Reading the story it says the bro went to confront the brother in law about their divorce not to kill him. And to me it doesn’t seem like they were hired. Who’d hire their own brother to kill some one?
Hata from the story Inasema wale wengine ni ma cuzzo wake. And wife anasema alikuwa Ana chapwa. Im assuming that’s why alikuwa anajitoa.
Their brother in law chased them with a knife. They had a knife too. The end.
But juzi hapa hapa tu kiongos si uli comment venye no matter how beautiful a jarruo woman looks,kwako bado ananuka omena?
They can be charged for manslaughter.
True Dat
[ATTACH=full]301498[/ATTACH]
You are better off learning Kikuyu than swahili
Wacha tuta wacha kiti na huyo mwizi wa Mali ya Umma tuone
Haha mkuki kwa nguruwe tamu lakini kwa binadamu uchungu…
Uyo dem achunguzwe kama ni Muna Wairimu
Hiyo ni Sawa. If you read the details in the article you can’t know what the intention was. Weree they really trying to kill him. If so was their actions consistent with that or is it they fought na ikakuwa hivyo.
And then did the wife send them to kill him, or intimidate him? Or did she even send them? She can argue that she didn’t. Hata wale Wali accompany the stabber can argue that when that happened it caught them off guard cause that’s not what they came there for. That the whole thing was triggered with that Husband chasing them down with a knife after they went to talk to him. Ni vijana wadogo. He may have turned into the aggressor.
I can easily see a situation where alikuwa Anachapa dame. Then her male family members walienda mum confront usichape msichana wetu ama kumwongelesha vibaya like we are not here. Then akawa attack na kisu akiwafkuza. Then they defended themselves.
So she did not hire a group of thugs to go kill this guy like is being suggested . Her brother and her cousins walienda kuongelesha kajamaa and he turned violent.
Let us start with the basic formula for criminal liability which is = The prohibited act (acts reus) + The mental state (mens rea) - defenses
Was the prohibited act of unlawful killing carried out? Yes. Can we call it murder? Probably yes, but it will be hard to prove this in court. The accused carried a knife ‘when going to talk to him’ which could suffice for malice aforethought but just undercharge here as it makes work easier. So manslaughter.
What was the mental element that accompanied their action? I will leave this one for you to decide. But surely why carry along 4 men (family members) when going to talk to a person with whom you had relationship issues? How objective was that conversation going to be in a 4 (or 5) vs 1 situation?
Do the accused have any defenses? Probably yes. Are they enough to save them in court? We leave that for the judge. We can ask a few questions to see what thinking the judge may apply here: your are 4 men with a knife (assuming only one had a knife) and you are up against 1 man (he has a knife)… was ‘reasonably equal force’ used here? You can introduce here the defense ati alikuwa anachapa dame. But that is not an excuse to draw the knife you brought to see him or is it? Who was the first to draw their knife? What if the victim (upon seeing the accused’s knife) just grabbed the knife which was closeby and intended to use it to scare them as he was terrified of the potential harm 4 men could cause him? (meaning the victim didn’t bring a knife to meet them ilikuwa tu karibu wakimkujia akaichukua).
I tried to address myself to the brother na hao cousins. For the wife, the arguments would be different kiasi.
They can argue that the victim has a history of violence… and they went many people so he doesn’t over power them since wako na mwili ndogo na ni wadogo. Safety in numbers. The knife also for self defense. Just in case.
The victim has a history of violence. Chased them down with his own knife trying to grievously harm if not kill one of them. So if they came mkono tupu and this guy had a knife on him Kama mambo ya kawaida, one of them would be dead. And the only way to stop him was self defense with the knife they brought… Allegedly:D:D
Hiyo hired a gang to kill the husband isn’t computing for me.
Looks like this will be settled out of court. That’s how they do justice in Isich. The family of deceased will be compensated in kind. Remember the finance guy’s case, the one who had an assassination attempt?
They clearly shouldn’t hire you as their defense counsel. Going by your argument, I’d charge them for murder as you clearly indicate that they meet the threshold of ‘unlawful killing with malice aforethought.’ Everything you have presented as a defense is an indication of their plan to commit murder. See how they can be deconstructed:
They can argue that the victim has a history of violence.
First, you have to prove this with records. Secondly, the law doesn’t allow you to take the life of someone who has a history of violence. The defense that works for you when dealing with someone who has a history of violence is called justification. For example, you can claim, I was going to talk to him and then he attacked me (this means that you can justify your action by the prevailing circumstance which you didn’t anticipate). If you admit having prepared for his reaction (by bringing a knife) then you lose the justification. From a criminal liability perspective, you don’t PREPARE to defend yourself. And even if you do, you have to use reasonably equal force. That is mostly why it’s stupid to carry around a gun in a place where most people don’t have one (a debate for another day).
…hired a gang to kill the husband…
If you ever bring your friend to confront someone (which makes you two people) and cause any form of injury on the person, this makes you a gang and you can be both charged with robbery with violence (whether you paid your friend or not). The judges will easily superimpose this principle on this issue an huyo bibi atakuwa toast.
This is an easier route. But on this issue, the state should act on behalf of the victim, in the strict sense of criminal law. But again, this is Kenya…