- Bernard Otieno Ayoma and Alex Onono Oketch were convicted of the offence of Murder contrary to the law after the court found them guilty of killing Daniel Onyango Rambo.
- In the judgement delivered on December 28, 2022, Justice Roselyne Aburili ruled that the two despite causing the death of the deceased by calling mob justice, did not show any remorse in their mitigation.
Two Siaya men who beat an avocado seller to death on allegations that he had stolen a phone have been sentenced to 35 years each in prison.
Bernard Otieno Ayoma and Alex Onono Oketch were convicted of the offence of Murder contrary to the law after the court found them guilty of killing Daniel Onyango Rambo.
In the judgement delivered on December 28, 2022, Justice Roselyne Aburili ruled that the two despite causing the death of the deceased by calling mob justice, did not show any remorse in their mitigation.
"Despite the mitigation, the accused persons who are not first-time offenders have not demonstrated any remorse before this court," the judge said.
The court further noted that the offences of persons administering punishment to suspects in a very violent manner are very rampant in this county, hence a deterrent sentence is called for.
"Punishment for murder upon conviction is death. However, following Francis Muruatetu v. Republic(2017), I hereby exercise discretion and sentence each of the two accused persons to serve 35 years imprisonment for the murder", Justice Aburili ruled.
The court heard that the accused persons were not first offenders.
In mitigation, Ayoma admitted that he was convicted of the offence of assault causing actual bodily harm and was sentenced to probation for 6 months while Oketch admitted that he was convicted and sentenced to serve one-year imprisonment for being found in possession of illicit brew.
The two pleaded for leniency saying they never intended to kill the deceased.
The deceased Rambo as per the post-mortem Report and the circumstances under which he met his untimely death, was that when he went to sell avocadoes at Ayoma’s home, he was accused of stealing a phone which his mother stated was purchased on loan.
The court noted that there was absolutely no evidence that the deceased who was brought to the home of Ayoma so that he could be forced to confess to having stolen his phone was a thief or that he had stolen the said phone which he had to for pay his life.
Justice Aburili said life is sacrosanct and no person has any right to take away the life of another except as by law provided.
She said the accused persons should have presented the deceased to the law enforcement officers if they suspected him to have stolen a phone so that they did not have to and had no right to take the law into their own hands to chastise the deceased or mete out punishment extra judicially.
The court heard Oketch in the company of another, are the ones who located and brought the deceased to the homestead of Ayoma's mother where they called him to come and when he did arrive, they continued administering mob injustice to the deceased until he was left for dead.
Then they pretended to be good samaritans taking him to a medicine man not even to a hospital when he was gravely injured.
The judge said they were in her view trying to cover their trail.