Two Men in Machakos Hit With Ksh.20M Fine Or 10-Year Jail Term For Possession Of Python, Crocodile Skins

 

Image of a Kenyan police car

In a hurry? Here’s a quick summary…

• Oscar Kambona Musyimi and Anthony Mutie sentenced to 10 years imprisonment or a Ksh.20 million fine.

• Convicted for possessing wildlife trophies, specifically seven python skins and two crocodile skins.

• Charges filed under Section 92 of the Wildlife Conservation and Management Act No. 47 of 2013.

• Offense committed on November 27, 2019, at Ndalani-Sofia Market in Machakos County.

• Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) presented six prosecution witnesses during the trial.

• Witnesses provided consistent and collaborative testimonies, withstanding cross-examination challenges.

• Principal Magistrate Paul Wechuli delivered the judgment, emphasizing the strength of the prosecution's case.

Heavy Penalties Imposed on Oscar Kambona and Anthony Mutie for Illegal Wildlife Possession

On Wednesday, two individuals, Oscar Kambona Musyimi and Anthony Mutie, received a 10-year prison sentence or faced a Ksh.20 million fine following their conviction for possessing wildlife trophies. 

The charges against them, as per Section 92 of the Wildlife Conservation and Management Act No. 47 of 2013, involved the possession of seven python skins and two crocodile skins.

The unlawful act took place on November 27, 2019, at Ndalani-Sofia Market within Machakos County, as detailed by the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP). The accused were discovered in possession of the aforementioned game trophy during this incident.

During the trial, Principal Magistrate Paul Wechuli, in delivering the judgment, noted that all six prosecution witnesses provided consistent and collaborative testimonies. 

Read Also:

Two Men Charged With Ugandan Olympian Benjamin Kiplagat’s Murder In Kenya

Drama As MCA Breaks Leg While Resisting Arrest In Machakos

EAWIBP, GIZ Partner To Train Women-Owned SMEs

These testimonies, according to the magistrate, withstood the challenges posed by the accused persons during cross-examination. As a result, the court found the defendants guilty, leading to the imposition of the specified penalty.