Sample Opening Statement(s)

Contents: 

1. Sample Opening Statement By Alphonce

2. Sample Opening Statement By Alphonce

Faith Mueni's Opening Statement

 
I am…, and I represent Faith Mueni who is the petitioner. The respondent is AlphonceMuoki, represented by …. This is a request for Faith to be allocated her half of the Machakos farm and for the intended eviction by the respondent to be blocked. I will first discuss the facts we will prove, after which I will review the evidence that will support these facts. We will prove the following facts;

i) That Faith Mueni was legally married to Alphonce and that the marriage was contracted under Kamba customary law; and,

ii) That Faith contributed to the purchase of the 13 acre farm in Machakos (LR No. 9999)

iii) That Faith is legally entitled to an equal share of the farm.

Your Honour, this is a case about a promise broken, a dream ended, a life shattered. My client, Faith Mueni, is a 35 year old mother of 3 children, Sebastian, Stella and Anne. She has been married to the respondent for 13 years, during which time she was a stay-at-home mom. The respondent is the District Education Officer of Machakos District. Here‘s how it all started, 13 years ago. Faith meets the respondent and the two fall in love. They then decide to move in together. At the time, Faith is working as a waiter in a local hotel in Machakos. To formalize their relationship, they contract a marriage under Kamba customary law. 2 years after the marriage and one child later, they buy a 13 acre farm near Katumani Research Institute. Although Faith does not make direct monetary contribution to the purchase of the farm, she takes care of all the family bills in order to allow the respondent to accumulate enough money to pay for the farm. A year after the purchase of the farm, Faith, on the respondent‘s request quits her job as a waiter and relocates to the farm. She diligently works the farm and is able to feed her family without requiring support from the respondent. There is even surplus harvest which is sold by the respondent and the proceeds used to build Faith‘s house on the farm. She later starts a dairy farm which becomes very successful. With her proceeds from the dairy farm, she takes care of all the family bills, including the children‘s school fees, in order to allow the respondent to comfortably pay off the mortgage on the farm. After the respondent finally finishes paying off the mortgage, he refuses to help Faith with the family‘s upkeep. By then, the family has grown by two more children. He suddenly becomes verbally and physically abusive. His usual weekend visits become more infrequent, and finally stop altogether. Later Faith notices some construction taking place on her farm and on making enquiries is told that a house for the respondent‘s new wife is being put up. She then travels to Machakos town to confront the respondent, and finds a woman claiming to be the respondent‘s wife at his house. When the respondent comes home later, he gets so incensed on seeing Faith and orders her out. He even calls her a ―mad woman‖ for saying that she was his wife. Now this same respondent who was helped to his feet by Faith wants this court to help him evict Faith and their children from the only home they have known for the last 13 years. Your Honour, on the point of whether Faith was legally married to the respondent, you will hear the expert evidence of MzeeNyamai, an 85 year old friend of Faith‘s parents who was present during Faith‘s betrothal ceremony. You will see the pictures of Faith‘s parents taken on the day of her betrothal and another picture of the respondent‘s dowry negotiation party. These pictures, as the respondent will admit, were purchased by him and given to MzeeNyamai as a memorial of the ceremony. This demonstrative evidence, along with the testimony of MzeeNyamai, Jomo Obama and Faith herself, will convince this court that Faith was legally married to the respondent.Your Honour, as you will see, the respondent has little time for his family. Initially he would only go home over the weekends, but he has stopped visiting completely. Faith will testify that for almost the whole life of this marriage she was the responsible for the needs of the children, all in an effort to ease the financial burden on the respondent. A selfless sacrifice to which the respondent has attached no value. A review of the pleadings will demonstrate that it is the respondent who wants this marriage (whose existence he denies) to end. As the facts of the case will show, like the dog in the manger, the respondent doesn‘t want Faith as his wife, is unwilling and does not have time to take care of his three children, but does not want his wife to be able to go on with her life, either. How selfish is that? Ask the horse who couldn‘t eat his dinner when the dog wouldn‘t move from the manger. Your Honour, the respondent will contend that he single-handedly bought the farm in Machakos. He will even produce as evidence a Sale agreement which indicates that he is the sole buyer. Further, the seller of the farm will testify that to his knowledge, the respondent was not married to Faith. What the respondent will not tell you is that were it not for Faith‘s contribution in paying for the family‘s upkeep, he would not have bought the farm. Again, the sale agreement will not demonstrate that Faith‘s contribution enabled the respondent to raise the purchase price. The seller, who had not seen or communicated with the respondent in many years, will also not tell you that Faith is married to the respondent, because he can‘t tell. After relying on the respondent‘s promise to live with her till death, and after 13 years of dedication to the respondent, Faith is about to lose it all. For nothing. She and her children are now threatened with eviction from their only home, and are facing a very uncertain future because of the respondent‘s selfishness. This court can come to her aid, and I ask that a permanent injunction be granted to block the respondent from evicting Faith and her children from the farm, and that this court issues orders granting Faith an equal share of the farm in Machakos.

