A man has been sentenced to 20 years in prison for the unlawful killing of his partner following a domestic altercation that turned fatal in Baringo County.
The sentence was handed down by the High Court sitting in Kabarnet, following a conviction for manslaughter in a case that highlighted the tragic intersection of alcohol abuse, domestic violence, and community unrest.
The incident occurred in late May 2023 in a village in Baringo Central.
According to court records, the man and the deceased, who were in a relationship, had spent the evening drinking when a disagreement between them escalated.
During the altercation, the man allegedly used a blunt object, a rungu, to strike the woman, causing fatal injuries.
Initially charged with murder, he was eventually convicted of the lesser offence of manslaughter after the trial court found insufficient evidence of premeditation but concluded that the fatal act had occurred during a moment of violent outburst.
The court acknowledged the gravity of the offence, particularly because it occurred within a domestic setting and involved the use of a weapon.
A pre-sentence report prepared by the probation office revealed that the man was a 26-year-old father of two, working informally to support his young family.
"The accused is a 26-year-old father of two, who worked as a boda boda operator. He dropped out of school in class six and later took on manual jobs to fend for his family. He admitted to committing the offence under the influence of alcohol and regretted his actions," the judgment read.
The probation report painted a mixed picture.
While acknowledging that the offender could potentially benefit from structured rehabilitation and noting that he had expressed remorse, the report also highlighted ongoing community tensions and a lack of reconciliation with the victim's family.
The family, still grieving the loss, expressed that justice would only be served through a custodial sentence.
"No reconciliation or compensation has occurred," it stated.
In court, the defense counsel urged the judge to consider a non-custodial sentence.
The defense highlighted the accused’s youth, first-offender status, and responsibilities as a parent.
They argued that his actions were not planned, arose from emotional distress and intoxication, and that he had already suffered consequences through time spent in remand.
The court was asked to consider an alternative sentence that would allow him to return to the community, rebuild his life, and care for his children and aging parents.
However, the prosecution opposed this plea, stressing the severity of the offence.
The State argued that the loss of life, especially in the context of intimate partner violence, warranted a sentence that would serve both punitive and deterrent purposes.
They further pointed to the absence of any reconciliation or restorative efforts by the offender and the strong sentiments expressed by the victim's family and the broader community.
In delivering her sentence, the judge acknowledged the legal framework under which manslaughter is punishable by up to life imprisonment but noted that sentencing is guided by the circumstances of each case.
Justice Rachel Ngetich emphasised that while the offender was a first-time convict and had shown some remorse, the aggravating factors outweighed the mitigating ones.
These included the fatal outcome, use of a weapon, the setting of domestic violence, and the emotional harm inflicted on the victim’s family and the wider community.
“The offence was grave, resulting in the loss of life. The community remains aggrieved, and no reconciliation or compensation has taken place,” the court observed.
The judge added that a custodial sentence was necessary not only for the offender’s rehabilitation but also to reinforce the seriousness of the offence and promote justice in the eyes of those affected.
The court further found that a non-custodial sentence would not serve the interests of justice in this case, given the violent nature of the act and the broader public interest in deterring domestic violence.
The judge held that accountability must be seen and felt, particularly where life has been lost under such avoidable and painful circumstances.
"The accused is sentenced to 20 years’ imprisonment. The period spent in remand shall be computed as part of the sentence. Right of appeal within 14 days,” the court ordered.
