The Kibera High Court has decisively rejected an application by Sarah Wairimu to declare her ongoing murder trial a mistrial, ensuring the high-profile case over the death of Dutch tycoon Tob Cohen continues as scheduled.

Sarah Wairimu’s ambitious legal attempt to restart her murder trial from scratch has dramatically collapsed. Justice Diana Kavedza firmly dismissed Wairimu's petition, ruling that the trial court inherently lacks the jurisdiction to arbitrarily nullify its own proceedings and expunge admitted evidence.

This landmark ruling represents a monumental victory for the prosecution, effectively keeping the multi-year legal saga on track. The dismissal of Wairimu's petition, which the judge characterized as an "appellate-style review," paves the way for crucial witness testimonies, bringing the relentless pursuit of justice for the brutally murdered businessman significantly closer to a definitive conclusion.

The grim case traces back to the fatal events of July 19, 2019, the last day the prominent Dutch businessman, Tob Cohen, was seen alive. Following a agonizing 54-day disappearance that captivated the nation, Cohen's lifeless, decomposing body was tragically discovered on September 13, 2019. In a macabre twist, his remains were found concealed within an underground water septic tank located directly on the sprawling grounds of his own lavish Kitisuru home in Nairobi.

Sarah Wairimu, Cohen's widow, quickly became the primary suspect in the gruesome killing. The Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) has consistently maintained that the couple's marriage was highly toxic and riddled with intense conflict. Prosecutors allege that these severe domestic tensions ultimately culminated in a calculated, premeditated act of murder executed in cold blood.

The Defense's Bold Legal Gambit

In a strategic legal maneuver filed on January 30, 2026, Wairimu’s defense team pushed aggressively for a total reset of the high-profile murder case. Her lawyers sought sweeping and unprecedented orders: to overturn all prior rulings made by the court, to systematically remove specific documentary evidence from the official court record, and to fundamentally move the trial to be heard by a completely different judge.

Wairimu's legal counsel argued fervently that alleged procedural missteps and constitutional breaches had irreparably compromised the trial's integrity. Central to the defense's sweeping claim was the prosecution's utilization of the court's modern digital platform. Wairimu maintained that the state had improperly uploaded a massive and significant "committal bundle" to the online system. She argued this action maliciously reintroduced unrecognized documents and exposed the trial court to critical evidence prematurely, thereby severely prejudicing her constitutional right to a fair trial.

Despite these serious claims of procedural misconduct, Wairimu explicitly noted that she was not seeking Justice Kavedza’s recusal due to a fundamental lack of faith in the individual judge's character, but rather due to profound concerns over how the proceedings had allegedly unfolded in an unconstitutional manner.

The Prosecution Holds the Line

The state, represented by Senior Assistant Director of Public Prosecution Gikui Gichuhi and State Counsel Vincent Monda, vehemently opposed the mistrial application at every turn. They asserted strongly that the trial had meticulously followed due process and standard legal procedure.

Prosecutors argued forcefully that the defense's application was merely a thinly veiled, tactical attempt to relitigate legal matters that the court had already decisively settled. State Counsel Monda clarified to the court that earlier orders, including a contested mental assessment report and the directive to escort Wairimu to Mbagathi Hospital, were executed lawfully and with proper judicial oversight.

Furthermore, the prosecution fiercely defended the implementation of the judiciary's digital platform. They explained that the e-filing system serves as a highly legitimate and necessary modern tool for efficiently tracking filings alongside traditional physical documents. The state maintained that asking the exact same trial court to declare its own prior conduct a mistrial is a contradictory legal approach that Kenyan law simply does not recognize.

Judicial Impartiality Reaffirmed

In a meticulously detailed ruling delivered on Thursday, Justice Diana Kavedza systematically dismantled the defense's legal arguments. She determined unequivocally that the trial court severely lacks the statutory and legal authority to grant the specific, sweeping orders Wairimu had aggressively requested.

"If the applicant believes that constitutional legal errors have occurred, the proper recourse lies in the appeal," Justice Kavedza ruled firmly. "Accordingly, this court finds that it lacks jurisdiction to grant the principal prayers seeking nullification of proceedings, rulings and expungement of evidence."

Justice Kavedza noted that while the defense application didn't formally ask her to step down from the bench, it implicitly raised issues typically associated with judicial bias. However, after reviewing the submissions, she found absolutely no tangible evidence to support such damaging claims.

• The judge clarified that a trial court cannot simply review and overturn its own previous rulings in the unilateral manner Wairimu proposed.
• The court viewed the petition as an improper attempt at an "appellate-style review," a legal process that strictly belongs in the Court of Appeal, not the court currently hearing the primary evidence.
• "Litigants have no right to select the judge who hears their matter. Recusal is a safeguard for fairness, not a tool for tactical manoeuvre," Justice Kavedza remarked, emphatically noting that every judge takes a solemn oath to remain utterly impartial.

The Next Chapter in the Quest for Justice

With the firm dismissal of this contentious application, the Tob Cohen murder trial is cleared to proceed exactly as scheduled. The High Court has officially set May 19, 2026, as the confirmed date for the intensive hearing to resume. The public and legal observers can expect a highly significant update then, as three crucial prosecution witnesses are officially slated to take the stand to deliver their sworn testimony.

As the ODPP prepares to present its comprehensive combination of forensic analysis, DNA results, cybercrime forensics, and expert autopsy reports, the focus sharply returns to uncovering the unvarnished truth behind the tragic death of the Dutch tycoon. When the court reconvenes in May, it will mark the next critical chapter in this relentless, years-long pursuit of justice.