Wendy Waeni exposed

Tony sued two grown, ugly ass women. Suing a child and her poor mother would have invited more backlash from the public. Joe is just following their lead. You decided to try this case in the court of public opinion? Okay, let's do this. When you attack me with a handgun, don't act shocked when I respond with a machine gun.

If Wendy's supporters had sued Joe, all these issues you're addressing would have been sorted in a proper court of law. Wendy angesema she's never received a single coin, halafu Joe atoe browsing history yake, alafu judge amwambie that's not relevant to this case, you're accused of scamming this young lady, produce evidence to the contrary.

They opened this can of worms by going public. There are no rules of engagement.
The man has ruined his reputation. Nobody will want to be managed by someone who can do this to a child.

As for the women being ugly I don't see what he has to do with anything. FOCUS.
 
Where do you get the idea that a child has got greater rights than him? Since when did the accused need to prove his innocence? The person making the accusations needs to prove his guilt. Yeye alisema she has never received a penny. Remake akasema hajawahi kupewa anything because hii no promotion. So who is lying?
Its your Kenyan law, basics 101. A child has more legal protection more than you in the event of mudslinging/felony or whatever hence enjoys more protection if he/she breaks any law in comparison to an adult. It is assumed she is not mature to make sound decisions. For an adult, all gloves are off. Ignorance non the less is no defence on his part.

If he has given out money three transcripts would be worthy a defence then shut up other than realeasing a minors alleged ponographic lifestyle. In whose authority was he releasing them let even that, lable them as facts? Up until now I don't understand why he felt he needed to release those snapshots whose authenticity is in doubt. Big fail from the manager in handling the minor, boy child ameniangusha, not only me but most men!
 
Last edited:
Its your Kenyan law, basics 101. A child has more legal protection more than you in the event of mudslinging/felony or whatever hence enjoys more protection if he/she breaks any law in comparison to an adult. It is assumed she is not mature to make sound decisions. For an adult, all gloves are off. Ignorance non the less is no defence on his part.

If he has given out money three transcripts would be worthy a defence then shut up other than realeasing a minors alleged ponographic lifestyle. In whose authority was he releasing them let even that, lable them as facts? Up until now I don't understand why he felt he needed to release those snapshots whose authenticity is in doubt. Big fail from the manager in handling the minor, boy child ameniangusha, not only me but most men!
Which law? Quote it please. The person to make an allegation must prove. If you say the man is a thief (mudslinging) you must prove. And whoever comes to justice must come with clean hands. You can't mudsling and then expect not to receive the same. Under what act is He guilty? He was not his counselor and neither is he his doctor. You throw words around but can't prove anything. The only thing she can do is to go to court and sue for defamation. Then He will say that it is true.
 
Which law? Quote it please. The person to make an allegation must prove. If you say the man is a thief (mudslinging) you must prove. And whoever comes to justice must come with clean hands. You can't mudsling and then expect not to receive the same. Under what act is He guilty? He was not his counselor and neither is he his doctor. You throw words around but can't prove anything. The only thing she can do is to go to court and sue for defamation. Then He will say that it is true.
The Penal Code goes further to say that if the child is between the ages of eight (8) and twelve (12) years of age, and commits a criminal offence, then before prosecution, the court must establish whether the child understood the consequences of his/her actions. If not, then the child will not be prosecuted, but if it comes out that the child understood, then he/she will be prosecuted.
Further, the same law tells us that male children under the age of twelve (12) years are incapable of committing an offence associated with carnal knowledge or sexual intercourse.
Therefore, criminal action cannot be taken against say an eleven-year-old boy who has committed the offence of rape or defilement, because the law sees him as incapable of committing such an offence.
 
From the above the kid clearly has some head start, the manager released info deemed very personal and of a minor, recorded a child secretly without consent by his own admission. Confiscated his clients phone yet post obscene ties online, didnt ask parents permission before taking handset. Didn't seek guardians approval before releasing damaging info of a minor. Violated digital print provisions on sharing personal and confidential matters online. Infact a charge of distributing and promoting child ponography by digital print should be added cause we are dealing with a minor.


Hii ghaseer italala ndani.
 
Last edited:

Micymas

Village Elder
The Penal Code goes further to say that if the child is between the ages of eight (8) and twelve (12) years of age, and commits a criminal offence, then before prosecution, the court must establish whether the child understood the consequences of his/her actions. If not, then the child will not be prosecuted, but if it comes out that the child understood, then he/she will be prosecuted.
Further, the same law tells us that male children under the age of twelve (12) years are incapable of committing an offence associated with carnal knowledge or sexual intercourse.
Therefore, criminal action cannot be taken against say an eleven-year-old boy who has committed the offence of rape or defilement, because the law sees him as incapable of committing such an offence.
she is 13. anyway, we all know how she will turn out
 
she is 13. anyway, we all know how she will turn out
Still she will be treated with baby gloves, rem the case between rugby players pale seefar? The lawyers tried to invoke a younger age difference to try get a slightly favorable ruling for the boys na huyu ni early teen whose being wronged? She is very much under 18 too.

Only hope for this guy is Mi Amor... He better be 18+ to get a slightly leaner penalty but even then kuna other lawsuits he is likely to be compelled with as stated in previous posts. Defamation being among them (true or false) just being one of them but least of his concerns. Wendy is a minor, as her manager he managed his clients privacy wrongly and forcefully obtained and disseminated sensitive info of a minor illegally. Posted them as facts without minding the well being of a minor and failed in protecting her mental well being while doing it even if not fabricated though they look fake. Didn't bother seeking consent before publishing the same on digital print and shared ponographic content and alleged were searched by Wendy yet he was in possession of the said phone during all this time. Am off this matter now, Wendy will seek redress if so desired, Mutula & Advocates will have a field day is all I can tell you.

What was so hard in addressing financial impropriety? He will face so many suits he will regret ever choosing the court of public opinion with no real come back. As I said am off, "repeating same thing here online won't either give Joe or Wendy justice but the adult in the room failed to reason as one.
 

Micymas

Village Elder
Still she will be treated with baby gloves, rem the case between rugby players pale seefar? The lawyers tried to invoke a younger age difference to try get a slightly favorable ruling for the boys na huyu ni early teen whose being wronged? She is very much under 18 too.

Only hope for this guy is Mi Amor... He better be 18+ to get a slightly leaner penalty but even then kuna other lawsuits he is likely to be compelled with as stated in previous posts. Defamation being among them (true or false) just being one of them but least of his concerns. Wendy is a minor, as her manager he managed his clients privacy wrongly and forcefully obtained and disseminated sensitive info of a minor illegally. Posted them as facts without minding the well being of a minor and failed in protecting her mental well being while doing it even if not fabricated though they look fake. Didn't bother seeking consent before publishing the same on digital print and shared ponographic content and alleged were searched by Wendy yet he was in possession of the said phone during all this time. Am off this matter now, Wendy will seek redress if so desired, Mutula & Advocates will have a field day is all I can tell you.

What was so hard in addressing financial impropriety? He will face so many suits he will regret ever choosing the court of public opinion with no real come back. As I said am off, "repeating same thing here online won't either give Joe or Wendy justice but the adult in the room failed to reason as one.
acheni kutubeba ujinga, ths was never about financial misuse. Jamaa alikuwa aambiwe alidinyna mtoto. Let's not lie to ourselves, we all know where this shit was headed, Acheni kubeba watu kama malenge, people are not children or morons, they are adults who live and experience life daily
 

Top