Judgment day set in Baby Sagini case
Young Brighton Junior Sagini whose eyes were gouged out in the most gruesome manner. Doctors have informed them that young Junior Sagini, the victim of the horrendous attack, will remain blind for the rest of his life.
The transfer of a prosecutor specifically assigned the baby Junior Sagini’s case delayed a scheduled court session to late Wednesday evening as Senior Resident Magistrate Christine Ogweno worked to beat her July deadline for the completion of the matter.
The case was particularly assigned to prosecutor Hillary Kaino, who was initially based in Kisii but was moved to Migori last month on normal transfer.
On Wednesday, the court in Kisii sat until 7pm, awaiting Mr Kaino who had another case to deal with in his new station in Migori.
One of the lawyers in the case, Mr George Morara, told Nation.Africa that the case which has drawn a lot of public interest, was assigned a specific prosecutor for consistency purposes.
“The Office of Director of Prosecutions declined to step aside Mr Kaino after his transfer to Migori. There were directions that he sees this matter of baby Sagini to the end,” said Mr Morara.
The matter had come up for confirmation of filing of submissions and highlighting of the same by the prosecution, advocates representing the victim and those of the accused persons.
The magistrate allowed the prosecution to highlight in the absence of the defense advocates who failed to present in court without communicating, since the date was fixed by consent.
The court also gave the accused persons an opportunity to express themselves before the judgment is written.
The judgement was fixed for July 7, 2023.
On December 13, 2022, at Ikuruma in Marani sub-county, the eyes of a minor were gouged out in the most gruesome manner.
The said minor, Brighton Junior Sagini, in the opinion of medical experts will not recover his sight as there is no known medical method in the world of giving him his vision back.
In his submission, Mr Kaino listed Alex Maina Ochogo (Sagini’s cousin) as the main suspect. The two other accused persons are Pacificah Nyakerario (aunt) and Rael Mayaka (grandmother).
The three family members were charged with the offence of Grievous Harm contrary to section 234 of the Penal Code. The prosecution marshaled 12 witnesses in support of its case.
For the accused to be convicted of the offence, the prosecution has to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the victim sustained grievous harm; the harm was caused unlawfully; and the accused caused or participated in causing the grievous harm.
“The second element requires proof that the injury sustained by the complainant was caused unlawfully. This means that the same was without legal justification or excuse. Was there any defence raised by the accused justifying their actions? Any self-defence, provocation raised? No such was raised and we concluded that there was no justification in gouging out the eyes of the hapless minor,” said the prosecutor in his submission.
On the key issue for consideration as to whether the accused caused or participated in the offence, Mr Kaino said they relied on direct and circumstantial evidence. The said evidence is gleaned from the record.
One of the key witnesses is Ochogo’s girlfriend who is under witness protection.
“She was at the scene on the fateful day. She was known to the accused and described them by their names. She had lived with the first accused (Ochogo) and were in an on and off romantic relationship. She placed all the accused persons at the scene. She testified at the scene and gave a graphic account of the day’s happenings including how the eyes were gouged out using a knife and the subsequent placing of the complainant in a gunny back by the accused,”Mr Kaino said in his submission.
He added, “She described how the victim was taken and placed under the bed in the second accused' (Nyakerario) house. She vividly pointed out to the court how each act culminating in the removal of the eyes was masterminded. Of note, she described and pointed out where the incident happened and where the minor was subsequently found.”
In her evidence, baby Sagini’s caregiver described how the three-year-old boy was traumatised when she first came into contact with him, including the injuries he had. He was apparently a tormented child who faced torrents of abuse.
In his testimony, baby sagini categorically testified that the third accused, his grandmother (Mayaka), removed his eyes.
The testimonies of the witnesses including Sagini’s sister, Shantel Kemunto, placed the three accused persons at the scene.
“We are of the view that the second accused (Nyakerario) left the scene well after the incident. She was in fact running away. For the first accused (Ochogo), his defense was incredible. His shifty demeanor in court betrayed him. His co-accused placed him at the scene. The fact that he was in a construction site was not believable,” said Mr Kaino.
