Nana M’ameru & 2 others v Republic
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal dismissed three murder appeals, ruling that a grudge, an alibi, or witnesses being related to the victim cannot overturn solid eyewitness testimony.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Key legal issues
#Sufficiency of consideration of the alibi defence
The trial Judge did not err in considering the alibi defence and concluding it was an afterthought displaced by watertight eye witness evidence.
The Court re-evaluated the testimony of the four eye witnesses and found the appellants were properly identified and recognized as the persons who cut and killed the deceased. The eye witness account placed each appellant at the scene, so the alibi was disproved. The Court adopted Ramadhan Kombe v Republic, where the weapon and cause of death were obvious and there was no other version of how the deceased was killed nor by whom.
Whether a grudge defeats the charge of murder
A grudge between the deceased and the appellants does not negate malice aforethought; cutting the deceased with slashers evidenced an intention to kill.
The Court adopted Daniel Muthee v R on malice aforethought under Section 206(b) of the Penal Code, holding that setting upon the deceased and cutting him with a sharp instrument shows knowledge that death or grievous harm would result. The grudge was irrelevant where the evidence showed the appellants cut the deceased with slashers intending to kill him.
Testimony of related eye witnesses
Relationship of the eye witnesses to the deceased did not affect their evidence and caused the appellants no prejudice.
The Court found the evidence of the four eye witnesses overwhelming and cogent, consistent and corroborative, and delivered in broad daylight. The trial Judge had examined their demeanour and found them honest and worthy of belief, and the defence had not cross-examined on the issue, which the trial court found to be an afterthought.
Legal principles established
#- On a first appeal, the Court of Appeal has a duty to re-evaluate the evidence on record and come to its own independent conclusions.
- An alibi defence is displaced where consistent and credible eye witness testimony places the accused at the scene and identifies him as the offender.
- A prior grudge between accused and deceased is not a defence to murder where the evidence establishes the requisite malice aforethought.
- A court may infer malice aforethought from the unexplained conduct of the accused under Section 111 of the Evidence Act.
- The fact that eye witnesses are related to the deceased does not by itself affect the probative value of their identification of the attackers where no prejudice is shown.
Court orders
#- 1.The appeal against conviction and sentence is dismissed
- 2.The conviction of the appellants for murder and the sentences of death imposed by the High Court stand
- On appeal from
- High Court of Kenya at Meru
- H.C.CR.C No. 6 of 2006
- Jurisdiction invoked
- First appellate jurisdiction over a conviction and sentence from the High Court sitting on a murder trial (Criminal Appeal from the High Court)
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Later judgments citing this (1)
#Judgments in the corpus that rely on this one. Where the Court said how it treated the authority, that is shown.
- Wangui v Wangui (Environment and Land Case 1403 of 2016) [2025] KEELC 5971 (KLR)[2025] KEELC 5971 (KLR)2 Sept 2025
Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "Nana M’ameru & 2 others v Republic", Case Analysis (2014). Criminal Appeal No. 303 of 2011. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2014/657/eng@2014-04-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.