- Justice Karanja noted that Salim's arguments were a plea in mitigation seeking mercy of the court to have the death sentence reviewed in his favour.
- He however stated that the nature of the offence left no room to accord mercy to Salim.
Image: FILE
If you ask Erick Imbugua Salim how his troubles began, he will probably tell you it was when he broke one of the 10 commandments by coveting his neighbour's goods.
A while later, Salim and his friends proceeded to rob the said goods from their owner of Sirwa Yalla village within Nandi.
It was on May 24, 2014, when they invaded Mary Siahi Musanga's home, took hold of her and demanded money from her husband as a condition for sparing her life.
Shortly after however, they brutally drove a knife through Mary's mouth right up to the back of her neck, killing her.
Following the crime, Salim and two others were arrested and arraigned before the Senior Resident Magistrate at Kapsabet.
They were charged with robbery with violence contrary to the law but pleaded not guilty to the offence.
The court proceeded to trial and conviction after which the then mandatory death sentence was imposed on Salim on July 29, 2016.
Being dissatisfied with the conviction and sentence, he filed an appeal at the High Court in Eldoret.
When the appellate court revisited the evidence availed against Salim as well as the defence he raised, it concluded that his conviction was proper and the sentence imposed upon him was lawful.
The appeal was thus dismissed for want of merit.
Delivering its verdict, the court regretted that the man and his accomplices had brutally murdered a woman, all to take away her hard-earned wealth.
"They took away both life and property and in my view, he does not deserve mercy. I find that the sentence meted was most appropriate and I decline to interfere with it," the court said in its judgment.
Unmoved by the outcome of that appeal, Salim attempted to persuade the court's mercy, by filing an application alleging a violation of his constitutional rights.
This, he claimed, was by the imposition of the death sentence which was at the time a mandatory sentence for which the trial court had no discretion.
In the application filed before the High Court at Kapsabet, the convict however failed to show how his constitutional rights were violated by the imposition of the death sentence.
The death sentence, by dint of the Muruatetu Case which was decided on December 14, 2017, is no longer mandatory.
Kapsabet High Court Judge Joseph Karanja acknowledged that indeed the 2017 case had a major effect of outlawing the mandatory nature of the death sentence.
He however clarified that it did not outlaw the death sentence itself as exists in the Penal Code with regard to a charge of murder and by extension to a charge of Robbery with Violence Under Section 296(2) of the Penal Code.
Section 296(2) states that " If the offender is armed with any dangerous or offensive weapon or instrument, or is in company with one or more other person or persons, or if, at or immediately before or immediately after the time of the robbery, he wounds, beats, strikes or uses any other personal violence to any person, he shall be sentenced to death".
Justice Karanja further noted that Salim's arguments were a plea in mitigation seeking the mercy of the court to have the death sentence reviewed in his favour and substituted for a sentence of imprisonment.
He however stated that the nature of the offence left no room to accord mercy to Salim.
"Doing so would be making a mockery of the death of the victim and probably unleashing a psychopath on the public under the pretext that he has since reformed, become a good Christian and seen the heavenly light," the judge said in a judgment delivered on January 18.
He then proceeded to dismiss the application citing lack of merit.