MURDER TRIAL

Court to rule on video evidence in Willie Kimani case

Defense objected to playing of video which shows police informer taking officers to scenes of crime

In Summary
  • Forensic officer Joseph Muindi took the stand on Tuesday and told court he recorded the video
  • Defence lawyer opposed playing of video saying prosecution had not complied with confession rules.
Police informer Peter Ngugi, police officers Leonard Mwangi, Sylvia Wanjiku, Stephen Chebulet and Fredrick Leliman in a Milimani court
SUSPECTS: Police informer Peter Ngugi, police officers Leonard Mwangi, Sylvia Wanjiku, Stephen Chebulet and Fredrick Leliman in a Milimani court
Image: FILE

The court will on Monday rule whether a video at the centre of the Willie Kimani murder case will be played in court.

The defense objected to the prosecution playing the video, which shows police informer Peter Ngugi taking police officers to scenes of crime where the killings took place.

Forensic officer Joseph Muindi took the stand on Tuesday and told court he recorded the video.

 

However lawyer Kevin Michuki for Ngugi opposed playing of the 47-minute video saying the prosecution had not complied with the confession rules.

Yesterday, Michuki asked the court not to allow the playing of the video because it would prejudice his client.

He argued the prosecution had not indicated any attempts to comply with out of court confession rules other than the witness submissions that they cautioned the accused.

"We ask you to be guided by the rules of out of court confessions as per the witnesses evidence," he said.

Michuki said the purported interviewer was the investigating officer, which was a grievous infringement of the rights of his client as set out in the Constitution.

"We submit that the court should note that our jurisdiction has a strict consideration when it comes to confessions taken out of court," he said.

He said self-incriminating evidence should not be allowed.

 

He submitted what the prosecution was to table was a a reconstruction of the scene.

He claimed the accused person was not cautioned before they recorded him.

The scene reconstruction evidence which the prosecution wanted to use was inadmissible.

In response, state prosecutor Nicholas Mutuku asked the court to allow the application.

He told court the rejection was incompetent and based on the wrong provisions of the law. It was only meant to delay the case.

"What's before you was made on August 2016 and was documented under the Evidence Act" he said.

Mutuku said the application was premature because the contents of the video had not been played in court save for the transcripts.

"Submission of the objection is premature, it cannot be raised, " he argued.

Mutuku said the witness testified that the accused took investigators to the scene on his will.

 "In any case, the witness testified that he cautioned the accused and he took investigators to scenes," he argued.

Mutuku said there will be no prejudice to be suffered by Ngugi should the evidence be admitted by court.

Meanwhile the case proceeds tomorrow with a new witness expected to take the stand.