Detective tracks man who killed his brother over witchcraft
Anena was hit by a blunt object and bled to death. His body was found buried just a few metres away from his garden.der. Illustration by Cosmos Arinitwe
Kampala- On April 25, 2014, Louis Anena left his father, Tani Anena, tilling his garden at Akeu Village, Ndhew Sub-county in Nebbi District. Anena returned home in the evening and waited for his father to come back.
At about noon, it started raining, but his father didn’t come back. It didn’t bother him until it approached 7pm. He asked their neighbours whether they had seen his father. None had seen him.
With his family members, they went back to the garden to look for him. The day faded without getting any trace of him. They informed the residents and local authorities about his disappearance.
The local officers and the residents had to wait for the next day to kick- start a grand search for the missing person. It didn’t take hours for them to find what they feared most. Tani Anena’s body was discovered a few yards away from his garden. His body had been buried in a shallow grave and covered with grass.
As the family members started mourning the death of their loved one, local authorities rushed to the nearby police station to report the matter.
A veteran police officer Assistant Inspector of Police Kennedy Chorom was assigned to investigate the case.Chorom with his forensic team arrived at the scene in a short time.
He secured the scene and then examined the surrounding area.
According to police records, D/AIP Chorom noted that there had been a struggle at the scene of crime which pointed to the fact that Anena’s death couldn’t have been occasioned by natural factors.
Further examination of the area showed that several footmarks left the scene. The first respondents told D/AIP Chorom that they didn’t tamper with the scene.
Lead found
D/AIP Chorom’s on-site interviews gave him the first lead – that the deceased had had a long grudge with his relatives with whom they shared a homestead.
Residents told him that the deceased had reported a sister-in-law, Paska Beriwu, to the village chief that she was sending evil spirits that were attacking his children, making them sick most of the time.
Mateo Obima told the officers that when the matter was brought to his attention, he called a meeting which the accused Beriwu and the elders attended. The accused denied the allegations.
Obima said they couldn’t determine the case so they all agreed that a traditional healer be called and he examines the victims and determine whether Beriwu was the cause of the problems.
The traditional healer came and did his examinations that exonerated the accused. The deceased wasn’t satisfied. He sought a new examination by another traditional healer, who carried it out and convicted the accused of witchcraft.
The accused didn’t agree with the second healer so she petitioned that a third examination be carried out.
All parties agreed, but the aggrieved and accused parties were to meet the consultation fees for the healer. They verbally agreed though Beriwu never fulfilled her part of the bargain and as a result, the third examination was never carried out.
To him, the bad blood started from there and led to the killing. The body of the deceased was taken to the hospital for a post-mortem to establish the cause of the death.
All residents had already convicted Beriwu, her husband Oyirwoth Pakivale and their son, Geoffrey Onega, of the crime in the public court.
But D/AIP Chorom needed evidence to prove the lead. Detectives are aware of homicide cases where criminals exploit existing misunderstandings between the deceased and relatives or neighbours to put them off the track.
D/AIP Chorom started from the basics of talking to those who could have witnessed the killing. There was none he could find.
Deceased’s son testifies
The only person who last saw the deceased alive was his son Louis Anena. He told the police that the only people whom he saw near where the deceased was tilling were Beriwu, Pakivale and Onega.
He said the trio left their garden, which was near theirs and left them tilling. The residents wanted to destroy property of the people they suspected to be behind the death.
The investigator sought to interrogate Beriwu. She told the investigator that at the time it is claimed that the deceased was killed, she was tending to her dried cassava far away from the scene. She said she was in a crowd of so many women who should be interviewed by the police to prove that she was innocent.
Pakivale told detectives that he returned from a hunt of wild animals with his colleagues a day after the killing of Tani Anena.
He said he found when an angry mob had destroyed their houses. He said he had to spend two days at the home of the area Local Council chairman where he was arrested from and taken to Nebbi Police Station.
Onega told police that it was a fact that he was in the garden that day with Palivale and others, but he left the deceased tilling his garden. He said he only returned home and visited the home of a colleague who had a sick child.
He added that it was during his visit that he had people making an alarm that his brother was missing.
Onega said he immediately joined the search until his brother’s body was recovered.
He said he was shocked that he could be implicated in the killing of his brother, whom he didn’t have a grudge with.
Without any direct evidence linking the suspects to the killings, the detective had to piece up the bits to see if the suspects had an offence against them. The postmortem report indicated that the deceased was hit with a blunt object on the head that led to bleeding and death. That couldn’t have been a natural occurrence.
The inconsistences in Pakiyale and Onega’s statements reinforced the detective’s conviction that they were at the scene of crime when Tani Anena died and probably had a hand in his death. All indications pointed to the fact that the trio were at the scene when the deceased was killed.
The Directorate of Public Prosecutions agreed with D/AIP Chorom that they were behind the killing. In no time, they were produced to court on charges of murder and remanded.
In the trial, each accused maintained their denial. After listening to testimonies of witnesses from both sides, Judge Stephen Mubiru found no evidence that destroyed Beriwu alibi that she was grinding cassava far away from the scene of crime.
“This doubt must be resolved in her favour and since the prosecution did not adduce evidence discounting the possibility that Beriwu was not at the scene when the deceased died, this has created a reasonable doubt in the case against her and, therefore, the prosecution has failed to disprove her alibi,” Judge Mubiru said.
However, he convicted Pakivale and Onega of murdering Tani Anena. He sentenced Onega to 22 years and three months in jail. Pakivale was sentenced to 12 years and 3 months in prison.
The sentence
I have considered the fact that the convicts are first offenders, Pakivale is a young man. I consider a reformative sentence to be appropriate for Pakivale. I for that reason deem a period of 15 years’ imprisonment to be an appropriate reformative sentence in light of the mitigating factors in his favour.
In accordance with Article 23 (8) of the Constitution and Regulation 15 (2) of The Constitution (Sentencing Guidelines for Courts of Judicature) (Practice) Directions, 2013, to the effect that the court should deduct the period spent on remand from the sentence considered appropriate, after all factors have been taken into account, I observe that the convict was charged on May 2, 2014 and been in custody since then.
I hereby take into account and set off a period of two years and nine months as the period the convict has already spent on remand. I, therefore, sentence Pakivale to a term of imprisonment of 12 years and 3 months, to be served starting today (February 8, 2017).
On the other hand, Onega is a man with considerable family responsibilities. Nevertheless, he killed his own brother over an allegation of witchcraft made against his wife. He deserves a deterrent sentence. I for that reason consider the period of 25 years’ imprisonment to be an appropriate deterrent sentence in light of the mitigating factors in his favour.
In accordance with Article 23 (8) of the Constitution and Regulation 15 (2) of The Constitution (Sentencing Guidelines for Courts of Judicature) (Practice) Directions, 2013, to the effect that the court should deduct the period spent on remand from the sentence considered appropriate, after all factors have been taken into account, I observe that the convict was charged on May 2, 2014 and been in custody since then.
I hereby take into account and set off a period of two years and nine months as the period the convict has already spent on remand. I therefore sentence Onega to a term of imprisonment of 22 years and 3 months, to be served starting (February 8, 2017).
The convicts are advised that they have a right of appeal against both conviction and sentence within a period of 14 days.
