Family feud deepens as Ndetei faces questions over ex-wife, children’s bail

A dispute over property, a contested hospital incident and questions about personal safety came under scrutiny at the Milimani High Court on Wednesday as lawyers for three murder suspects challenged Professor David Ndetei’s opposition to their release on bail, bringing his troubled relationship with his former wife and two children into the proceedings.

Rose Mbithe Mulwa, her children Chris and Angela Mulwa, and four other suspects are charged with the murder of Dr Victoria Mutiso, whom Ndetei was married to. The seven accused have denied the charges.

During cross-examination before Justice Alexander Muteti, lawyer Joel Mbaluka, representing Rose, Chris and Angela, sought to establish whether disagreements within the family had influenced Ndetei’s position on their continued detention as they await trial.

The lawyer questioned the professor about his feelings towards his children, a property dispute involving the family and the circumstances behind his decision to oppose their release.

Mbaluka asked Ndetei whether he held a grudge against his children, but the professor denied harbouring resentment towards them.

“No. I said I forgave them. I have four children,” Ndetei responded.

The professor spoke favourably about Angela, describing her as a smart girl and expressing confidence in her academic potential. However, he maintained his opposition to her release on bail despite acknowledging her abilities.

His assessment of Angela contrasted with his position on the bail application, which remains a point of contention between him and the three accused.

Ndetei expressed a different view of Chris as the defence continued to examine the strained family relationships and other disagreements that have emerged during the proceedings.

Property row features in cross-examination

Mbaluka also questioned Ndetei about a property dispute involving his children and a High Court decision relating to the matter.

The professor confirmed that the dispute existed, telling the court that the parties had been given an opportunity to appeal the ruling but had not done so.

However, the defence noted that the ruling had not been attached to the affidavit Ndetei filed to oppose the release of the three accused.

The property disagreement formed part of the lawyer’s wider examination of the circumstances surrounding the professor’s opposition to bail and the relationship between him and the accused.

Ndetei has cited concerns for his safety as one of the reasons he does not want Rose, Chris and Angela released while the murder case is ongoing.

Mbaluka challenged him to explain whether he had taken any formal steps to address those concerns, specifically asking whether he had applied to be placed under witness protection.

Ndetei confirmed that he had not made such an application, explaining that he had not gone that far. He added that his background as a medical professional meant he was not aware of his rights in that regard.

The exchange placed his claims of fearing for his safety under scrutiny as the defence examined whether he had sought the protection available to people who believe their lives could be in danger.

Disagreement over alleged eviction

The cross-examination also returned to an incident in March this year that Ndetei had described as an attempted eviction allegedly led by his son Chris.

Mbaluka asked whether the professor remembered the confrontation, including the circumstances in which he was taken to hospital in an ambulance.

When the lawyer suggested that Ndetei had been taken to hospital humanely, the professor interrupted him and challenged that description.

“Humanely? Humanely?” Ndetei asked. “No. It’s a twisting of the facts,” he said, describing the people who had come to see him as “thugs” intent on evicting him and claiming they were led by his son.

The exchange highlighted the sharp differences between the accounts of the incident as the defence sought to test the professor’s version of events.

The March incident also featured in questions surrounding the affidavit Ndetei submitted to oppose the release of the three accused.

Rose, Chris and Angela had challenged whether he personally swore the document, pointing to his reported hospitalisation at the time and suggesting that someone else might have sworn it on his behalf.

The court permitted the defence to question Ndetei to establish whether he had personally sworn the affidavit and whether the statements contained in it were his.

The inquiry therefore focused not only on the reasons for his opposition to bail but also on the preparation and authenticity of the document supporting his position.

Professor recounts alleged threats to his life

In earlier testimony, Ndetei told the court that he had reported alleged threats to his life at Athi River police station in 2025, before Dr Mutiso’s death.

He claimed that the officer commanding the station initially refused to record their statement but later allowed it after he raised the matter with senior authorities.

Asked to identify the officer, Ndetei said he could not recall whether the name was Ndegwa or Mugambi.

The alleged threats form part of the safety concerns he has raised in seeking to prevent his former wife and two children from being released on bail pending trial.

The defence’s questioning has brought several aspects of the family dispute into the bail proceedings, including the property disagreement, the March confrontation, the professor’s fears for his safety and questions over his affidavit.

The three accused remain among seven people facing charges over Dr Mutiso’s murder, which they have denied, as the court considers the issues raised in the bail proceedings.