Court acquits MP Babu Owino in DJ shooting case


Embakasi East Member of Parliament Paul Ongoli alias Babu Owino is a free man after the court acquitted him of the offence of misuse of a firearm in a case where he is alleged to have shot and wounded DJ Evolve.

Senior Principal Magistrate Bernard Ochoi acquitted the MP on grounds that the prosecution had failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt.

“Having evaluated the evidence before me, it it my conclusion that the prosecution did not prove the case beyond reasonable doubt,” the magistrate ruled.

Babu was found with a case to answer and placed on his defense. He called four witnesses to testify including the victim DJ Evolve who was expected to be a prosecution witness.

Through his team of lawyers led by Duncan Okatch, the MP told the court he was not drunk on the fateful night of 17th January 2020 and did not shoot the DJ. He denied behaving disorderly while armed with a fire arm.

Babu was alleged to have shot DJ Evolve on the neck while on duty a B Club in Nairobi.

Not drunk

The defense argued that Babu Owino was not intoxicated and that is why the police never filed his blood test report showing the level of intoxication in court.

The court heard that Babu’s gun had jammed the previous day at a shooting range and therefore could not have been used to shoot the victim.

He also claimed that before getting into the club, he left his gun with the club’s security as is the protocol.

In regards to the CCTV used in court, the defense argued that it been interfered with before the investigating officers took possession of it.

The court found that the prosecution had failed to prove that Babu had behaved disorderly and was drunk.

“Blood samples report and swabs of glass the accused was allegedly using were never submitted in court,” the magistrate ruled.

On disorderly conduct, the magistrate ruled that none of the prosecution witnesses testified that the accused was disorderly.

The investigating officer relied on the CCTV footage to claim that the accused was disorderly as was seen arguing with the accused even though the footage had no sound.

Victim’s testimony

The victim himself denied ever engaging in any confrontation with the lawmaker.

He also testified that he never saw where the bullet that hit him came from.

The DJ further testified that he has been friends with the MP for a long time adding that he has been supporting him since the incident.

In his ruling, the magistrate noted that no medical evidence was tendered by prosecution to show the injuries the victim sustained.

In addition, no P3 form was adduced to confirm that the victim sustained a gunshot wound.

“The investigating officer relied on the CCTV footage to determine the type of injury the victim suffered,” the magistrate added.

The court found that the CCTV footage used was not all clear.

The footage showed the left side of the accused who then points something to the other side which was dark and someone falls down. The footage had no sound so the gunshot sound is not heard neither was it clear to show the victim being shot.

It was a surprise when the DJ testified on Babu’s side. The court noted that the investigating officer said he never record a statement from the victim.

DJ Evolve denied seeing Babu with a gun. He said he was also told the accused took him to hospital.

His evidence, the court ruled, contradicted that of the investigating officer.

According to the judgment, the police should have adduced the person who allegedly recoverd the bullet to testify.

A ballistic expert should have also visited the seen to determine the angle where the accused was shot from and the position the bullet head was recovered.

There was also no medical evidence to determine that the bullet went through the accused.

The magistrate further noted that the ballistic expert did not find that the gun of the accused was the one used to shoot the victim.

In conclusion, the magistrate noted that this is a case of great public interest which could have gone wrong during investigations and the DCI should perhaps consider such.