Plea-taking for Pangani-based police officer Rashid Ahmed has been deferred yet again to March 3.

High court judge Kanyi Kimondo deferred the murder plea that was scheduled for tomorrow pending a ruling on whether the police officer should be charged with murder at the High Court or at a Magistrate Court.

The Judge had ordered him last month to surrender himself to the Directorate of Criminal Investigation (DCI) in Garissa Township and for him to undergo a mental assessment before he could plead to the charges of murder on February 9.

Through his lawyer Danstan Omari, however, he filed an application challenging the murder charges levelled against him at the High court.

Ahmed claimed that commencing the murder trial at the High court was lacking in legal justification and logic arguing that if the High Court ends with a guilty verdict, he shall be deprived of a remedy for appeal.

“I shall be deprived of a remedy such as that which I could have if the verdict was reached at the Magistrates court, whereby I can move to the high court for a retrial,” Ahmed argued in court documents.

He added that initiating murder trial at the High court compromises an essential element of his right to a fair trial which is denying him a step in the appellant chain as provided for in the constitution.

Sergeant Rashid Ahmed is facing murder charges over the March 31, 2017 killings of two boys; Jamal Mohammed and Mohammed Dhair Kheri in Eastleigh; an incident that was captured on camera.

He is accused of fatally shooting the two boys on March 31, 2017, on suspicion of engaging in crime within the Eastleigh neighbourhood.

DPP recommended his prosecution over the said murder following the investigations done by the Independent Policing Oversight Authority (IPOA).

This caused an uproar from two factions with Human Rights Organizations claiming that Rashid Ahmed he should be answerable for his actions saying it was about time to end police Impunity.

Eastleigh Business Community demonstrated outside Milimani Law court saying the officer should have been awarded for what he did not get prosecuted for it.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *