News
Officer has a case to answer
Former police constable Edward Kirui at the High Court in Nairobi during the hearing of murder charges against him following the killing of two demonstrators at Kisumu’s Kondele market during the post-election violence on January 16, 2008. Photo/PAUL WAWERU
Posted Monday, February 8 2010 at 18:34
In Summary
- Court rules that he be put on his defence over killings during poll dispute protests
A police officer who was captured on video shooting at protesters during the post-election violence in Kisumu has a case to answer, a court has ruled.
High Court judge, Mr Justice Fred Ochieng’, found that the prosecution had established a case against Mr Edward Kirui in a murder trial and put him on his defence.
Once an accused person is put on his or her defence, it means that they are required to call witnesses to defend themselves against the accusations. At this stage the court cannot find one guilty or not until the defence is heard.
In his ruling on Monday, the judge said ballistic evidence adduced in court appears to have linked the bullet head retrieved from the body of a victim to the gun which had been issued to Mr Kirui.
Mr Johnstone Mwongela, a ballistic expert in his testimony earlier in the case, had said markings on the bullet retrieved from Mr George William Onyango’s body showed that it was fired from Cpl Kirui’s rifle.
He told the court that each rifle had unique rifling markings after firing. He likened the markings to fingerprints.
Mr Mwongela had said that three rifles, two of them Chinese-made and similar to AK-47s and a G-3 gun, were submitted to him from Kondele Police Station for tests.
The expert examined all of them and found out that they were all in good working condition.
He also test-fired each of the guns to get the markings and formed the opinion that the bullet retrieved from Mr Onyango’s body was fired from a Chinese-made rifle serial number 3008378, then held by the corporal.
The judge also noted that from evidence brought by the prosecution, Mr Kirui, who is accused of killing Mr Onyango and Mr Ismail Chacha was present at the scene of shooting.
Mr Kirui is said to have committed the crime at Kondele market in Kisumu on January 16, 2008.
A total of 21 witnesses who were called by the prosecution testified against Mr Kirui. Among those who testified was foreign journalist Lucy Hannan who was covering the post-election violence.
Ms Hannan who works for UK’s Channel 4, had said the officer, who was camouflaged, ran after two young men with his gun up and then fired at them.
After shooting the two, she had said, the officer kicked one of them in a casual manner as he lay on the ground. She said none of the protesters had any weapon at the time they were shot.
“There was no obvious trigger to the shooting,” said the witness.Mr Kirui is expected to present his defence to court on April 21.
-
Submitted by wagkimunyaPosted February 09, 2010 11:01 PM
-
Submitted by Asungu007
Yes but who gave the orders to shoot. We need to go after those behind the orders to shoot defenseless people. Simply prosecuting Mr. Kirui will not achieve much.
Posted February 09, 2010 10:09 PM -
Submitted by kiwiko
The person on the dock should be the then police commissioner who gave the orders not the person following orders.
Posted February 09, 2010 07:08 PM -
Submitted by agogogeorge
The guy has to undergo stern punishment even if it calls for meeting the hangman to act as a warning to those officers who don't know the purpose of the assigned rifles.The government needs to enlighten the officers on the value of human life due to the fact that most of them are ignorant of their duties.I mean they should not only be trained on how to shoot but also on how to save human life.
Posted February 09, 2010 06:53 PM -
Submitted by hardraj2020
Simply a pwan - while those in power and truly responsible recieve their paychecks and get away with murder... awesome.
Posted February 09, 2010 04:32 PM




RSS
I sympathise with Rofi for his uncalled for remark. The rioters were sirely not armed with G3 rifles. The police are or should also be trained to disarm. In legal terms, his reaction would be termed as disproportionate and he should feel the heat of the fire he started. He does not warrant any sympathy and neither should he get it.