The Court of Appeal in Nairobi has upheld the conviction and life sentence of Samson Mburia Gakono for defiling two minors, dismissing his appeal to overturn the decision. Justices Patrick Kiage, Rachel Ngetich, and Stephen Radido found no grounds to challenge the trial court and High Court’s concurrent findings.
Gakono, representing himself, questioned the minors’ testimony, asserting they had been intoxicated on the night in question, which he claimed impaired their ability to identify the perpetrator or understand the offense. He referenced statements from the minors’ mother and grandmother, who reportedly acknowledged that the minors had mentioned being given alcohol, arguing this undermined the credibility of their testimony.
Additionally, Gakono contested the sufficiency of the evidence, claiming that the mothers’ testimonies were unreliable due to the time lapse between the minors’ reports and their medical treatment. He noted that he had not undergone a medical examination, despite the minors being diagnosed with infections.
Gakono also contended that the life sentence was excessively harsh for a first-time offender and inconsistent with constitutional provisions and sentencing principles. However, the Director of Public Prosecutions opposed the appeal, affirming that the High Court had adequately addressed the essential elements of the defilement charge and that the imposed sentence was lawful.
The prosecution urged the court to uphold the sentence, emphasizing its legality and propriety, while noting that different court benches had reached varying conclusions regarding life imprisonment.
The Court of Appeal determined that Gakono failed to demonstrate any legal error warranting interference with the lower courts’ findings on identification, penetration, and witness credibility. The judges clarified that their role was limited to matters of law in this second appeal, not fact.
Referencing legal precedent, the judges reiterated that they could only intervene in concurrent findings if it was shown that the lower courts had improperly considered certain matters or neglected others, leading to an incorrect decision.
On the issues of identification and penetration, the judges confirmed that these were primarily factual matters, with the minors’ testimony supported by medical evidence. They noted the consistent findings by both the subordinate and superior courts that the minors had correctly identified Gakono.
The judges found no reason to question the lower courts’ assessments of witness credibility and evidence. Regarding the sentence, they stated that this matter had already been conclusively addressed by the High Court.
As a result, Gakono’s appeal was entirely dismissed, with the court concluding that it lacked merit.
