DPP opposes bail for Mbithe and six others in Mutiso murder case

Director of Public Prosecutions Renson Ingonga and Professor David Ndetei, the husband of murdered doctor Victoria Mutiso urged the High Court to deny bail to Rose Mbithe Mulwa and six others accused of her murder.

Ingonga, through State prosecutors, told Milimani High Court Judge Alexander Muteti that the prosecution had established compelling reasons to keep the accused persons in custody pending trial, citing risks to witnesses and the integrity of the proceedings.

Ndetei, the husband of the slain doctor, separately opposed the release of Mbithe and her two children, Chris Mulwa and Angela Mulwa saying he feared for his safety because of what he described as years of intimidation and hostility.

Mbithe, her children, Police Constable Elijah Kibelion Kimoi, Maritim Kimutai alias Kim, Police Constable Collins Bett Kiplangat and Pius Muiru Mbugua alias Headboy have denied murdering Dr Mutiso on July 29, 2026.

The DPP informed the court that the accused persons, who were all charged afresh yesterday posed a substantial risk of interfering with witnesses, obstructing investigations, destroying evidence, colluding with suspects still at large and absconding if released.

State prosecutors Jalson Makori and Gikui Gichuhi relied on an affidavit by DCI homicide investigator Corporal Romana Odour who said investigators had received intelligence of a plan to harm suspects who had agreed to cooperate with police.

She said some witnesses were known to the accused persons and their associates who remain at large, creating a risk that they could be contacted, intimidated or influenced if the suspects were released.

The prosecution further alleged that the accused persons and their accomplices meticulously planned and executed the murder of Dr Mutiso, claiming that the killing was preceded by more than four months of surveillance and preparations to intercept her.

Ndetei, who was married to Mbithe before marrying Dr Mutiso, told the court that he had allegedly lived under intimidation by his former wife and their children for more than three decades.

He said their marriage was dissolved in 2001 and that a subsequent property dispute resulted in a High Court ruling against Mbithe.

According to Ndetei, his former wife did not accept the decision and did not appeal, resulting in what he described as a continuing grievance.

He said he later married Dr Mutiso and alleged that he and his wife were subjected to constant threats by the accused persons.

“I confirm that we were constantly threatened by the accused persons and those threats eventually culminated into my wife's death for over 30 years,” Ndetei stated in his affidavit.

He said the murder of Dr Mutiso had heightened his fears and left him traumatised, adding that he feared for his safety because of what he described as years of hostility.

The professor argued that the accused persons knew his family, relatives, colleagues, friends and members of the deceased's family, as well as their homes and places they frequented.

He expressed concern that potential prosecution witnesses, including members of the two families, household and domestic staff and people within their professional and social circles, could be approached or influenced if the accused persons were released.

Ndetei also described Mbithe as “an imperious individual” who, he alleged, had repeatedly threatened him.

He said he feared that the accused persons could intimidate, bribe or otherwise interfere with witnesses, as well as endanger him and his family.

He further argued that potential witnesses could be approached through telephone calls, messages, visits or intermediaries if the accused were released.

Ndetei also raised concern over the fact that some of the accused persons are police officers, arguing that their positions could give them access  to police colleagues, records, databases and other resources that could be used to trace or intimidate witnesses.

The court heard that Ndetei and his late wife were evicted from their Mlolongo home in February this year following a court order obtained by Mbithe and their children, Chris and Angela, in a case filed before the Machakos courts.

Ndetei alleged that the eviction and the disputes surrounding the property contributed to the hostility between him, his late wife and his former family.

The defence, however, dismissed Ndetei’s allegations as malicious and unsupported by evidence.

“Prof David Ndetei's affidavit is full of malicious, hatred and witch hunt. It has been sworn in order to achieve continued detention,” lawyers representing Mbithe and her children submitted.

They accused Ndetei of using the bail proceedings to settle old scores arising from property disputes involving the former couple.

“This court has not been furnished with message or evidence of any threats in that regard,” the lawyers said.

The defence urged the court to grant the accused reasonable bail terms, maintaining that Mbithe, her children and the co-accused were not flight risks and were willing to comply with any conditions imposed by the court, including surrendering their passports.

“They are willing to deposit their passports in court,” lawyer Joel Mbaluka told Justice Muteti.

On possible interference with witnesses, the defence argued that there was no such risk, noting that some witnesses had already been placed under witness protection.

Lawyer Mbaluka further claimed that some suspects had been induced to incriminate Mbithe and her children in exchange for their freedom.

“Daniel Mwande and Samuel Karanja are suspects induced to incriminate the accused persons herein,” the lawyer submitted.

But the prosecution insisted that the risks were real and were not based on mere suspicion. “The evidence presented must be concrete, very strong and specific evidence,” the State submitted.

Prosecutor Makori also said that some accused persons attempted to conceal evidence after the murder, including erasing digital and telecommunications data.

The State further alleged that Kimoi, a serving police officer, was identified as the person who fired the fatal shot and fled after the murder before being arrested 10 days later.

Investigators claimed he destroyed evidence by burning the clothes he allegedly wore during the shooting.

The prosecution also told the court that Kim, whom investigators described as a close associate of Mbithe and her children, was arrested at Pangani Police Station while allegedly carrying food to a suspect cooperating with investigators.

According to the State, the incident followed intelligence received on August 20 concerning an alleged plan to eliminate cooperating suspects.

Kim denied the State's allegations that he attempted to poison suspects at Pangani Police Station.

His lawyer described the allegations as generalised, while confirming that Kim had gone to the station with bread and milk.

The lawyer said police later forced him to eat some of the bread and taste the milk, which he complied with and suffered no harm.

Bett, another accused person, also denied being a flight risk and disputed the circumstances of his arrest, telling the court he was not arrested in Uganda as alleged by the prosecution.

He said he was arrested in Kisumu, blindfolded and taken to an apartment, where he claimed he was tortured and that his manhood was also subjected to severe torture.

He further told the court that he was forced by the DCI to sign an affidavit incriminating key suspects in the case.

Constable Kibelion’s lawyer argued that his client had a fixed place of abode and was not a flight risk, noting that he was a serving police constable attached to Karinde Police Post.

Prosecutor Makori further said three witnesses had been placed under protection and that other alleged accomplices, including senior police officers, remained at large.

The prosecution argued that releasing the accused could compromise the ongoing investigations and expose witnesses to intimidation.

The defence, however, maintained that the constitutional right to bail could only be denied where the prosecution demonstrated compelling reasons.

“The exception, which is the denial, must be supported with evidence as opposed to apprehension, conjecture, and assertion,” the defence submitted.

Justice Muteti postponed further hearing of the bail application to Friday.