BY SAM ALFAN.
The Director of Criminal Investigation George Kinoti has urged the court to dismiss the application by Sarah Wairimo Kamotho, the wife of the missing Kenyan based Dutch businessman, who has challenged orders granted by a Kiambu magistrate detaining her for 14 days.
The DCI through Senior Assistant Prosecutor Alexander Muteti said that Wairimu is likely to interfere with witnesses, some of whom she had coached on what information to give to the police.
In his affidavit, detective Maxwell Otieno asked the court to uphold the ruling of the trial Magistrate since no grounds have been advanced to warrant the disturbance of the exercise of the discretion of the Magistrate.
According to the police, it is highly probable that the missing Tob Cohen might have been kidnapped from his residence in Nairobi and taken by Wairimu and associates to an unknown place. The police suspect that the kidnap may probably turn to be murder.
Cohen has been missing since July 19, 2019 and his phone has since been unreachable.
His wife filed the case before the High Court seeking to review the orders to detain her for 12 days.
Wairimu who arrested in connection to the disappearance of her husband was detained on 2nd September by Kiambu Law Courts Chief Magistrate to allow police to complete investigations.
She argued that her arrest and arraignment in court without a charge or holding charge is in breach of her fundamental right to liberty and freedom.
Through her lawyer Eva Mbula, Wairimu says that the learned Magistrate misdirected herself in finding that there sufficient grounds on which she should be remanded for 12 working days without justifiable reasons.
“Without prima facie evidence of the nature of the purported offence for which the applicant has been arrested, she has been ordered detained for 12 days without justifiable cause and in contravention of her constitutional right to liberty,” states Mbula.
The court heard that the learned Magistrate misapprehended and/or failed to appreciate the law applicable for applications of custodial orders.
She accuses the police of failing to provide the information they hold, which she requires for the exercise or protection of her fundamental rights to freedom and liberty by failing to inform her of the charges or purpose of her arrest with sufficient details to enable her answer it.
“Rather than inform the applicant of the charge and/or purpose of her arrest to enable her answer it, the respondent has resorted to ‘leaking’ information to the media,” her lawyer said.
