A Nakuru court has finally given a verdict in a protracted custody case that spanned eight years, beginning in 2012.
The court presided over by Nakuru resident magistrate Benjamin Limo granted full custody of the minor to the father, Ephantus Miana while limiting the mother, Elizabeth Thuita, to 9 hours a year in which to be with her child.
As per their ruling, as reported by the Nation, the judge provided that the mother would be limited to supervised visits on the first Saturday of every school holiday from 2.00 p.m to 5.00 pm.
That adds up to three school holidays a year, at three hours per session which amounted to 9 hours cumulatively across each calendar year.
“I have granted the mother supervised access to the minor on the first Saturday of each of the closing school holidays from 2 pm to 5 pm. The supervision [is] to be under the gender officer on duty at the Nakuru Central Police Station and should be within the gender office and in the presence of the father,” provided Justice Limo.
The basis of the judgment was a report by Salome Waithaka, the Nakuru East Sub-Couty Children’s Officer, which was drawn from an interview between the officer and the minor.
As per the interview, the minor claimed that her mother had abducted her, abused her and subjected her to cruelty.
The minor had expressed her preference to remain with her father and stepmother as she claimed that her biological mother had threatened to kill her.
Elizabeth, the mother, reacting to the ruling claimed that justice had been miscarried. She claimed that the basis of the court ruling was based on lies from her estranged husband.
About the report from the children’s officer, she asserted that it was both malicious and false, created punish her.
“How can I be a cruel mother to my child whom I have been seeking custody of for more than eight years? She was coached to state those claims because the father wants to punish me by keeping her away from me,” she questioned.
Justice Limo, in his ruling also barred the mother’s her relatives from visiting the child in school until she attained the age of 18.
Elizabeth had fought to have the judge recuse himself in the case on the grounds that he was biased in the matter having committed her to a month’s jail term for contempt of court.
Limo also dismissed a second application from Elizabeth to adjourn the case so she could get more time to prepare for it.
[ATTACH=full]291150[/ATTACH]
Elizabeth, dissatisfied with the ruling, has vowed to appeal the case.
You guys always say the court rules in favour of women all the time…well not all the time. There must have been really overwhelming evidence for the judge to separate a woman from her child. Hiyo access period si ni kali jameni? better to keep off and communicate by post.
Some women do abuse their kids. I saw a documentary about a mother that used to have sexx with her 11 year son here in the UK and in her defence she said she and the step dad were trying to stop him from turning gay. So she was teaching him how to have sex with a woman. She got a v lengthy sentence.
Bado haijanikujia bro…yes it is here already with 319 confirmed cases and 5 deaths as of yesterday last I checked. But we have huge trust in how the BoJo and his gava are handling it. With all the seriousness it deserves.
Lakini I am in the house most of the time.
Most likely the man is not demanding for child support. But if the lady were to get the child the next battle could have been related to child support.
The ruling is still in favor of the woman. She gets supervised visitation even after the kid testified that the mother was abusive and even threatened to kill the child. If the roles were reversed and it as the father being accused of the abuse and death threats, he would never see that child again, and he would be in jail right now.
Not really. As a mother, I would feel totally crushed at such minimal supervised contact and with the ex hubby in tow. There must be a reason why that ruling was made. And if the courts are not happy with the reports from the visits, it will be cancelled altogether.
It’s not about how the mother feels, it’s about protecting the child. What you’re basically saying is that abuse by the mother shouldn’t be punished the same as abuse from the father since one would obviously get a more severe punishment for the same thing.
No, what I mean is that, for a mother this is enough punishment. That, you will be seeing your own child under supervision and recorded and with the ex in the room too!!!. The intention is to make her give up voluntarily if she does not mean it.
Which is why I said there is a reason as to why this ruling was made. May’be the child said they would like to be seeing the mother but with Dad around…the child is paramount here. Not her or his feelings. The fact that she is appealing makes think that she is v dizzy. She should comply and work with them. Think the judge was quite fair. In short, this is enuff punishment.