Alphonce Muoki's Opening statement

May it please the court, my name is…, and I represent Mr.AlphonceMuoki who is the respondent. It is our case that the petitioner in this matter, Faith Mueni, does not and has never owned or held the parcel of land identified as L.R. No 9999 Machakos and therefore is ill advised by her counsel in asking this honorable court to making any orders regarding the said parcel of land. We will show the court that;

i) My client AlphonceMuoki was never married to Faith Mueni,

ii) All the contributions towards the purchaser of the 13 acre farm in Machakos (LR No. 9999) were made by my client Alphonce,

iii) Subsequently, Faith is not entitled to any share of the farm.

Your Honour, this court has just listened to a sensational presentation by the petitioner‘s side intended to paint my good client in bad light. It is not disputed that my client knew Faith Mueni; my client admits that they had a brief romantic liaison 13 years ago and got a child. My client not being one to abandon his responsibilities and as a way of making up for his indiscretions, out of the kindness of his heart offered to provide for the petitioner and their baby. It is sad that the kindness shown by my client has been abused to this point that we find ourselves at today. Thirteen years ago, Alphonce was a well-educated man working for the Ministry of Education making strides career wise. He meets Faith who is working as a waiter and they have a brief sexual liaison for ten months. They are blessed with a son and Alphonce is proud enough to give the child his last name, Sebastian Muoki. For whatever reason, the relationship turns sour and the two part ways but Alphonce is responsible and proud enough of his son that he supports them and even makes visits to Faith‘s home to be with him. Six months after their relationship has ended, Faith contacts Alphonce and informs him that she has lost her job as a waiter and is in need of a place to stay. She could rely on my client‘s kindness and sense of responsibility to act. Alphonce has held a relatively enviable job and has made something of himself, having been able to acquire loan facilities from a bank and buy a 13 acre piece of land near Katumani research institute on his own. Alphonce empathizes with the seemingly helpless Faith and agrees to put her up at his farm house even letting her work the land at no profit to himself and never demanding any rents. There is a clear understanding that this arrangement was merely temporary until my client finds a bride and starts his home at the farm. This is all contained in my client‘s sworn statement and he will testify to this.

Your Honour, the petitioner contends that she has been married to my client for 13 years and seeks to rely on the evidence of MzeeNyamai. MzeeNyamai is an 85 year old friend of Faith‘s parents and is in his own words ―the memory of the community‖. With all due respect MzeeNyamai has seen better days. He was 72 years when the alleged traditional marriage ceremony between my client an Faith took place. With ageing comes a lot of degradation physical functional and abilities such as memory and recollection bear the brunt. As ―the memory of the community‖ is it also possible that MzeeNyamai witnessed very many such ceremonies and is getting the participants confused? In his sworn statement he already makes the mistake of stating that Faith has 3 sons when in fact it is a son and 2 daughters. Alphonce is father to the boy and is responsible for him alone. The petitioner also seeks to rely on two photographs as proof of my client‘s alleged marriage to Faith. We admit that the photographs are authentic but they are not dated and the photographer cannot come before this Honourable court. We will kindly be requesting the court to indulge us in the rule requiring documentary evidence to be presented by its author.

Your Honour, counsel for the petitioner has attempted to take the wind out of our sails‘ by pre stating what we intend to rely on in proving that my client bought the 13 acre parcel of land with his own money and without any form of contribution from Faith or anyone else. I am confident that this Honourable court has an eye for justice that will easily see through this smoke screen tactic. I do not wish to fall into their trap by being repetitive so I will just make an extremely short statement. The entire transaction for the land is clearly documented and at no point is Faith a party to the transaction. We will tender as evidence the sale agreement made between Alphonce and Mr. Charles Muema. The petitioner on the other hand seems unable to produce any documentary evidence that support her contention of being a contributor to the purchase of the farm. The complainant employs similar smoke screen tactics of pre stating weaknesses in their case so as to ‗take the wind out of our sails‘ again. Faith mentions in her sworn statement that she tracked her contributions by recording them in a book that was allegedly taken by my good client and has somehow managed to elude finding, how convenient. I trust this court‘s eye for justice. The kind hearted nature of Alphonce has surely been tested over these 13 years, but the straw that broke the camel‘s back was when Faith had the audacity to storm into my client‘s matrimonial home and desecrate its sanctity by peddling hurtful lies to his young bride, almost destroying their union ordained before God. After all evidence is tendered and all witnesses have taken the stand, I request that this court finds for my client, dismissing the petitioner‘s case with costs. We rely on this court‘s eye for justice. Much obliged your Honor.