UPDATE: Today, Thursday, February 23, 2023, Justice W. Musyoka sentenced Nyapara to life in prison…..read more on the sentence.
The High Court has returned a guilty verdict against a police constable in connection with the fatal shooting of Ms. Christine Maonga at Navakholo, Kakamega County.
It brings to an end a nearly four-year search for justice, which began with an investigation by the Independent Policing Oversight Authority following the death of the teacher on March 14, 2019.
During the incident, The Court established that Patrick Oita Nyapara, who served in Administration Police Service, used his officially-issued firearm to commit the heinous crime.
Prior to the shooting, the court found that the officer had arrived at Ms. Maonga’s house in Nambacha Sub location, engaged her in a verbal exchange that deteriorated into a physical altercation.
“That set of facts were given by witnesses, who were next door neighbours to the deceased. They were at the scene. They saw the accused come to the house, they heard the two quarrel, they saw the deceased rush outside, heard gunshots or saw the accused fire the gun at the deceased, saw the deceased fall, and saw the accused flee the scene,” Justice W. Musyoka said in the judgment.
Self-defence
The Court had on 17, September 2021 ruled that the accused had a case to answer, and put him on his defence.
Nyapara then cited self-defence, saying he had sired a child with Maonga and had visited the home but was confronted by another man.
He said that he arrived there at around 7pm and found her neighbours outside, greeted them and went into the house.
He added that when he entered the house and sat, the deceased emerged from the bedroom and asked him why he had gone into her house, asked him to leave and never to visit without her consent.
Nyapara also said, a man emerged from the bedroom and charged at him with a stool, prompting him to cock the gun, as they engaged in a physical tussle.
Verdict
The court however found that the accused caused the death with malice aforethought. The officer’s colleagues told the court that he was on duty at the armoury, issued firearms to his colleagues, took a gun from the armoury, and then went to the deceased’s house.
“The fact that he took a firearm when he was not required by his duty on that material day, and went with it to the house of the deceased meant that he had an intention to use it on someone,” Justice Musyoka said.
The judge said that the accused’s allegation that there was another man inside the house did not pass muster, as there was no evidence to support it.