A man convicted of defiling a 10-year-old boy in a Migori County forest has lost his final appeal and will serve a life sentence.
This is after the Court of Appeal upheld his conviction and punishment in a judgment delivered in Kisumu.
Sammy Odhiambo Odindo, the appellant, had been convicted in 2014 by the Rongo Principal Magistrate’s Court for the offence of defilement contrary to Section 8(1) as read with Section 8(2) of the Sexual Offences Act.
He was sentenced to life imprisonment. His conviction was upheld by the High Court in Homa Bay, prompting a second and final appeal to the Court of Appeal.
According to court records, the heinous crime took place on August 24, 2012, in Migori County.
The boy, referred to in court as TAO, to protect his identity, was just 10 years old when he was lured into a forest under the pretence of seeing a rabbit.
A deceptive lure into the bush
TAO recalled the sequence of events with clarity during his testimony.
On that fateful day, he had gone to church with his aunt, CAA, and his younger brother, identified as PO. The two boys later left for home early.
When they arrived home, they found Odindo, who told them that he had caught a rabbit in the forest. Innocently excited, TAO asked to see it.
Odindo led the boys into a nearby bush, then told TAO to remove his shorts.
In a heart-wrenching moment recounted in court, TAO said Odindo claimed he wanted to see his genitals and then proceeded to sexually assault him.
The innocence in his voice, as noted in court records, painted a disturbing picture of how childlike curiosity was manipulated into a horrific crime.
A Silent witness
The court also heard from TAO’s younger brother, PO, who was just five years old at the time.
Although he was not able to fully articulate the trauma, he confirmed the series of events.
He remembered how the accused smoked a cigarette in the bush before instructing TAO to remove his shorts and bend over.
PO told the court, “I knew him as Sammy.”
He watched in silence but did not tell anyone immediately what he had seen.
His age and vulnerability meant he was not cross-examined, a legal misstep acknowledged by both the High Court and Court of Appeal, though ultimately deemed not prejudicial to the case.
A family’s alarm and immediate action
When the boys returned home, TAO informed their aunt, CAA, about what had transpired.
Upon informing the boy’s mother, she examined her son and noticed a crack on his anus.
Alarmed, she immediately took him to the hospital and reported the matter to the police.
“He told me that a man had touched his buttocks and told him to bend over,” the mother told the court.
Medical evidence confirms assault
According to the medical report, TAO had blood stains and a crack in his anus, confirming forced penetration.
Additionally, the examination revealed that Odindo had bruises on his penis, consistent with resistance or forceful sexual contact.
The medical report also showed that the victim was HIV-negative, but the accused tested HIV-positive, a fact that added another layer of horror to the already grim ordeal.
Arrest and identification
The investigating officer, Eliud Kipleting, told the court that the matter was reported by TAO’s father.
After investigations, Kipleting arrested Odindo and brought him before the children, who positively identified him.
Odindo, in his defence, denied the charges.
In an unsworn statement, he claimed that he was cutting grass at the grandmother’s compound and that the children ran away from him because he looked dishevelled and was carrying a panga.
He claimed to have been arrested while having lunch, denying any knowledge of the offence.
The trial and appeals
The trial magistrate convicted Odindo and sentenced him to life imprisonment under section 8(2) of the Sexual Offences Act.
Dissatisfied, he appealed to the High Court, arguing that the evidence was weak and that he had not been given a fair trial.
Justice David Majanja dismissed the appeal, stating that the trial had been properly conducted, that the prosecution had proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt, and that the identification of the accused was not mistaken.
The court also addressed the issue of the PO’s improper cross-examination, but ruled that the overwhelming evidence from the other witnesses and medical officers outweighed any procedural error.
Still unsatisfied, Odindo took his case to the Court of Appeal.
Here too, Judges Asike-Makhandia, H A Omondi, and Luka Kimaru unanimously upheld the conviction and sentence.
The appellate judges found no merit in the grounds raised by the appellant, including claims of unfair trial and violation of constitutional rights.
“The appeal lacks merit and is dismissed,” they ruled.
