Republic v Okenyuri [2022] KEHC 14083 (KLR)

Republic v Okenyuri (Criminal Case 14 of 2019) [2022] KEHC 14083 (KLR) (19 October 2022) (Ruling)

Neutral citation: [2022] KEHC 14083 (KLR)

Republic of Kenya

In the High Court at Nakuru

Criminal Case 14 of 2019

TM Matheka, J

October 19, 2022

Between

Republic

Prosecution

and

Christine Okenyuri

Accused

Ruling

1. On August 18, 2021 Christine Okenyuri was found guilty and convicted of the offence of manslaughter contrary to section 202 as read with 205 of the Penal Code.

2. The only issue for determination here is what is the appropriate sentence in the circumstances of the offence.

3. Section 205 of the Penal Code provides the punishment for manslaughter and states that;“any person who commits the felony of manslaughter is liable to imprisonment for life.”

4. Such a sentence must only mean that a person will remain imprisoned for the duration of the remainder of their natural life, in other words, until they die, as opposed to the sentence of death, where the state will cause the person to suffer death in the manner authorized by law.

5. Clearly therefore the plain reading of section 205 is that a person sentenced to imprisonment for life will remain in prison until they lose their lives through natural means. Until otherwise known as an indeterminate sentence.

6. Do the circumstances of this case call for that sentence?

7. I sought a pre-sentence report from probation and after care services.

8. I have carefully considered the report. It brings to focus the socio-economic status of the accused, she is now the sole bread winner and care giver of her five (5) children, the eldest in form 2, the youngest 3 years old. Her former abode is not safe for her as the family of the deceased is said to labour hostilities having torched her house after the incident. However, the father who lives in a different location is willing to provide a home for her and her children should she be released on a non-custodial sentence.

9. While the sentencing policy guidelines do not specifically provide for manslaughter, they give the general guidelines that for imprisonment as stated at paragraph 23:1.

10. Under paragraph 23. 9 the court is guided to start at 50% of the sentence established by statute for that particular offence. For manslaughter there no determination number of years set out by statute. Hence the guideline must come from elsewhere, case law.

11. Thereafter the court is to consider 50% of the sentence, and proceed to apply the aggravating factors, to mark up the sentence, on the mitigating factors to bring down the sentence.

12. The court is also required to consider the period spent in custody.

13. In this case the accused person was engaged in a fight by the deceased who was armed with a knife. It is in the struggle that ensued that she got the knife stabbed him once. She was pregnant at the time and believed that the husband who was intoxicated has issued death threats to severally before that date, was determined to kill her. She stabbed him once, without any intention of killing him but getting out of his grip.

14. In the circumstances she became a widow and the care giver of their five (5) children. She has expressed remorse and will live with this for the rest of her life.

15. She has been in custody since February 25, 2019 a period which the court is required to take into account in arriving at a sentence.

16. Having looked through Kenya Law Reports, I have noted that similar cases attract a non-custodial sentence. In this case, the accused person is to be placed on probation supervision for three years.

17. Right of appeal 14 days.

SIGNED, DATED AND DELIVERED VIRTUALLY THIS 19TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2022. MUMBUA T. MATHEKAJUDGEIn the presence of:Court Assistant: JenniferFor State: Ms. MurungaFor accused: N/AAccused: present