• The irony is that nobody has accused Ruto of murdering Kenei or having anything to do with it.
• However, sometimes it’s not the absence of any accusation that matters, but guilt by association.
Image: COURTESY
In Hamlet, Queen Gertrude laments, “The lady doth protest too much, methinks.”
She was responding to the insincere overacting in a play within a play created by Prince Hamlet to prove his uncle’s guilt in the murder of his father, the King of Demark.
The phrase, quoted frequently today, indicates doubt concerning someone’s protestations and sincerity.
Did Deputy President William Ruto protest too much during the burial of Sergeant Kipyegon Kenei, the security officer in his office who was murdered?
For anyone whose hobby is to detect when politicians are lying and knows how Ruto speaks, he or she would have to conclude that the DP was sincere in his impassioned denial of having anything to do with Kenei's murder.
The irony is that nobody has accused Ruto of murdering Kenei or having anything to do with it.
However, sometimes it’s not the absence of any accusation that matters, but guilt by association.
In other words, Ruto may be completely innocent of anything to do with the murder. But given the characters who most likely orchestrated and carried out the killing are the same characters connected with the military equipment scam that was executed right in the DP’s office, it is hard to imagine how Ruto can avoid at least becoming collateral damage.
This largely explains why Ruto gave the impassioned speech at Kenei’s funeral, proclaiming his innocence and turning to the deceased’s father to assure him those guilty of the crime shall be found and brought to justice.
Indeed, the DP was at one point almost in tears as he professed his innocence.
And there can only be two reasons why Kenei was killed. To keep him from telling what he knows about the fake deal or to implicate Ruto and thus bring him down.
There’s no in-between scenario to explain this murder. None.
Someone who follows these things closely suggested there may be a third option, that ostensibly, there is a third actor using the murder as a cut-off to prevent the evidence trail to lead to no-go zone implicating national security. That would fall under the first of these two options.
And just so it’s clear, had Ruto wept, it would not have been crocodile tears.
But that’s one half of the story – the innocence or absence of it.
The DP did not just profess his innocence. He went on the offensive, daring anyone, including the 'system', out to stop him from becoming the next president, to even kill him. He said he won't be cowed.
The man from Sugoi singled out DCI George Kinoti as a representative of the system and basically told him his (Ruto’s) gloves are off and he is ready for the fight.
But while he may be innocent, it was not wise to take the battle to Kinoti, and therefore to the President.
It was unnecessary to say the least.
Someone will get a knockout and bettors who don’t like losing money will put their odds on the system delivering the proverbial KO.
If not, Ruto will and he will be president for life.
And the country will then see an exodus of mostly men scrambling for life and safety outside the borders and out of reach of Ruto’s own Kinoti.
Samuel Omwenga is a legal analyst and political commentator