Published on November 8, 2024 by Agencies for Kenya Online News
Last Updated on 1 year by Agencies for Kenya Online News
The High Court will rule on whether it will place former Migori governor Okoth Obado and two others on their defence over the brutal murder of Sharon Otieno and her unborn baby on January 30, 2025
Parties highlighted their submissions in the case on Friday morning, with Obado asking the court to acquit him for lack of evidence.
If the court finds they have a case to answer, the three will proceed to defend themselves against the accusations levelled against them.
If no case, they will be acquitted. Obado is among the accused persons charged with Sharon’s murder that took place on September 3, 2018, in Homa Bay County.
Also on trial are his PAs, Michael Oyamo and Caspal Obiero. At the time Sharon met her death, she had suffered seven stab wounds and two slash wounds.
The first stab wound was so severe that it went through her womb. This ultimately led to the death of the unborn baby. The first witness in the case, government pathologist Dr. Johansen Oduor, after a thorough examination, formed the opinion that the baby died because of sharp abdominal trauma.
Sharon, on the other hand, died of severe haemorrhage due to penetrating force trauma.
The stab wounds were on her neck, stomach, and back. There were also multiple cuts distributed on her upper and lower limbs.
The prosecution closed its case some two months ago with lead prosecutor Nicholas Ole Sena stating that there was no evidence that Obado had any knowledge of Sharon’s murder.
The accused persons are now at the stage of highlighting their submissions on why they should not be placed on their defence regarding the murder.
One of the reasons, as laid out by Senior Counsel Kiko Kilukumi and Rodgers Sagana, is that there is no iota of evidence linking his client with the death of Sharon.
“The entire case as it relates to Obado is about the relationship, pregnancy, the monies he gave her for upkeep, and plans to buy her a home,” said Kilukumi.
He reiterated that the sexual relationship Obado had with Sharon was an open secret, given that it was known in the county offices.
The same was also not a secret to Obados wife nor his son, and a protected witness was described as XYZ. Kilukumi submitted that when Sharon got pregnant, Obado was not sure whether or not he was responsible for the pregnancy.
He doubted whether he had exclusive sexual access to the deceased. But this was to be later confirmed by a DNA test. John Kimani, the prosecution’s third witness and also a medic said from the test, the baby Sharon was carrying was fathered by Obado.
But Kilukumi said that even after it was proved that Obado was the father, he took responsibility and made plans to take care of Sharon and the child. There were plans to buy her home in Homabay and a plot worth sh 800,000.
She was also receiving at least Sh200,000 from Obado as proof of his willingness to take care of her and the child before she died. Kilukumi in his submissions, said the case against his client is wholly dependant on circumstantial evidence.
The evidence he said is that Sharon and witness XYZ were lured into a vehicle. Inside the vehicle were four men.
“It is these four men who killed Sharon, and none of them stands in the dock today,” said Kilukumi.
“The investigators never got a hold of the actual killers. We will never know what motivated them to kill. It will remain a matter of conjecture unless the killers are brought to book,” said Kilukumi.
The four men include the taxi driver Jackson Gombe, who allegedly ferried Sharon to the scene of the crime. Obado questioned why Gombe was never charged if indeed he was the one driving. Kilukumi asked the court to look into these circumstances and the evidence on record and find that his client was not involved in any way with the murder of Sharon.
The prosecution, on the other hand, said from the evidence they have tabled, the court should find there’s a clear chain of events that ties the accused persons to the offence of murder. The prosecution provided forensic and medical evidence through expert witnesses.
