Kiambu choir teacher imprisoned for 20 years for defiling minor

Once a week at a local church in Kamangu Village in Kiambu County, members of the choir would meet to practise and prepare for the Sunday service. On August 25, 2009, as was usually the routine, Njeri (not her real name) and her younger sister, Grace, attended the choir practice session. Their choir teacher, James Ndung’u, concluded session at 5:30pm. The other children left but Ndungu called 13-year-old Njeri back and told her to take a jug and cups to the kitchen within the church.

Njeri complied. Unknown to her, Ndung’u was following her. When she entered the kitchen, he got hold of her and made her lie down on the seat.

Njeri would later testify that Ndung’u lifted up her skirt and tore off her underwear as he defiled her. After Ndungu was done, he told Njeri to go home. She walked home crying and reported the incident to her mother who immediately made a report at the Kikuyu Police Station. Njeri was taken to Orthodox Hospital in Kamangu and thereafter Nairobi Women’s Hospital where she was treated. Ndung’u was arrested and charged at the Kikuyu resident magistrate’s court. In his defence, he claimed to be a bicycle repairman and had no idea why he was being accused of defilement. He further said that his family and that of Njeri’s had differences relating to a parcel of land. The court found him guilty and sentenced him to 20 years in prison. Dissatisfied with the court’s decision, Ndung’u appealed at the Nairobi High Court, saying that the charge sheet was defective and that his constitutional rights had been violated. The appeal was dismissed, but he filed another appeal at the Court of Appeal in Nairobi, which was presided over by Judges Erastus Githinji, Sankale Ole Kantai and Fatuma Sichale. The Appellate Court judges noted that Ndung’u had failed to raise the issue of his constitutional rights being violated during his first appeal and therefore dismissed the appeal. On October 7, 2016, Ndungu’s second appeal was dismissed by the Court of Appeal, noting that it had no merit and the evidence presented by the prosecution was sufficient and no prejudice was suffered by the errors in the charge sheet.