Mama Tutam acquitted of Sh25m fraud, says Nigerian tycoon cost her marriage

Nairobi Woman Representative aspirant Faith Mwikali Ndiwa, alias Faith Nguthu addresses journalists at the Milimani Law Courts in Nairobi on September 9, 2026. [David Gichuru, Standard]

 A Nairobi Woman Representative aspirant has confessed the frustrations and embarrassment that befell her after befriending a wealthy Nigerian businessman who later accused her of defrauding him of Sh25 million.

Faith Mwikali Ndiwa, alias Faith Nguthu, popularly known as Mama Tutam, said she was kicked out of her marriage after the father of her three children discovered reports linking her to an alleged love affair with Nigerian investor Jude Olabayo Veracruz.

“My husband chased me away after social media went awash with information that I was seeing a Nigerian investor, Jude Olabaya Veracruz,” Nguthu told journalists at the Milimani Law Courts on Wednesday.

She said Veracruz befriended her after they met through the spa business but later developed a romantic interest in her.

“Indeed, the Nigerian was my friend after we met in spa business. He developed interest in me and forced a relationship with me, which I declined because I was already a married woman with three children,” she said.

Nguthu said Veracruz knew she was a successful businesswoman running a chemist and a spa in Nairobi and working in the ticketing department at Wilson Airport.

She said the Nigerian would send her money for shopping and other expenses and often referred to her using affectionate names, including “babe”.

Their relationship, however, would later land her in court after Veracruz reported to DCI accusing her of defrauding him of Sh25.04 million in a purported KEMSA tender deal.

The stunning revelations came moments after Milimani Chief Magistrate Caroline Mugo acquitted Nguthu of multiple charges arising from the alleged fraud.

Nguthu had faced eight counts, including forgery, uttering false documents and obtaining money by false pretences.

The prosecution alleged that Nguthu convinced Veracruz to invest in a lucrative tender to supply Long-Lasting Insecticidal Nets to KEMSA.

According to the charge sheet, she allegedly claimed that through her companies, Ashley Dylan Limited and Faizel Limited, she had secured tender number IFT No GF ATM MAL NFM-19/20-OIT-004.

The prosecution alleged that Nguthu forged framework contracts involving KEMSA , Ashley Dylan Limited and Faizel Limited before presenting the documents to Veracruz.

She was also accused of obtaining Sh25,040,150 by falsely claiming that her companies had secured a KEMSA tender.

The prosecution's case was that Nguthu had orchestrated an elaborate scheme to convince Veracruz to invest in the purported mosquito-net supply business.

The fraud began in May 2022 when Nguthu posed as an investor seeking financial advice from Veracruz, the CEO of a bank in Nigeria.

She initially sought his expertise in managing Sh 70 million.

Building on this engagement, she later proposed a lucrative business opportunity involving a contract to supply mosquito nets, falsely claiming to have connections to a relative of the late former Prime Minister Raila Odinga and used forged documents, including a purported framework contract and an amendment, to support her claims.

Convinced by the proposal, Veracruz transferred more than Sh25 million in instalments between June and December 2022.

The prosecution alleged that after receiving the money, Nguthu cut communication with the investor, prompting him to report the matter to the Directorate of Criminal Investigations.

Investigations subsequently led to her arrest as detectives sought to establish how the money had been used.

The prosecution further alleged that Nguthu used part of the money to acquire a high-end Range Rover, registration number KDM 311L, and had fabricated aspects of her professional credentials, including alleged links to reputable organisations and a purported position as a physician for the then First Lady.

Nguthu was arrested in May 2024 and spent about a week at Capital Hill Police Station.

Her arrest and detention attracted public attention after she reportedly collapsed and suffered a miscarriage while appearing before then trial magistrate Benmark Ekhubi, who has since been elevated to the High Court.

Throughout the trial, Nguthu denied the allegations and maintained that she was already an established businesswoman before meeting Veracruz.

She also rejected claims that she used the Nigerian's money to buy her Range Rover, saying she acquired it through an NCBA loan facility that she was servicing at about Sh300,000 a month.

“Indeed, I was a successful businesslady before I met Veracruz. He met me when I was already driving my Range Rover,” she said.

In her ruling, Mugo said the prosecution had failed to establish the crucial link between Nguthu and the alleged fraudulent transactions.

The magistrate questioned the electronic evidence relied upon by the prosecution, noting that investigators had failed to establish who owned or used the telephone numbers linked to WhatsApp conversations allegedly exchanged between Nguthu and Veracruz.

“No witness from Safaricom or any other telecommunication service provider was called to establish that either the telephone numbers were registered or were used by the accused person,” Mugo ruled.

“The court can therefore not safely attribute the content of those communications to the accused.”

Mugo also noted that no witness had seen Nguthu give the alleged forged tender documents to Veracruz, while several people and entities who allegedly received money from the complainant were not called to testify.

The court said the prosecution had failed to establish the relationship between Nguthu and some of the recipients or prove that the money paid to them was received on her instructions or for her benefit.

The magistrate further noted that both Veracruz and Nguthu were signatories to a Pfizer Limited bank account, saying movement of money through accounts associated with the parties could not, without more evidence, amount to proof of fraudulent representation.

“The accused person's explanation may not necessarily account for every transaction, but the court is not required to determine whether her account is the most probable one,” Mugo said.

“The question is whether the prosecution's evidence excludes reasonable doubt as to her guilt. In my view, it does not.”

On the forgery charges, Mugo said the prosecution was required to prove that Nguthu was the person who made the allegedly false documents.

“The mere fact that the documents were found not to be genuine does not, in the absence of evidence connecting the accused person to their making, establish the offence against her,” she ruled.

Mugo said the case contained circumstances that raised questions and suspicion but stressed that suspicion could not replace proof beyond reasonable doubt.

“Suspicion, however strong, cannot take the place of proof beyond reasonable doubt,” she said.

Nguthu thanked the Judiciary for dispensing justice in her case, saying the acquittal had finally given her an opportunity to move on with her life.