Fake Canadian Jobs Mastermind Brian Reeves suffers another blow as High Court dismisses unfair prosecution petition he had filed.
Businessman Brian Reeves has suffered another legal setback after the High Court dismissed his petition challenging his arrest, investigations and prosecution, finding that he had failed to prove that the case against him was malicious or unlawful.
Justice Lawrence Mugambi, in a judgment delivered on August 20, 2026, said Reeves had not demonstrated that the prosecution was initiated without reasonable or just cause or that it was tainted by illegality or procedural impropriety.
“In the circumstances, this Court finds that this Petition is devoid of merit and is hereby dismissed with costs to the respondents and the interested parties,” Justice Mugambi ruled.
Reeves had challenged the manner in which police investigated and prosecuted him, including his arrest and the search of his home at about 2am.
He also complained that police compelled him to provide passwords to his mobile phones and computers and that his photograph was allegedly shared on the X social media platform by one of the respondents, warning members of the public about the alleged dangers he posed.
However, the judge found that Reeves had not established bad faith or abuse of office by the investigating authorities or the Director of Public Prosecutions.
The court noted that police acted on a complaint lodged against Reeves and that interviews with witnesses led investigators to gather additional material during the inquiry.
The DPP, the judge said, independently reviewed the evidence presented by investigators and formed the view that there was sufficient evidence to sustain the prosecution.
Justice Mugambi further declined to determine issues relating to the criminal case, noting that the ongoing proceedings before the magistrate’s court were the appropriate forum to ventilate those matters.
On the items allegedly confiscated from Reeves during the investigations, the judge noted that the issue had already been raised before the lower court.
The Kibera magistrate had on February 6, 2025 directed that the items be returned to Reeves, meaning he could enforce the existing order instead of seeking fresh relief from the High Court.
The judge also struck out a second interested party from the petition, saying Reeves had not demonstrated why the party was necessary or sought any relief against it.
Justice Mugambi said courts should be slow to interfere with the constitutional mandate of the DPP where there is no clear evidence of abuse of office.
The court consequently dismissed the entire petition with costs.
