A Milimani court will deliver a key ruling on July 7 determining whether the prosecution in the cybercrime case against controversial blogger Maverick Aoko will be allowed more time to present witnesses or be compelled to close its case for lack of evidence.
The decision was set by Principal Magistrate Dolphina Alego after the prosecution failed to present the full list of witnesses during the three-day hearing window allocated for the case.
During Thursday morning’s hearing, the court was told that only one witness was available to testify, prompting the defence team to file a formal application seeking the closure of the prosecution’s case on grounds of insufficient evidence.
Sergeant Testifies on Arrest but Admits Key Gaps
The lone witness, Sergeant Norah Shindi, told the court that she had been assigned to arrest Aoko along Gatanga Road alongside a Chief Inspector and officers from the Intelligence Unit. She testified that the arrest and subsequent search were authorised by a court order obtained via a miscellaneous application.
She said that during the operation at the accused’s house, police recovered several items including:
- A Huawei phone with a broken screen
- A laptop
- A flash disk
- A Dell laptop charger
“At the point of arrest, we found the items in her house,” Shindi said.
However, during cross-examination, significant procedural gaps emerged. Sergeant Shindi admitted that she could not confirm whether the house belonged to Aoko, nor could she confirm the ownership of the seized devices.
“I am not the investigating officer in this matter,” she told the court, adding that she had not been briefed on the specific reasons for the arrest and assumed it was related to cybercrime.
She further revealed that the search order did not contain the accused’s address, and that the location was identified based on directions from another officer who is not listed as a witness in the trial.
Shindi concluded her testimony by stating that the recovered items were handed over to the investigating officer, who did not appear in court.
Background of the Case
Maverick Aoko is facing charges of false publication and cyber harassment under the Computer Misuse and Cybercrime Act, 2018, for allegedly using her X (formerly Twitter) account to post false and defamatory statements targeting a complainant, Beth Wambui Mbuitu.
The charge sheet states that on August 3, 2024, Aoko posted:
Maze it disorients me to say this.. But Amber Ray is innocent. She did not ruin marriage, ya Jamal Amira.. Beth did. She’s the daughter of a powerful cop, so if you find me thrown Kware, refer to this tweet… Ask how Jamal moved from Makanga wa South C to Matatu boss… Ndio naanza.”
The prosecution argues that the tweet was malicious, false, and deliberately crafted to damage the complainant’s reputation. If convicted under Section 23 of the Computer Misuse and Cybercrime Act, Aoko faces up to 10 years in prison, a fine of Sh5 million, or both.
Aoko, who was arrested on August 16, 2024, is currently out on a Sh100,000 cash bail.
What Happens Next
Principal Magistrate Alego is expected to rule on July 7 on whether the prosecution should be granted an extension to call more witnesses or whether the case will be dismissed at the close of the prosecution’s evidence.
Legal observers say the outcome could set an important precedent on prosecutorial conduct, especially in cybercrime-related cases involving public figures and online speech.
The defence argues that the failure to produce key witnesses and the procedural gaps in the search and seizure weaken the case beyond salvage, while the prosecution is expected to seek more time to shore up its witness list.
As the case enters a critical phase, both free speech advocates and victims of cyber harassment are closely watching the court’s next move.
