Man who killed neighbour to serve 28 years in jail
Crime and Justice
By
Kamau Muthoni
| Mar 03, 2026
Killers behind bars either murder with a motive or intent.
However, Isaac Nderitu will go into the history books as the first Kenyan to kill someone ‘for nothing.’
Jackson Wangangi is deceased. The dead tell no tale; hence, the reason why Nderitu hit him on the stomach, causing a fatal rapture remains a mystery.
Those who saw the brawl told the court that they heard that Nderitu beat Wangangi for nothing.
READ MORE
Agoa renewal offers new chance to redefine Africa's place in global trade
Iran war hits kitchens as shilling slumps, forex reserves dwindle
China woos Kenyan producers with '800-million opportunity' as zero-tariff deal takes effect
Co-op bank shares set for further gains on strong profit growth, lower rates
Kenya slashes dollar debt to record low as Chinese yuan gains ground
Government plans stricter laws to clean up tea sector
Tourism earnings hit record Sh500 billion as arrivals near 8m
Kakamega youth, women eye avocado export cash after skills training
Portable kitchen: Designer taps into space-saving trend
Kenya urged to pilot AI regulatory Sandbox in bid to lead Africa's digital future
For this, the Court of Appeal Judges Agnes Murgor, Imaana Laibuta and Ngenye Macharia affirmed a 28 years jail term, after finding that his explanation that Wangangi got hit by a toilet hole when he was going to relieve himself was too far from a believable account.
“Upon re-evaluation of the evidence and the law, we come to the conclusion that the learned Judge properly analysed the facts, applied the applicable legal principles of circumstantial evidence that established a complete chain pointing irresistibly to the appellant as the perpetrator responsible for the deceased’s death. As a consequence, we are satisfied that the conviction was safe,” the bench headed by Justice Murgor ruled.
The case was first heard by High Court Judge Nyakundi.
Wangangi and Nderitu’s story started on April 9, 2020, at Nyangoro, Lamu County.
On the fateful day, Paul Ndisho was called by his neighbour that a fight had erupted near his fence. The informer, one Bethuel, told Ndisho that one of the persons had been badly injured.
Ndisho stated that he immediately rushed to the scene and found Wangangi lying in pain and bleeding from the stomach.
He narrated that he rushed him to Witu Hospital.
The man told the court that the deceased was conscious and spoke sporadically.
However, the following day, a woman he sent to take some milk and clothes to the deceased informed him that the deceased was no longer in the ward.
Ndisho said that upon learning that Wangangi had died, Nderitu showed up and persuaded him to go to the police station for company. However, he was arrested on the way.
The second witness, Bethwel Wamba, told the court that he met a woman called Mama jane who explained to him that two men were in a fight. He also rushed to the scene, and Wangangi asked him for help to report to the police. He said that the deceased told him that only the government would come to his assistance.
Wamba said that he was told that Nderitu beat Wangangi for nothing.
The Director of Public Prosecution also called Dr. Samuel Kimani as a witness. He told the court that a postmortem indicated that the stomach was swollen and had large amount of fluid and a rapture, which were consistent with a hit with force.
The other witness was Police Constable Solomon Akwoyo. The officer said that he was the investigator. According to him, there was no murder weapon, but there was one Regina who witnessed the fight, who vanished and could not be traced.
The officer testified that Wangangi had disclosed that Nderitu was the person who beat him up.
In his reply, Nderitu told the court that Wangangi had allegedly passed by his home to answer a call of nature. He said that the deceased left a bag with him but he saw him lying outside the toilet.
The court observed that it was clear he was the last person to be seen with Wangangi. For this, the judges said, he needed to give a plausible explanation on what or who caused the death.
“On application of the doctrine of common intention, the evidence showed that it was the appellant and no other that inflicted the fatal injuries on the deceased. For this reason, it was inapplicable to the circumstances of this case. This ground is also without merit,” they ruled.
MOST READ
- Iran war hits kitchens as shilling slumps, forex reserves dwindle
BUSINESS
By Brian Ngugi
- China woos Kenyan producers with '800-million opportunity' as zero-tariff deal takes effect
BUSINESS
By Brian Ngugi
- Co-op bank shares set for further gains on strong profit growth, lower rates
BUSINESS
By Brian Ngugi