He maintained that the accusations against him are based on suspicion rather than direct proof.
“I did not kill Sharon,” his lawyers told the court. They stressed that even if suspicion appears strong, it cannot replace clear and convincing evidence.
According to the defence, the law requires the prosecution to provide firm proof that directly connects an accused person to a crime.
In this case, they argued, that connection has not been established.
The court heard that the prosecution’s case largely relied on claims about the relationship between Obado and Sharon.
The two were said to have had an intimate relationship, and Sharon was reportedly pregnant at the time of her death. However, Obado’s legal team insisted that a relationship alone does not amount to guilt.
They told the court that personal ties, no matter how complicated, cannot be used as evidence of murder without concrete proof.
Sharon was killed on the night of September 3 and 4, 2018. Her body was later discovered near River Owade in Homa Bay County.
The news of her death shocked the nation and sparked widespread public attention. Many Kenyans followed the case closely, calling for justice and accountability.
A postmortem examination revealed that Sharon died from severe bleeding caused by penetrating force injuries.
Doctors also found signs of manual strangulation. At the time of her death, she was about 28 weeks pregnant.
The details of the medical report painted a painful picture of the violence she suffered.
Despite the seriousness of the findings, Obado’s defence team argued that none of the medical evidence directly links him to the act.
They told the court that the prosecution must show not only that a crime was committed, but also that the accused person committed it. Without that direct link, they said, the court should acquit him.
The case has drawn strong emotions from different sides. While the prosecution believes it has built a convincing case, the defence insists that gaps remain in the evidence presented.