Ezekiel Oramat Sonkoy v Republic [2013] eKLR “...we stayed two for months there. I used to sleep in a house. We slept in the same house. That is when we started to sleep in the same house. We slept in the same house. We made love. We slept on the bed with him...” And: “...we used to know each other. We were starting to be friends in 2009. We had done s** at his place before Eldoret. My place is not far from his place...” In cross – examination PW1 stated that the appellant did not force her to have sex. The appellant promised to marry her. W.L (PW2) is an uncle and guardian of PW1. PW1 stayed at his home. On 17th August 2010 he arrived home to find PW1 missing. He made various reports and searches. After 2 months he and.D.K (PW3 who is PW1s' father) found PW1 in Eldoret in the company of the appellant. PW1 and the appellant were living as husband and wife. They were arrested and the appellant was subsequently charged in court. No. 88807 PC David Murai (PW4) of Kilgoris Police Station received report, investigated the matter, arrested the appellant and presented him to court. PW4 also prepared P3 Form which was completed by a Clinical Officer Dickson Nenguseu (PW5), who examined PW1, found evidence of defilement and produced P3 Form in court as part of the evidence That is the prosecution case that the trial magistrate evaluated and having found a prima facie case as having been established called on the appellant to answer. The appellant gave sworn testimony where although he still denied the charge essentially confirmed the prosecution case. Let him speak for himself: “...We agreed with the girl we were boy and girl friends. I never defiled her. We agreed and decided to stay together. We went with her so that we give the parents time so that we go back to them officially. The parents didn't like it so the girl became confused. I pray that the court should be lenient and forgive me. I will never repeat that again...” When he was cross-examined by the court prosecutor the appellant stated:“...I know the girl. She is a friend of mine. She used to be a girl friend she was a lover. I had slept and had sex with her sometime back. I knew the age...” As we have already stated the appellant was convicted and duly sentenced, the trial magistrate reminding himself in the sentence that the appropriate sentence was set out in the Sexual Offences Act for an offence such as the one that the appellant faced. The appellant was represented by counsel in the first appeal where 12 grounds of appeal had been raised. The learned judge in a fairly well considered judgement re-evaluated the evidence and reached the conclusion that conviction had properly been entered and the sentence should not be disturbed. The appeal came before us on 10th June, 2013 when the appellant appeared in person while Mr. G. A Mongare, learned Senior Prosecuting Counsel appeared for the respondent. The appellant complained that the evidence of prosecution witnesses did not support the charge relating to the date when the offence was committed. The charge sheet states that the offence was committed on 17th August, 2010. Evidence of PW1 confirms that this is the day she left home and accompanied the appellant to his home. This is http://www.kenyalaw.org - Page 3/6