A Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS) expert investigator was on Monday put to task over the events of January 18, 2025, when a suspect allegedly disappeared while in the custody of KWS rangers.
The suspect, believed to be missing fisherman Brian Odhiambo, allegedly went missing after he was arrested for trespassing into Lake Nakuru National Park and engaging in illegal fishing.
Senior Warden Edwin Mwasi took the stand before Senior Principal Magistrate Kipkurui Kibelion to defend six KWS rangers charged with abducting Odhiambo, who has been missing since the incident.
The six are Senior Sergeant Francis Wachira and rangers Michael Wabukhala, Alexander Lorogoi, Isaac Ochieng, Evans Kimaiyo and Abdulrahaman Sudi.
Mwasi struggled to defend his claim that the six rangers did not violate the Standard Operating Procedure or the Wildlife Conservation and Management Act when they arrested the suspect, who KWS maintains escaped from custody.
His position was questioned by Kibelion, who sought to understand why Mwasi, who testified as an expert investigator, had failed to produce the manual detailing the standard procedures as well as the relevant Act.
“What expertise did you bring to court?” asked Kibelion.
In his defence, Mwasi said his sworn testimony on the procedures for handling arrested trespassers and illegal fishermen within the park demonstrated sufficient expertise.
Pressed further, Mwasi, who described the alleged escape as a serious incident, admitted that it had not been properly recorded in the Occurrence Book (OB).
He confirmed that there was no specific OB number for the alleged escape of the suspect believed to be Odhiambo.
He told the court that although the incident had been entered in the OB, it was strangely recorded in the remarks column instead of the Nature of Occurrence column.
“For the whole month of January 2025, that is the only incident entered in the OB under the remark section. It has no time, and I cannot tell by the face of it who entered it,” he admitted.
Mwasi further acknowledged that remarks are usually follow-ups to occurrences, but admitted that the entry concerning the alleged escape was not a follow-up to any incident report. He also said one could not make a remark about something that had not occurred.
Mwasi admitted that he was in court when Sudi, who was last seen with the missing fisherman, defended himself and said the fisherman injured him before escaping.
“Don’t you find it outrageous that the injuries suffered by Sudi, which allegedly led to the suspect escaping, were not recorded in an OB?” asked Kibelion.
“It was not captured. We usually record and report injuries to the police, based on the degree,” answered Mwasi.
“Are you telling the court that Sudi’s injury, which saw a suspect escape, did not meet the threshold of being reported to the KWS and the police?” pressed Kibelion.
In response, Mwasi said he believed the injury did not meet the threshold, despite admitting that he had not been deployed to the national park at the time of the incident.
Although he maintained that this was not a violation, Mwasi admitted that Sudi, who was driving the vehicle transporting the suspect, should have been accompanied by two other rangers to guard him.
During cross-examination by the prosecution, Mwasi admitted that he could not know whether the rangers abducted and confined Odhiambo.
He further said he could not know whether Wachira had reported the alleged escape because he was not present when the incident occurred.
“The alleged escape has never been reported to the police station because we did not record the details of the arrested suspect. The same is usually handled internally,” he testified.
The investigator was also questioned over why he remained in court when some of the accused persons testified, despite knowing that he would later give evidence in the case.
“Don’t you think giving testimony as a KWS officer in a case that you have participated in will be a conflict of interest?” asked Mogendi Abuya, a lawyer representing Odhiambo’s family.
“No, because as an investigator I only came to testify on the general procedure for an arrested person,” he answered.
Mwasi also admitted that he did not conduct independent investigations to establish why Sudi remained alone with the suspect for hours, contrary to the standard procedure.
“Don’t you find it strange that the suspect was left alone with a ranger driver who was supposed to drive a KWS vehicle and at the same time guard him?” asked lawyer Kipkoech Ngetich.
“I believe that Sudi was under instruction to guard the suspect alone. Suspects can also escape in custody of more than two officers; it was just unfortunate,” answered Mwasi.
His testimony marked the close of the defence case.
The case will be mentioned on October 26, when the court is expected to give a date for judgment.
