logo
ADVERTISEMENT

Appeal backfires as man gets life sentence for defiling 6-year-old

Vincent Korir was found guilty of defiling the child in a school van on the morning of March 24, 2018.

image
by SHARON MWENDE

News10 August 2025 - 16:40
ADVERTISEMENT

In Summary


  • He had been sentenced to 25 years in prison by the trial court, a decision that was upheld by the High Court. 
  • However, upon his second appeal, the Court of Appeal dismissed his case and enhanced the sentence to life.
A pair of cuffs and a gavel/FREEPIK.




A man convicted of defiling a six-year-old girl in Kericho has had his sentence increased to life imprisonment after the Court of Appeal found the earlier 25-year term unlawful.

Vincent Korir was found guilty of defiling the child in a school van on the morning of March 24, 2018. 

He had been sentenced to 25 years in prison by the trial court, a decision that was upheld by the High Court. 

However, upon his second appeal, the Court of Appeal dismissed his case and enhanced the sentence to life.

Korir had pleaded not guilty and claimed he was herding cattle at home on the material day.

But the Court found his defence unbelievable and based on inconsistencies.

The complainant, referred to as DC, told the trial court that Korir was her school van driver and was well known to her. 

That Saturday, she said, she was the only child in the van. Korir allegedly drove for a short while, parked the vehicle, removed her clothes and defiled her.

“He told me if I cried, he would kill me,” she testified. 

She later went to school as usual but remained in pain. Her mother noticed that she kept coming home crying for several days, but was unable to explain why.

On March 28, the child finally opened up. Her mother, MC, examined her and found red bruises on the child’s private parts. She rushed her to Kapkatet Hospital the next day.

A medical officer examined the girl. 

“She had bruises on her labia majora and minora. There were lacerations consistent with blunt object penetration,” he told the court.

Though there was no bleeding, the doctor confirmed the injuries were between two and four days old.

The P3 form was filled later, and the delay was explained as administrative.

The police officer who investigated the case, CPL Janet Tarus, testified that Korir surrendered to police on May 1, 2018.

The case hinged largely on the testimony of the child, her mother, and the medical evidence.

The Court noted that under Section 124 of the Evidence Act, a conviction for sexual offences can be based on the testimony of a single child witness if the court believes the child is telling the truth.

“We find that she was deliberate with the truth,” Justices John Mativo, Mwaniki Gachoka and Weldon Korir.

They added that there was no mistaken identity, as both the child and her mother had known Korir for two years.

Korir’s defence included an alibi and testimony from the headteacher who claimed the school was closed on Saturdays. 

But the Court found gaps in that evidence. 

“Though he said the school did not operate on weekends, he admitted he never came to school on Saturdays. He also could not produce the attendance register for that day,” the ruling noted.

The Court further questioned why the headteacher could not remember the school vehicle’s registration number or confirm whether the child was absent on the material day.

In a dramatic turn, the Director of Public Prosecutions had filed a notice of sentence enhancement. 

The Court warned Korir about the risk, but he opted to proceed with the appeal.

“The appellant was ready to take a blow for the rule of law,” his lawyer told the court.

In its ruling, the Court said the sentence initially imposed was unlawful because under Section 8(2) of the Sexual Offences Act, defilement of a child under 11 years attracts a mandatory life sentence.

The court noted that the girl was six years old then, adding that “it is not gainsaid that the sentence meted out to the appellant (Korir) was unlawful”.

“Accordingly, as per the notice of enhancement dated April 22, 2025, the appellant’s sentence of 25 years imprisonment is hereby set aside and substituted with a sentence of life imprisonment,” the judges ruled. 

“We set aside the sentence of 25 years and substitute it with a life sentence.” 

Related Articles

ADVERTISEMENT