report the matter of the children to the Children’s court for opening of Protection and Care files for them since their parents are not available to attend to them.
28. It is so ordered.
1. The accused person in this matter was tried for the offence of Murder contrary to section203 as read with 204 of the Penal Code.
2. At the close of the trial this court found the accused person guilty of the offense of Manslaughter contrary to Section 202 as read with 205 of the Penal code.
3. The court called for a pre-sentence report which was prepared and submitted to court on the 11 th November 2025.
4. The offence of Manslaughter attracts a life imprisonment sentence.
5. However, life imprisonment being the most severe sentence would ordinarily be imposed on the most aggravated Manslaughter cases.
6. The court retains the discretion to impose a lesser sentence depending on the circumstances of each case.
7. The pre-sentence report in respect of the accused is not favorable for she is said not to have shown remorse over the incident when she was interviewed.
8. The deceased’s family also is yet to come to terms with the killing of their kin.
9. This court invited the defense counsel to mitigate on behalf of the accused but he requested the court to also allow the accused a moment to communicate with the court directly.
10. The accused indicated to the court that the reason why the presentence report is not favorable is because the probation officer had demanded a bribe to prepare a favorable report which her family could not raise.
11. This court understood the accused to be urging the court to disregard the report on that basis.
12. The court closely observed the accused throughout as she spoke, smiling as though there was nothing of importance that she was telling the court. I therefore dismissed the allegation as an attempt by the accused to draw from this court by besmirching the character of the probation officer.
13. Counsel for the accused submitted that the accused was remorseful and that she had delivered herself of a baby a week before.
14. The accused was said to be taking of three other minors.
15. The defense counsel urged this court to consider that this was a case of domestic violence which could as well have resulted in the accused person’s death.
16. Counsel for the accused pleaded for a non-custodial sentence while prosecution strongly urged the court to consider imposing a custodial sentence.
17. The prosecution and the defense did not suggest any sentence that each one of them would have considered reasonable.
18. This court shall therefore exercise its discretion on the matter of sentence considering the totality of the circumstances.
19. The deceased died a painful death. The accused person stabbed the deceased right into the left side of the chest. The stab landed on the heart and the left ventricle sustained a cut which penetrated to the right ventricle.
20. The injuries speak to the degree of force employed by the accused. She may have been assaulted or even angry at the deceased but did she have to go for the heart?
21. The action of the accused was reckless and dangerous. She ought to have known that a stab on the chest would endanger the life of the deceased.
22. This court is not without mercy but the accused does not appear remorseful at all. She kept denying the commission of the offence and the pre-sentence report shows that she has kept blaming the deceased for what happened. The accused therefore does not merit a non- custodial sentence.
23. She needs time at the prisons to reflect on the sanctity of human life. She also needs to know that certain actions have consequences. The deceased did not injure her in the course of the scuffle thus the stabbing was unnecessary.
24. The sentencing guidelines in this country precisely set out the goals of sentencing as retribution, denunciation, community protection, rehabilitation, restorative justice and reintegration. Not forgetting deterrence. See Republic vs Mariko (Criminal Case E001 0f 2025) {2025} KEHC 17245(KLR) .
25. The facts of this matter and the lack of remorse on the part of the accused leads this court to the conclusion that a deterrent custodial sentence is called for. The accused person is hereby sentenced to serve 10 years imprisonment to be computed from the date of arrest but shall exclude the period she was out on bail.
26. The accused has a right of appeal within 14 days.
27. The pre-sentence report has alluded to the matter of the minors who have been under custody and care of the accused. This court has taken note of the representations and declares the children to be children in need of care and protection under Section 144 of the Children’s Act, and directs that Ms Mercy Kanyangi Senior Probation Officer or any other probation officer based at the Milimani law courts shall report the matter of the children to the Children’s court for opening of Protection and Care files for them since their parents are not available to attend to them.
28. It is so ordered.