- He would however, betray their trust and do the the unthinkable – take away their innocence on diverse dates in July 2013
- He then asked her to put on her mother's clothes and inner garments, commanded her to undress and proceeded to defile her
Image: FILE
When JI separated from his wife, his two daughters remained under his care.
He would however, betray their trust and do the the unthinkable – take away their innocence on diverse dates in July 2013.
They lived in Mai Mahiu, Nakuru county.
Court papers say on one of the days, JI was left alone with his eldest daughter BW after he asked her not to go to church with her younger sister TN.
He then asked her to put on her mother's clothes and inner garments, commanded her to undress and proceeded to defile her.
On another day, late at night, JI asked BW to join him in his bed and repeated the beastly act.
Fearing that the father who had turned into a deranged man might defile her younger sister, BW decided not to raise an alarm but plotted an escape to their grandmother’s home.
A few days later the two girls started the trek to Nyahururu.
Darkness found them in Maai Mahiu where they sought refuge in a nearby home.
It is here that BW shared her ordeal with the host lady who later informed the chief.
The two sisters were taken to Maai Mahiu police station and then to hospital where it was confirmed that BW had been defiled.
The father was arrested and charged with defilement and an alternate charge of committing an indecent act with a minor.
His defense was that BW fabricated the claims and attributed his prosecution to a pre-existing grudge with his wife.
JI said his wife was adulterous and wanted him jailed since she had a new lover.
He was convicted at a magistrate’s court in 2014 and given a life sentence.
Iteru appealed the conviction, listing a litany of grievances but was not successful. The High court tossed it off in 2016.
Undeterred, he moved to the Court of Appeal and told the court that his grudge with his former wife was not addressed.
He said that the investigating officer did not append his signature on the investigation diary; the evidence was not corroborated; and that the medical report indicting him was inconclusive.
The three-judge bench at the Court of Appeal found that the conviction was solid since it was proven that the girl was below 18 and was sexually assaulted.
The court condemned him for violating the trust the little girl had put on him as a father.
It said though it did not want intervene on the severity of the sanction, it had a role to determine the legality of the sanction chosen.
“…the jurisprudence emanating from this court is to the effect that convicted persons should be given determinate sentences as life imprisonment, though still legal, owing to its indefinite nature is no longer recommended. It is on this basis that we find it necessary to consider the appeal against sentence,” the June 21 judgement says.
He was given 30 years, noting he was a first offender. The sentence will run from 2013 when he was first arrested and presented to take plea.