Former Migori Governor Okoth Obado has maintained that although he had an affair with Sharon Otieno and accepted responsibility for her pregnancy, he had no motive or reason to kill her.

Obado made the remarks while giving his defence before the Milimani High Court in the long-running murder trial that has gripped the nation since 2018. He is charged alongside his former personal assistant Michael Oyamo and former Migori County Clerk Caspal Obiero over Sharon’s abduction and killing in September 2018.

How the Relationship Began

In his sworn testimony, Obado told the court that he first met Sharon during an Interpol conference in Nairobi. According to him, it was a brief encounter where they exchanged contacts and later reconnected.

He explained that the relationship developed after that meeting and that they later met again in Kisumu. The affair, he said, became intimate within a short period.

Obado described the relationship as short-lived. He told the court he later distanced himself due to doubts and concerns about Sharon’s claims, though he admitted that he continued offering financial support.

The Pregnancy Admission

One of the most critical elements of the trial has been the pregnancy.

Obado acknowledged in court that Sharon informed him she was pregnant and that he believed there was a strong possibility the child was his. Medical evidence presented earlier in the trial confirmed that Sharon was approximately seven months pregnant at the time of her death.

However, Obado denied that the pregnancy created any motive for murder. He insisted that he had no reason to harm her and that he was willing to take responsibility for the child.

His defence argues that acknowledging paternity contradicts the prosecution’s claim that he orchestrated the killing to avoid scandal or political damage.

The Prosecution’s Case

The prosecution alleges that Sharon’s pregnancy and the potential political fallout posed a reputational threat to Obado. They argue that this threat provided motive for a coordinated plan to eliminate her.

During the trial, the state presented dozens of witnesses, including forensic experts and investigators. Phone data records, witness testimony and circumstantial evidence were introduced to link the accused to the abduction and killing.

The prosecution’s position is that the murder was premeditated and that the three accused acted in concert.

The Defence Position

Obado categorically denied involvement in the killing.

He told the court he neither conspired with his co-accused nor instructed anyone to harm Sharon. He rejected claims that he procured or financed the crime.

The defence maintains that suspicion and public outrage cannot replace proof beyond reasonable doubt. They argue that the prosecution has not provided direct evidence placing Obado at the scene of the murder or directly tying him to the execution of the crime.

Where the Case Stands

The trial has been one of Kenya’s most closely followed cases because it involves a senior political figure and serious allegations of abuse of power.

After both sides closed their cases, the matter proceeded to final submissions. The court is expected to deliver judgment after evaluating whether the prosecution has met the legal threshold required for conviction.

The Core Issue

Strip away the politics and emotions, and the case revolves around three key questions:

1. Did the pregnancy create motive?

2. Is there direct evidence linking Obado to the murder?

3. Has the prosecution proved its case beyond reasonable doubt?

Obado admits to the affair.
He admits the pregnancy was likely his.
He denies ordering or participating in the killing.

The court will determine whether the evidence supports his denial or confirms the prosecution’s theory of a calculated crime.

Until judgment is delivered, the presumption of innocence remains.