- Police informer gives chilling details of how, where, what time and who took which part in cold-blooded murder of Kimani and two others
- They were brutally tortured - hit on the head with blunt objects, their testicles crushed
Image: FILE
The High Court will on July 8 hear a confession detailing how lawyer Willie Kimani, his client and a driver were allegedly brutally executed by police officers.
The High Court yesterday allowed the prosecution to use the confession made by Peter Ngugi, one of the accused in the case.
Justice Jessie Lessit ruled that she was convinced the statement made by Ngugi implicating police officers in the murder was taken in accordance with the Evidence Rules and was therefore admissible.
In the confession, Ngugi gives chilling details of how, where, what time and who took which part in the cold-blooded murder of Kimani, Josephat Mwenda and Joseph Muiruri on June 23, 2016.
The confession by the police informer, who is also an accused person in the case, gives graphic specific details of exactly what happened from when the victims were kidnapped as they came out of a Mavoko law court to the time they died.
They were brutally tortured - hit on the head with blunt objects, their testicles crushed and heads tied with plastic bags leading to suffocation.
Their bodies were retrieved stashed in gunny bags at Oldonyo Sabuk River a week later.
Ngugi, who told court that he had worked as a police informer for many years before he was arrested and charged with murder, has implicated police officers among them his co-accused Fredrick Leliman.
The defense had strongly opposed the use of the statement by Ngugi, claiming that he was illiterate and did not understand what he recorded. However this argument was rejected by the court yesterday.
Ngugi had asked the court to strike out the confession, arguing that he was coerced and tortured to write it.
At same time, his co-accused Leliman, Stephen Cheburet, Sylvia Wanjiku and Leonard Mwangi suffered another setback after their bid to be released on bond failed.
Judge Lessit dismissed their application for bail, ruling that the circumstances under which they were denied bail two years ago are still the same.
“The court considered submissions that were placed before it by counsel for the accused persons and the prosecution in opposition and considered sentiments expressed by the advocate for the victims. The court observes that circumstances subsisting at the time of the previous bail ruling remain the same,” the judge ruled.
She further ruled that the defense had delayed the case by having so many adjournments, dismissing the arguments by the accused persons that the case had taken too long to conclude.
The four wanted the court to review their bail application but the prosecution opposed the application maintaining that witnesses remain at risk if the officers are released on bond.
So far 37 witnesses have testified in the case.