Elizabeth Auma, the mother of missing fisherman Brian Odhiambo, displays a portrait of her son at the Nakuru Law Court on February 6, 2025.
Bribery allegations have emerged in the investigation into the mysterious disappearance of Nakuru fisherman Brian Odhiambo.
Fresh revelations indicate that unknown individuals have attempted to bribe witnesses in a bid to compromise the ongoing investigations.
Mr Odhiambo went missing on January 18, allegedly after being arrested by Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS) rangers in Lake Nakuru.
Odhiambo’s mother Ms Elizabeth Auma made the damning allegations in an affidavit filed before a Nakuru court on Monday. She stated that an individual identified only as Hosea approached her, claiming he had been sent to speak to her about the case.
According to Ms Auma, Hosea offered her a financial inducement in exchange for dropping her pursuit of justice.
“He then asked me to quote my price so that this matter could go away. I understood this as an attempt to offer a bribe or financial inducement in exchange for my silence and withdrawal from the pursuit of justice for my missing son,” reads part of the affidavit.
She said the man allegedly left promising to return for further discussions, a move she interpreted as a sign of continued pressure, threats or further offers.
A portrait of Nakuru fisherman Brian Odhiambo who disappeared on January 18, 2025 after being arrested by KWS officers at Lake Nakuru National Park.
“I was deeply disturbed by this encounter and interpreted it as a clear attempt to interfere with the ongoing investigations and obstruct the course of justice,” she stated.
Ms Auma reported the matter to the police and informed her lawyers.
The affidavit was tabled in court on Monday when six suspects linked to the fisherman’s disappearance were arraigned.
Appearing before Principal Magistrate Kipkurui Kibelion, the suspects Francis Wachira, Alexander Lorogoi, Isaac Ochieng, Michael Wabukala, Evans Kimaiyo and Abdurahman Ali were charged with abducting Mr Odhiambo with the intent to confine him at an unknown location on January 18.
Plea taking was initially deferred to the afternoon after lawyers representing the family protested KWS’s decision to have its legal counsel Leon Callisto represent the accused.
Led by Mr Kipkoech Ngetich, the lawyers argued that Mr Callisto’s representation posed a conflict of interest, given that he was taking instructions from the KWS, which should not be involved in a matter of individual criminal culpability.
According to him, allowing the KWS counsel to represent the suspects would pit the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions against KWS, which is not on trial.
But Magistrate Kibelion ruled that KWS had an institutional interest in the outcome of the case and was therefore entitled to have its legal counsel represent the accused.
“Other than defending its employees, KWS is protecting its institutional interest. I do not see any conflict of interest. I find that Mr Callisto is within his rights to represent the accused persons herein,” the magistrate ruled.
The suspects wil remain in remand until May 12 when the court will rule on whether to release them on bond.
