By Dorothy Musyoka
A Lamu court has slapped a man, 28, with a three-decade jail term for defiling a 12-year-old girl.
According to the court the convict’s family offered furniture to the minor’s family as a mode of compensation for the defilement.
But the deal fell through after the convict’s family failed to keep their side of bargain, forcing the minor’s relatives to seek justice with the authorities.
Jafah Mohamed Alias Mudhafar was found guilty of defilement contrary to section 8(1) as read with 8(2) of the sexual offences act no.3 of 2006.
According to the Office of the Directorate of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) prosecution counsel Ahmed Omar Mohamed availed 6 witnesses to prove the case against the convicted defiler.
At the same time Lamu Resident Magistrate Hon. Flavian Mulama gave a tongue lashing to mothers of the accused and the defiled girl for condoning the criminal act.
“The two women entered into a concession to settle the matter with the victim’s mother reporting the incident with police after the accused’s family failed on the terms of compensation,” said Lamu Resident Magistrate.
“The report further indicates that the girl was on the verge of dropping out of the school following persistent pressure from the accused who promised to marry her,” stated ODPP.
Hon. Flavian was more expressed dissatisfaction with a decision by clinical officer who encouraged the families to settle the matter out of court.
“It was wrong for the treating doctor one Aziza S Mbaruk to allow and/or permit any interference with the treatment notes and all these intentions are made clear by her advise to the victims to resolve the matter out of court,” stated Hon. Flavian.
Additionally the magistrate took issue with the culprit’s mother, who prepared a meal of rice and stew and a hot breakfast and delivered the same to her son while in the room with the girl.
“We can all guess again what would have happened had the mother of the accused person called him out and not condoned the behaviour by her son. Shame on you for encouraging your son to commit the offence. You had the power to stop your son’s shenanigans but you promoted it by providing food, maybe so that he has the energy. Sadly, that may be his last meal prepared by you for the next couple of years to come,” the court observed.
Following this ruling the magistrate highlighted the need to protect children from harmful behaviours.