The Wednesday court session at Milimani took a new twist during the sentencing hearing of former Migori Governor Okoth Obado and his co-convicts, as the parents of the late Sharon Otieno appealed to Lady Justice Cecilia Githua for leniency regarding the former governor.
Obado's co-convicts are Michael Oyamo who was wearing a pink shirt and a black suit and Casper Obiero who was wearing a black kaunda suit. Obado was in a navy blue suit and sky blue tie.
The Court adjourned to look for a Dholuo interpreter because parents of the late Sharon wanted to address the court in Dholuo.
During the morning session, the three could be seen talking. They looked composed but worried at the same time. The court was full to capacity. Police were having hard time to control relatives and members of the public who showed up in court to follow proceedings.
Following a brief adjournment to secure an interpreter, the court established the order of proceedings, allowing the prosecution to present first, followed by the victim’s family, and lastly the defense counsel.
The family of the late Sharon urged High Court to spare Obado either a death sentence or a life sentence and that they were okay if he would be handed a non-custodial sentence.
Ms Melinda Auma, Sharon's mother, said if Obado is handed a death sentence or a life sentence “another death will occur in my family”.
“Spare me another death in my family by handing down a non-custodial sentence,” Ms Auma said.
Father to the late Sharon, Mzee Douglas Otieno said he was bitter with Oyamo and Obiero.
He said they were the last people to be seen with Sharon.
One allegedly gave a car while the other hired hitmen who did the unthinkable by shedding his daughter's blood that was leaked.
Mr Otieno stated that if he was a dog, he would maul the two - Oyamo and Obiero - and leak their blood just the same way his daughter's blood was leaked by wild animals in the Owade Forest in Homa Bay County.
"I am a very very bitter person with them. They have shown no amount of remorse. For nine years that l have attended this trial, the two have not been remorseful," Mr Otieno said.
He added that relatives of Obado have visited his family seeking reconciliation, which his family has welcomed.
But the State through prosecuting counsel Gikui Gichuhi, objected the reconciliation saying "sentencing is the role of the Judiciary" and cannot be swayed otherwise.
Ms Gichuhi said the offence was against the State and Public and that sentences must be in line with judiciary sentencing policy.
She added that the Supreme Court did not scrap the death sentence in the Francis Muruatetu Constitutional interpretation on death penalty.
In their victim impact statement, Sharon’s parents anchored their plea on restorative justice. They requested a non-custodial, supervised sentence for Obado, explaining that keeping him behind bars would prevent them from maintaining a constructive relationship and halt the financial support required for Sharon’s three surviving children.
Their counsel emphasized that legal procedures should not overshadow the emotional, psychological, and economic needs of the victims, noting that punishment alone cannot reverse their tragedy.
They pointed out that Obado had previously provided assistance voluntarily and argued that his continued freedom would allow structured support for the children’s welfare and education.
Conversely, the prosecution advocated for a severe, deterrent penalty, emphasizing the gravity of the offense.
The State submitted that the murder was premeditated, highlighting the multiple injuries inflicted on the victim, the state of her body, and the unprovoked nature of the crime.
Furthermore, prosecutors noted an abuse of office, given that the co-accused were close associates employed by Obado and acquainted with the deceased.
While acknowledging the family’s statement, the prosecution argued that victim preferences are not binding on the court, as murder remains a crime against the State and society that warrants public deterrence under established sentencing guidelines and judicial precedent.
Defense attorneys for Obado and his co-accused, Michael Juma Oyamo and Caspal Ojwang Obiero, pressed for non-custodial orders, community-based supervision, or probation.
Obado’s counsel cited legal precedents where community-based orders were granted to prevent broader societal hardship, highlighting his standing and potential usefulness to the community.
Representing Oyamo, counsel noted that the second accused had no prior criminal record and cited a probation report recommending supervised probation.
The court heard that Oyamo’s local priest and area chief described him as a remorseful, community-minded individual who actively supports vulnerable children.
Defense counsel added that Oyamo attempted reconciliation on August 12 by sending a five-member delegation to the victim’s family—a visit constrained earlier by bail conditions—and offered financial compensation to help alleviate the hardship faced by Sharon’s children.
Lady Justice Githua stated she will issue her ruling on November 27, 2026, at 10:30am after considering submissions made on Wednesday.
Be the First to Comment