By The Weekly Vision Court Reporter
The High Court has found former Migori Governor Zacharia Okoth Obado, his former personal assistant Michael Juma Oyamo and Caspal Ojwang Obiero guilty of the murder of journalism student Sharon Beryl Otieno, ruling that the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the three acted with a common intention to orchestrate and execute her killing in September 2018.
In a landmark judgment delivered on 23 July 2026, the court concluded that a compelling chain of circumstantial evidence established their criminal responsibility, despite Obado not being physically present at the scene of the murder.
The court convicted the three of murder contrary to Section 203 as read with Section 204 of the Penal Code after a trial that lasted nearly eight years and was delayed by the COVID-19 pandemic, numerous interlocutory applications and changes in the judicial bench. They had faced two counts of murder relating to the deaths of Ms Otieno and her unborn child, known in court as “Baby Sharon”. However, the court acquitted them on the second count after finding that the prosecution had not established a case to answer regarding the unborn child.
The prosecution’s case centred on the events of 3 and 4 September 2018, when Ms Otieno was abducted from Homa Bay County before her body was discovered in Owade, Rachuonyo Sub-County. The three accused pleaded not guilty on 8 October 2018. Still, the proceedings were repeatedly interrupted by unresolved pre-trial applications, the COVID-19 pandemic and the transfer of the original trial judge in September 2022 after 25 witnesses had testified. Following a directive by the Chief Justice on 17 July 2023, the case resumed before the current judge, who concluded the proceedings after determining 16 interlocutory applications.
The prosecution called 42 witnesses during the trial. On 30 January 2025, the court ruled that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against all three accused over Ms Otieno’s death and placed them on their defence. Each gave sworn testimony, while only Oyamo called additional defence witnesses.
In its judgment, the court held that the prosecution had proved all the essential ingredients of the offence of murder: that Sharon Otieno died, that her death resulted from an unlawful act, and that the accused caused her death with malice aforethought. The court found that the severity and nature of the injuries she sustained ruled out any possibility of accidental or natural death.
On the issue of criminal responsibility, the court relied heavily on circumstantial evidence and the legal doctrine of common intention. It found that Obado had a clear motive arising from his deteriorating relationship with Ms Otieno after she reportedly declined his demands to terminate her pregnancy, threatened to expose their relationship through the media and allegedly made financial demands. The court held that his absence from the crime scene did not absolve him of liability because the evidence demonstrated that the murder was carried out in furtherance of a shared unlawful plan.
The court found that Oyamo played a central operational role in executing that plan. As Obado’s personal assistant, he was found to have fraudulently registered an Airtel telephone line to conceal communications with Ms Otieno and other witnesses, channelled money through third parties and participated in a planning meeting held at Obiero’s home on 3 September 2018. He was also identified as one of the last people seen with Ms Otieno at Graça Hotel before she left in a vehicle with her attackers. After the murder, the court found that Oyamo filed a false police report and facilitated the preparation of fabricated medical records, conduct the judge described as consistent with consciousness of guilt.
Obiero was found to have provided logistical support before and after the killing. According to the court, his residence in Nyamune hosted the planning meeting. At the same time, his wife’s vehicle, whose tracking system had been tampered with on the material day, was used during the abduction. The court also found that he assisted in procuring forged medical documents intended to conceal the offence. His defence, the court noted, failed to effectively challenge critical prosecution evidence relating to the planning meetings and the tampering of the vehicle’s tracking system.
Having considered the totality of the evidence, the court concluded that it formed “a chain so complete” that it pointed irresistibly to the guilt of all three accused and excluded any reasonable hypothesis of innocence. Applying Section 21 of the Penal Code on joint offenders, the court held that each of the accused bore equal criminal responsibility for the murder committed in pursuit of their common unlawful purpose.
Following the conviction, the court cancelled the bonds of Obado, Oyamo and Obiero and ordered that they remain in custody pending sentencing. It further directed the preparation of pre-sentence reports and a victim impact statement before the matter returns to court on 18 August 2026 for confirmation of compliance and the fixing of a sentencing date.
This report is based on the High Court’s official media summary in Republic v Zacharia Okoth Obado & 2 Others, Nairobi High Court Criminal Case No. 46 of 2018. The Weekly Vision will provide further updates once the court delivers its sentencing decision.
