NAIROBI, Kenya — Criminal defence lawyer Cliff Ombeta has publicly challenged the conviction of former Migori Governor Okoth Obado in the murder of university student Sharon Otieno, arguing that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt.
Ombeta’s remarks came a day after the High Court convicted Obado, alongside his co-accused Michael Oyamo and Caspal Obiero, for the 2018 murder of Sharon Otieno, a case that has remained one of Kenya’s most closely followed criminal trials.
In a statement shared on social media, Ombeta maintained that his client was wrongly convicted, insisting that the evidence presented during the trial did not place Obado at the scene of the crime or directly link him to the killing.
“Obado did not commit that offence. I don’t know about the others. Even the circumstantial evidence (non-existent) could not put him in any scene or act,” Ombeta said.
The advocate also criticised the trial court’s reasoning, suggesting the conviction was based on assumptions rather than concrete evidence.
“The court (Judge) imagined he was afraid of publicity and embarrassment and therefore…” Ombeta wrote.
He further questioned whether investigators had sufficiently explored alternative theories regarding the murder.
“Was it possible other family did it?” he asked.
However, the High Court reached a different conclusion after evaluating the evidence presented during the trial.
In its judgment delivered on Wednesday, Justice Cecilia Githua held that the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt that Obado, Oyamo and Obiero acted with a common intention in the murder of Sharon Otieno.
The judge found that although Obado was not physically present at the crime scene, the evidence established that he financed and facilitated the execution of the murder, while his co-accused played different roles in carrying out and concealing the offence.
Following the conviction, the court cancelled the bond terms granted to the three convicts and ordered that they remain in custody pending sentencing.
Ombeta’s comments are likely to fuel further public debate over the landmark case as the defence prepares for the sentencing phase and considers a possible appeal.
