Jacque Maribe turns to Jesus behind bars

776 views
0

Beleaguered Jacque Maribe on the docks

State House top officials have abandoned Citizen TV journalist Jacque Maribe after she entangled herself in a murder case.
Maribe is now on her own and has turned to her Maker as she prepares to battle the murder case.
Since Wednesday last week when the High Court ordered she be remanded at Langata Women Prison, the popular newscaster has turned to the Bible for solace. She prays every morning, afternoon and before sleep just like her father who is a pastor had prescribed to her while she was free, in vain. As it is in many prisons across the world, the favourite scripture of those behind bars is that Saul and Sila praying and prison doors opening.
As a celebrity, Maribe most times was in heavy partying and sleeping late. She rarely attended church services except wedding parties for high fliers. With no hard drinks, four course meals and wine in prison, the Bible is her only comforter.
She has also received encouragement from her father, family members and close friends.
Maribe is accused, alongside her fiancé Joseph Irungu alias Jowie, of killing Monica Nyawira.
Though she was not at the murder scene, police believe she helped try conceal the heinous killing by lying to them and destroying evidence.
During last year’s campaigns, Maribe covered Uhuru Kenyatta’s functions, a move that brought her a mixed bag of goodies.
Those close to her say due to the flow of the money, she intensified her frequency of entertainment joints patronised by moneyed city dwellers, among them B-Club in Nairobi’s Kilimani.
But she was disappointed after missing out on a top State House job to her colleague Kanze Dena.
Uhuru’s chief of staff Nzioka Waita announced the appointment of Ms Dena as State House deputy spokesperson and deputy head of the Presidential Strategic Communications Unit, though it is Maribe who had pitched tent at State House covering the president. Dena has since been confirmed to the post.
Maribe is thought to have enjoyed better relations in State House that saw her being awarded a Head of State Commendation in 2017 Jamhuri Day.
Maribe’s family is said to have described Jowie as “boastful, manipulative, controlling and with anger issues”.
On the night he allegedly took Monica’s life, he picked a fight with Maribe whom he met at a night club.
In her statement to the police, she said she was totally drunk on the night Monica was killed. Maribe is an accessory in the murder case because she assisted in the commission of the crime, although she did not actually participate in the commission of the crime as a joint principal. The distinction between an accomplice and a principal is a question of fact and degree.
The principal is the one whose acts or omissions, accompanied by the relevant mens rea (Latin for “guilty mind”), are the most immediate cause of the actus reus (“guilty act”).
If two or more people are directly responsible for the actus reus, they can be charged as joint principals (common purpose). The test to distinguish a joint principal from an accessory is whether the defendant independently contributed to causing the actus reus rather than merely giving generalised and/or limited help and encouragement.
(1) Every one is a party to an offence who
(a) actually commits it;
(b) does or omits to do anything for the purpose of aiding any person to commit it; or
(c) abets any person in committing it.
(2) Where two or more persons form an intention in common to carry out an unlawful purpose and to assist each other therein and any one of them, in carrying out the common purpose, commits an offence, each of them who knew or ought to have known that the commission of the offence would be a probable consequence of carrying out the common purpose is a party to that offence.
23. (1) An accessory after the fact to an offence is one who, knowing that a person has been a party to the offence, receives, comforts or assists that person for the purpose of enabling that person to escape.
An accessory is a person who assists in the commission of a crime , but who does not actually participate in the commission of the crime as a joint principal. The distinction between an accessory and a principal is a question of fact and degree:
The principal is the one whose acts or omissions, accompanied by the relevant mens rea (“guilty mind”), are the most immediate cause of the actus reus (“guilty act”).
If two or more people are directly responsible for the actus reus, they can be charged as joint principals (common purpose). The test to distinguish a joint principal from an accessory is whether the defendant independently contributed to causing the actus reus rather than merely giving generalised and/or limited help and encouragement.

About author